53percenter's Blog

Ever since James Mattis was appointed by President Donald Trump as defense secretary, he has made no secret of his commitment to maintain and improve the effectiveness and caliber of the United States military.

“I’m not subtle,” Mattis told GOP lawmakers earlier this year. “I need to make the military more lethal.”

According to a report from The Washington Times, the United States Army just took a huge step to ensure that its soldiers will continue to be the most effective and powerful force on Earth.

In what is a major shift from the Obama administration era, fighting and battlefield skills will now take priority over social justice issues like transitioning transgender troops.

In service-wide memorandums obtained by The Washington Times, military leaders are making optional what used to be mandatory training on transgender transition, drug abuse and other issues.

TRENDING: Peter Fonda’s New Film Nets Measly $30,000 After Actor’s Perverted Attack on Barron Trump

The memorandums were approved by both Army Secretary Mark Esper and Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley.

“The move, Army leaders argue, is designed to relieve stress on the overburdened troop training regimen and refocus on soldiers’ ability to fight in combat,” The Washington Times reported.

The Chief of the Army’s collective training division Col. John O’Grady said that the former training requirements “served as barriers to maximizing time … to build readiness and lethality” within combat units.

“The Army’s regulations and policies that deal with training were pretty settled, and there were not a lot of detractors to it. … It was all the other [training] requirements that we levied on ourselves, or we had levied from other places” that led to the burdensome approach to combat readiness, O’Grady explained.

These changes will bring the Army in line with the Pentagon’s new National Defense Strategy under President Trump, and the policy initiatives of Defense Secretary Mattis, which include more focus on challenging rivals such as Russia and China, and increasing the military’s overall lethality.

In addition to doing away with mandatory non-combatant training, the Army is also extending the time soldiers spend in infantry training.

“Soldiers graduating from the nine-week basic training course will now spend an additional two months in advanced individual training before heading to their first duty stations,” The Washington Times reported.

“The military is expected to prepare its members in warfare: to kill, destroy, and break our enemies. The most important factors in preparing a strong military are not hormone therapy, surgical sex changes, or politically correct education,” wrote speaker and author Walt Heyer for The Daily Signal. “We need psychologically fit, emotionally sound, highly trained troops to protect our nation from its enemies.”

Under the leadership of Trump and Mattis, military men and women can take comfort that they will be prepared for the challenges they will face on the battlefield and be spared from Obama era indoctrination.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

While she may not be the imminent existential threat to America that some on the far-right claim her to be, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is a very real danger to important segments of American society.

In particular, Waters’s rabid extremism and recent calls for pseudo-violence, pose a concrete threat to public safety personnel and others who serve the public in her own high-crime congressional district and elsewhere across the country.

In the broad sense, the congresswoman’s self-proclaimed duty to stalk, harass, and intimidate her enemies represents a complete and utter repudiation of the social contract that makes the rule of law possible. And, without it, America qua America cannot long survive.

The embrace of mob rule as articulated by the octogenarian congresswoman represents a philosophical rejection of civility and the very rule of law on which our country was founded. But in a more immediate and personal sense, her vitriolic call to harass and “get in the face” of any public servant with whom one might disagree on policy or actions, does more than poison the public policy arena in ways that rend the fabric of a civil society; it encourages and empowers those who incline toward violence to act.

It is this consequence of Waters’s rantings that pose a clear, present, immediate, and potentially deadly danger to police and other public safety officials. With public tempers already at a height unimaginable less than one generation ago, the verbal match struck by Waters’s uncivil call-to-arms easily becomes the spark flaring into deadly action.

Just days ago, in Harris County, Texas, someone with hate in their heart sought to poison sheriff officers with flyers laced with fentanyl; a high-potency opioid that can be absorbed through the skin if touched unwittingly. In California, an individual with similar hatred for public safety officials, fatally shot a firefighter working at the scene of an apparently purposefully-set fire at a retirement home.

These are neither hypothetical nor isolated incidences. And they are perpetrated by individuals of the sort open to encouragement by officials with a public microphone with which to exhort them, like a Maxine Waters. The Californian congresswoman’s rants are far different from those of a Rosanne Barr or a Robert de Niro. Tweets or speeches exhibiting a racial or political animus are one thing; and they do their part to deteriorate the fabric of civil public discourse.

That discord is taken to a far higher and more dangerous level, however, when it is not Tweets or words by a TV or movie actor, but calls for action, including violent acts, by those in the public. One can slough off the despicable words of a second-rate actor like Peter Fonda; but not as easily calls for action by a sitting member of Congress. People and groups listen to, heed, and act upon such words.

When mobs — not civil discourse or judicial process — decide what speech is acceptable, what public policies are worthy of support, or when police should be permitted to take action to halt criminal activity, then we have arrived tragically at that dark precipice evoked in 1964 by Ronald Reagan in describing the United States as the “last best hope of man on earth.” The key difference between 1964 and 2018 is that the threat to freedom in American then was posed by an enemy without; today it is the enemy within. Even worse, that enemy within is not only Hollywood elites, Antifa anarchists and deranged individuals, but includes the very individuals supposed to stand as a bulwark against anarchy and chaos – members of the United States Congress.

The America painted in Waters’s warped vision of public action is one where it is not voters, democratically elected officials, trained police, learned judges, or even the Constitution that determine the law; but rather which group is bold enough to make the most noise, exert the most intimidation, and rouse sufficient rabble to force its goals on others.

It is a recipe for only one thing: chaos. And for the individual public safety official daring to stand against it, perform their sworn duty, and do their best to serve and protect, it is a red flag being waved in their face. While Waters may claim her calls to harass and intimidate are not explicit calls for violence; the real consequences of such rhetoric tell a different story. Just ask one of Waters’s colleagues, Steve Scalise, who last summer was gravely wounded at a baseball practice by a gunman angered at the congressman’s political affiliation.

Bob Barr is president and CEO of the Law Enforcement Education Foundation (LEEF). From 1995-2003, he represented Georgia’s Seventh Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

According to a recent survey released by the Pew Research Center, the majority of both Republicans and Democrats believe that social media websites at least “somewhat” censor political views.

Axios reports that a recent poll published by the Pew Research Center has given a deeper insight into how social media is viewed by both Democrats and Republicans. According to the survey, more than half of Republicans believe that it is “very likely” that social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter are censoring political opinions that they find “objectionable.” Similarly, 20 percent of Democrats believe that this is also the case while 42 percent of Democrats believe that political opinions are “somewhat” censored on social media.

Axios reports that according to the survey:

• 54% of Republican or Republican-leaning adults said it was very likely that social media platforms censor political viewpoints they find objectionable. An additional 32% said it was somewhat likely.
• 64% of those adults say that major tech companies support liberal views over conservative ones.
• 20% of Democrats or Democratic-leaning adults said it was very likely that the platforms censor political views, and 42% said it was somewhat likely.

As Axios notes, social media companies are aware of the tense situation between their platforms and conservatives, organizing outreach meetings with various conservative groups. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey met with various conservative figures in Washington D.C. while Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg invited a group to the Facebook campus at Menlo Park, California.

While the majority of Republicans seem to be convinced that social media websites are censoring certain political opinions, Republicans are still less likely to support more regulation of social media firms than Democrats are. 72 percent of adults reportedly believe that they can trust major social media firms to only do the right thing some of the time or hardly ever. 74 percent of people do however believe that the impact of social media companies on their life was more good than bad.

Read the full report by the Pew Research Center here.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

A Texas judge threw out the results of a recent Democrat runoff race for a justice of the peace seat in Kleberg County, ruling seven votes cast were invalid. He ordered a new election must be held.

Breitbart Texas reported that Democrat challenger Ofelia “Ofie” Gutierrez contested the results of the May 22 primary runoff race against Democrat incumbent Esequiel “Cheque” De La Paz for Kleberg County Justice of the Peace in District 4. Gutierrez originally lost by seven votes. She requested a recount but lost again by six votes, 318 to 312. Then, on June 8, Gutierrez sued De La Paz, alleging voter fraud.

This week, visiting Judge Joel Johnson heard arguments from attorneys for Gutierrez and De La Paz in the 105th District Court. Frank Alvarez, representing Gutierrez, argued that five adults registered to vote used De La Paz’s home address and two others did not live in Kleberg County. He contended the seven questionable votes were cast by individuals related to De La Paz or connected to his immediate family members.

The Kingsville Record reported the attorney for De La Paz, Natasha Torres, maintained in court that Gutierrez was entitled to challenge the election results but Gutierrez’s subsequent actions in filing suit was because “she wasn’t happy” about her defeat.

“If you can’t handle the heat, stay out of the kitchen,” said Torres during the hearing. She remarked that even with the recount, Gutierrez lost by six votes. “She lost fair and square.”

Alvarez countered that De La Paz was concerned to find himself in a primary runoff election for an office he has held for more than 20 years. “What this proves, your honor, is the extent a family will go to continue on this position,” said Alvarez, who implied De La Paz did not “win fairly” and resorted to cheating.

On Tuesday, Johnson ruled there was enough evidence to show voter fraud. He determined that the individuals in question did not reside in District 4 of Kleberg County and invalidated the May 22 election results.

In response, Gutierrez’s lawyer said he hoped Johnson’s ruling will result in people thinking twice about voting fraudulently.

Torres issued a prepared statement on behalf of De La Paz. It stated: “Truly we just want to say ‘Thank you’ to all of our friends, family, and fellow community members for their aid throughout this entire process.” The family also asked for “their continued love and support” in the upcoming election.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a national election integrity law firm, commented on the judge’s decision to toss the Kleberg County JP runoff results and order a new election. They tweeted: “seven bad votes determined winner/loser. Anyone who argues some fraud is inevitable and the cost of doing democracy is complicit.”

#TEXAS: Justice of peace election results in Kleberg County tossed out for #VoterFraud.

SEVEN bad votes determined winner/loser. Anyone who argues some fraud is inevitable and the cost of doing democracy is complicit.

— PublicInterestLegal (@PILFoundation) June 28, 2018

According to the Corpus Christi Caller Times, Kleberg County Clerk Stephanie Garza said the Texas Election Code requires the new election is held by August, but no date is currently set. Garza said she awaited word from the Texas Secretary of State’s office on how best to move forward with the ordered election.

No Republican candidate ran on the other side of this JP race. The winner of the Democrat do-over primary election will run unopposed for the Precinct 4 in November.

Follow Merrill Hope, a member of the original Breitbart Texas team, on Twitter.

First lady Melania Trump traveled to a border facility in Arizona on Thursday, hosting a roundtable discussion with members of law enforcement on the border.

“I want to thank you for all your hard work. I know how difficult and dangerous your daily jobs are,” she said. “I am here to support you and help any way I can.”

Chief Patrol Agent Rodolfo Karisch of the Tucson Sector Border Patrol told the first lady that there was “a lot of misinformation” about their handling of children who were caught crossing the border illegally.

One agent said 1,600 people, including 539 in families, tried to enter the United States illegally just on Wednesday.

“Serious enforcement of immigration laws is necessary and there has to be consequences for violations of the laws, because if you don’t have consequences then you promote additional illegal activity,” he said.

Assistant Director of Field Operations Director Michael Humphries also criticized the misconceptions about the border enforcement process.

He said that frequently many adults who claimed a relationship with children were lying and that separating the children from the adults helped them prevent child trafficking across the border.

Agents said that children more frequently were apprehended unaccompanied at the border.

“We give the utmost care to all coming in,” Humphries said.

Border patrol agent Joyce Silva spoke about how she cared for the children she found at the border.

“As a mother, it hurts to see the children, they don’t really know what’s going on,” she said.

She said border agents worked with compassion, removing them from the dangerous parts of the border and giving the children food, water, clothing, and toys to help comfort them.

“There’s a lot of parents in the border patrol and we really care for the children,” Silva said.

A woman in the United States thanks to President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program has been accused of smuggling illegal aliens across the state of New Mexico.

Irania Martinez-Martinez, a DACA illegal alien who obtained her DACA status in April 2017, allegedly trafficked three illegal aliens through Texas and into Albuquerque, New Mexico, according to court documents obtained by KFOX14.

The illegal aliens allegedly promised to give the DACA illegal alien $200 for gas. While on their way to Albuquerque, Martinez was stopped by Border Patrol agents at a checkpoint. That is when the agent inquired about the woman’s citizenship, where she allegedly falsely claimed that she was a U.S. citizen.

The four were told to travel to another checkpoint, where the DACA illegal alien was found to have been lying about her U.S. citizenship and the three men were discovered to be illegal aliens, according to police.

The DACA illegal alien allegedly told investigators that this was the second time she had tried to smuggle illegal aliens across the U.S. She has been charged with smuggling and will have her DACA status revoked as a result of the charge.

Since DACA’s inception, more than 2,100 illegal alien recipients have been kicked off the program after having been found to be convicted or charged as criminals or gang members.

Looks like Rep. Maxine Waters is trying to backtrack on her endorsement of the harassment of Trump administration officials with the aid of a little emotion.

She appeared on MSNBC to talk about her comments and used “the children” as a distraction from the severity of her actions, The Daily Caller reported.

“I did not call for harm for anybody,” Waters said. “The president lied again.”

She then teared up as she said, “But let’s not talk about that. Let’s focus on the children. That’s what this is all about. It is about the fact that children have been snatched away from their parents’ arms.”

Waters’ waterworks may work on the rest of the public, but let’s do a little fact check on those teary comments.

TRENDING: Peter Fonda’s New Film Nets Measly $30,000 After Actor’s Perverted Attack on Barron Trump

“If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and create a crowd. And you push back on them. Tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere!” Waters said just last week.

Sadly, Waters’ call to action was not echoed by her fellow Democratic leaders. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi actually rebuked Waters for her comments.

“In the crucial months ahead, we must strive to make America beautiful again,” Pelosi said in a tweet. “Trump’s daily lack of civility has provoked responses that are predictable but unacceptable. As we go forward, we must conduct elections in a way that achieves unity from sea to shining sea.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also spoke against Waters, saying that her approach was “not American,” CNN reported.

“I strongly disagree with those who advocate harassing folks if they don’t agree with you,” Schumer said. “If you disagree with a politician, organize your fellow citizens to action and vote them out of office. But no one should call for the harassment of political opponents.”

When Waters was presented with the facts that her Democrat colleagues spoke against her, she got emotional again.

“They don’t really say I’m out of line. What they do is try to find a way (to) talk about civility without attacking me or anybody else as the leader of the Democratic Party, I expect that she would do everything that she could to make sure nobody believes that Democrats are out here harassing anybody or causing any violence,” Waters said of Pelosi.

RELATED: Maxine Waters’ District Is 47% Hispanic, and Now Hispanic Repub’s Targeting Her

Although Waters was not really crying, as some news outlets reported, she could have gotten a little teary-eyed in her attempt to emotionally manipulate the American public back to accept her again.

Well, it is clear that the left is up to its tricks again. And since the race card hasn’t been working too well, it looks like Waters is trying something new.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

Once again, the D.C. establishment — including many Republicans — tried to push through legislation granting amnesty to illegal immigrants Wednesday.

Once again, the effort failed, thanks to 112 GOP House members who rejected Speaker Paul Ryan‘s “compromise” bill.

The legislation would have provided a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants — those who were brought into this country as children, the so-called Dreamers.

President Donald Trump indicated Friday that GOP lawmakers were “wasting their time” by trying to pass an immigration bill.

Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November. Dems are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solves this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 22, 2018

TRENDING: Peter Fonda’s New Film Nets Measly $30,000 After Actor’s Perverted Attack on Barron Trump

On Wednesday, however, the president tweeted his support for the compromise bill — called Goodlatte II for its sponsor, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia).

HOUSE REPUBLICANS SHOULD PASS THE STRONG BUT FAIR IMMIGRATION BILL, KNOWN AS GOODLATTE II, IN THEIR AFTERNOON VOTE TODAY, EVEN THOUGH THE DEMS WON’T LET IT PASS IN THE SENATE. PASSAGE WILL SHOW THAT WE WANT STRONG BORDERS & SECURITY WHILE THE DEMS WANT OPEN BORDERS = CRIME. WIN!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 27, 2018

Trump called the measure “strong but fair,” and it would have provided $25 billion toward his promised wall on the border with Mexico.

His endorsement wasn’t enough to put it over the top, however, as amnesty foes stood together to stop it. The bill was defeated on a 121-301 vote.

Not a single Democrat voted for the legislation. They’re hoping immigration will be a winning issue for them in the November midterm elections.

The Goodlatte II bill paired amnesty for Dreamers with funding for the wall and other provisions strengthening border security and interior enforcement.

Last week, the House took up Goodlatte I, a more conservative bill that didn’t include the amnesty. It also fell short but by a narrower margin — 193-231.

Both bills would have allowed Dreamers to remain in the country indefinitely with non-immigrant legal status, but they featured different renewal periods (three years under Goodlatte I and six under Goodlatte II).

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) was among the members of the Freedom Caucus who voted against Goodlatte II on Wednesday. He urged the House leadership to get behind the conservative bill.

RELATED: Final Betrayal: Ryan’s Amnesty Draft Leaks, Looks Like Biggest Amnesty in US History

Leadership told us that the conservative immigration bill would only get 150 or 160 votes. When they put it on the floor in front of God and everybody, it got 193.

We’re close. We just need House Leadership to push for this.https://t.co/RKX6KC4OoY

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 26, 2018

We won’t hold our breath waiting for that to happen.

In every campaign year, Republicans across the country declare they’ll be tough on illegal immigration and oppose amnesty, knowing that border security is an issue that resonates with GOP voters.

When they get to Washington, however, many of those same Republicans get sucked into the swamp and cast their lot with the establishment.

Let’s remember their names come Election Day.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.