Do you believe the left has little trust in the American people?

A new survey suggests that professors at American colleges and universities are frequently using their classrooms to rant against President Donald Trump. The survey polled over 1,000 conservative college students around the country, finding that almost 50 percent had experienced anti-Trump rants in the classroom.

According to a survey commissioned by The College Fix, almost 50 percent of Republican college students claim that their professors use class time to criticize President Trump.

The survey, which was conducted by College Pulse, revealed that 46 percent of Republican students said that their professors are openly engaging in leftist activism in the classroom. For students majoring in the social sciences, the arts, and the humanities, this percentage was even higher.

Students were encouraged to provide comments on their experiences with activist professors. One student noted that his professor cried in class after Trump was elected. Another student said that their professor forced them to watch CNN for 30 minutes during class time.

“CU boulder is a great spot if you want to hear bullshit from professors about how bad this country is,” one student from the University of Colorado Boulder wrote. “Literally had one teacher cry in class when he got elected. I payed to learn, not hear propaganda from professors.”

“There was one class where it was like everyday the professor had something new to criticize him for like they were just watching CNN 30 minutes before being at work and blabbing about whatever bs they were talking about that day,” one student from Clemson added.

One student from Central Michigan University said that even their French professor used class time to bash President Trump. “I don’t care if you like him or not but when I’m in French class I would prefer to talk about French stuff. Maybe even French politics but I’m not paying you $25 an hour to give me your opinion about politics.”

Our Founders created a nation in which the rule of law would prevail and be applied equally to citizens from all walks of life and also would act as a restraint on the power of our leaders.  The tradition also includes the assumed duty of all Americans, including our political leaders, to live within the established and agreed upon laws of society.

The Democratic Party’s increasingly progressive, left-leaning, radical political agenda contests this fundamental and longstanding American tradition of the law applying equally to all our citizens.  Whether I am walking on the streets of my city or viewing the news, I am witnessing on a daily basis increasingly uncivil, lawless, and visibly politically corrupt conduct being tolerated by our country.

Democratic Party policies today support the idea that adhering to the rule of law is no longer obligatory for several designated and politically favored groups selected by them.  Progressive politics is attempting to move Americans to accept and adopt a multi-tier justice system based on the unequal application of the law, whereby treatment by the system is increasingly dependent on subjective political considerations. 

On a local level in many cities and communities, Democrats in power are by their actions undermining the rule of law.  For example, expected compliance with the law in several of our leading cities run by Democratic Party leaders, including most notably New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Seattle, is now often based on a person’s economic and immigration status, race, sex, sexual orientation, and increasingly an indication of a person’s political and religious affiliations.  The reason for these exemptions being granted is based on the dual ideologies of identity politics and social justice.

The creation of an implied multi-tier justice system expressly violates our fundamental value of the law applying equally to citizens from all walks of life and most importantly results in the increasingly intolerable and dangerous conditions existing on the streets of these cities and an overall perception of communities in decline.  It has led to environments where ordinary people feel increasingly unsafe due to a lack of enforcement of quality-of-life crimes such as rampart homelessness and loitering, open drug use, and the willing accommodation of numerous illegal aliens performing criminal acts.

Their policies absolve individuals belonging to their politically favored groups of their responsibilities to adhere to our agreed upon laws and act in civil ways.  They contend that challenging social and economic conditions are responsible for criminal and antisocial behavior rather than the individual person acting in a negative way.  Progressive leaders in these locations are resisting enforcing the law, especially against quality-of-life violations, because they label these actions as the criminalization of poverty and accuse the police of the ongoing use of racist tactics.

Thirty years ago, America’s urban centers faced similar issues, leading New York City to adopt under the combined leadership of Republican Mayor Giuliani and his police commissioner, William Bratton, strict law enforcement policies that became to be known as “broken windows’ policing.  These policies were based on the lifelong and collaborative work of criminologist George L. Kelling and political scientist James Q. Wilson, who became best known for publishing an essay in The Atlantic in 1982, called “Broken Windows.”

It emphasized community policing, proactive enforcement of the law, and maintaining order in public places by either arresting or dealing with people for even minor crimes such as drunkenness; vagrancy; prostitution; and, in NYC at that time, subway turnstile–jumpers and the infamous squeegee men.  All of these minor crimes were being overlooked, inviting even greater criminality.

The effect of implementing “broken windows” policies by the police in New York City and, soon afterward, across many other cities starting in the 1990s resulted in a dramatic decline in crime, including, most importantly, a significant drop in homicides committed.  This crime-fighting approach was fundamental to altering the quality of life of many of our cities and significantly contributed to many of them becoming highly desirable places to live. 

The current deterioration of living conditions in many of our cities and communities led by Democratic Party leaders and their progressive policies can be directly attributed to their moving away from the proactive community policing that was previously so effective and created environments that discouraged criminality.  Many of these locales are starting to lose population.

In addition, apparently included as one of the favored groups permitted to operate outside the acceptable bounds of civility and the law are Democratic leaders themselves in their ongoing and unrelenting pursuit of power.  In Washington, the Democrats are attempting to subvert the will of the majority of the American people, as expressed by the election results in 2016, by executing and plotting orchestrated campaigns to remove President Trump from office before the next election.  These efforts range from the recently unsuccessfully perpetrated Russia collusion hoax, which is now being followed up by an illegitimate impeachment drive by the House.

These operations also revealed the mostly clandestine activities of a permanent and extensive Deep State, also labeled “the swamp,” actively working with the Democrats to subvert President Trump.  A broken environment exists in Washington that contributes to the perception that too many of our elected officials feel free to participate in and to tolerate corruption without being held accountable for their actions.  It is highly discouraging for many Americans that up to this point, there have been no legal consequences or viable restraints in place to curb these types of actions that are so fundamentally dangerous to the very foundations of our country.

As a nation, we can look back at the great success the implementation of broken windows enforcement policies and practices as a potential guide to current-day challenges of maintaining a just and civil society both in Washington and across our nation.  The crucial and pragmatic next steps in re-creating a proper environment of deterrence in our country against lawless conduct, including misconduct by government officials, will be the impending actions of Attorney General William Barr and U.S. attorney John Durham.

The key question is whether their lengthy investigations of improper activities associated with attempts to remove President Trump from office will lead to the suitable punishment of all the players responsible without exception.  If these efforts are unsuccessful, the Deep State wins, and all our freedoms are at risk.  A lack of decisive action against these participants will signal to many in government that they are free to operate outside the rule of law with impunity in their pursuit of political power.  At risk is our Founders’ design for an enduring nation, in which the rule of law would prevail and be applied equally to citizens from all walks of life — and also would act as an ongoing restraint on the power of our government.

K.S. Guardiola blogs at “Set the Record – Right!” at rightquestions.blog and can be reached at deplorableurbanite@rightquestions.blog.

Our Founders created a nation in which the rule of law would prevail and be applied equally to citizens from all walks of life and also would act as a restraint on the power of our leaders.  The tradition also includes the assumed duty of all Americans, including our political leaders, to live within the established and agreed upon laws of society.

The Democratic Party’s increasingly progressive, left-leaning, radical political agenda contests this fundamental and longstanding American tradition of the law applying equally to all our citizens.  Whether I am walking on the streets of my city or viewing the news, I am witnessing on a daily basis increasingly uncivil, lawless, and visibly politically corrupt conduct being tolerated by our country.

Democratic Party policies today support the idea that adhering to the rule of law is no longer obligatory for several designated and politically favored groups selected by them.  Progressive politics is attempting to move Americans to accept and adopt a multi-tier justice system based on the unequal application of the law, whereby treatment by the system is increasingly dependent on subjective political considerations. 

On a local level in many cities and communities, Democrats in power are by their actions undermining the rule of law.  For example, expected compliance with the law in several of our leading cities run by Democratic Party leaders, including most notably New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Seattle, is now often based on a person’s economic and immigration status, race, sex, sexual orientation, and increasingly an indication of a person’s political and religious affiliations.  The reason for these exemptions being granted is based on the dual ideologies of identity politics and social justice.

The creation of an implied multi-tier justice system expressly violates our fundamental value of the law applying equally to citizens from all walks of life and most importantly results in the increasingly intolerable and dangerous conditions existing on the streets of these cities and an overall perception of communities in decline.  It has led to environments where ordinary people feel increasingly unsafe due to a lack of enforcement of quality-of-life crimes such as rampart homelessness and loitering, open drug use, and the willing accommodation of numerous illegal aliens performing criminal acts.

Their policies absolve individuals belonging to their politically favored groups of their responsibilities to adhere to our agreed upon laws and act in civil ways.  They contend that challenging social and economic conditions are responsible for criminal and antisocial behavior rather than the individual person acting in a negative way.  Progressive leaders in these locations are resisting enforcing the law, especially against quality-of-life violations, because they label these actions as the criminalization of poverty and accuse the police of the ongoing use of racist tactics.

Thirty years ago, America’s urban centers faced similar issues, leading New York City to adopt under the combined leadership of Republican Mayor Giuliani and his police commissioner, William Bratton, strict law enforcement policies that became to be known as “broken windows’ policing.  These policies were based on the lifelong and collaborative work of criminologist George L. Kelling and political scientist James Q. Wilson, who became best known for publishing an essay in The Atlantic in 1982, called “Broken Windows.”

It emphasized community policing, proactive enforcement of the law, and maintaining order in public places by either arresting or dealing with people for even minor crimes such as drunkenness; vagrancy; prostitution; and, in NYC at that time, subway turnstile–jumpers and the infamous squeegee men.  All of these minor crimes were being overlooked, inviting even greater criminality.

The effect of implementing “broken windows” policies by the police in New York City and, soon afterward, across many other cities starting in the 1990s resulted in a dramatic decline in crime, including, most importantly, a significant drop in homicides committed.  This crime-fighting approach was fundamental to altering the quality of life of many of our cities and significantly contributed to many of them becoming highly desirable places to live. 

The current deterioration of living conditions in many of our cities and communities led by Democratic Party leaders and their progressive policies can be directly attributed to their moving away from the proactive community policing that was previously so effective and created environments that discouraged criminality.  Many of these locales are starting to lose population.

In addition, apparently included as one of the favored groups permitted to operate outside the acceptable bounds of civility and the law are Democratic leaders themselves in their ongoing and unrelenting pursuit of power.  In Washington, the Democrats are attempting to subvert the will of the majority of the American people, as expressed by the election results in 2016, by executing and plotting orchestrated campaigns to remove President Trump from office before the next election.  These efforts range from the recently unsuccessfully perpetrated Russia collusion hoax, which is now being followed up by an illegitimate impeachment drive by the House.

These operations also revealed the mostly clandestine activities of a permanent and extensive Deep State, also labeled “the swamp,” actively working with the Democrats to subvert President Trump.  A broken environment exists in Washington that contributes to the perception that too many of our elected officials feel free to participate in and to tolerate corruption without being held accountable for their actions.  It is highly discouraging for many Americans that up to this point, there have been no legal consequences or viable restraints in place to curb these types of actions that are so fundamentally dangerous to the very foundations of our country.

As a nation, we can look back at the great success the implementation of broken windows enforcement policies and practices as a potential guide to current-day challenges of maintaining a just and civil society both in Washington and across our nation.  The crucial and pragmatic next steps in re-creating a proper environment of deterrence in our country against lawless conduct, including misconduct by government officials, will be the impending actions of Attorney General William Barr and U.S. attorney John Durham.

The key question is whether their lengthy investigations of improper activities associated with attempts to remove President Trump from office will lead to the suitable punishment of all the players responsible without exception.  If these efforts are unsuccessful, the Deep State wins, and all our freedoms are at risk.  A lack of decisive action against these participants will signal to many in government that they are free to operate outside the rule of law with impunity in their pursuit of political power.  At risk is our Founders’ design for an enduring nation, in which the rule of law would prevail and be applied equally to citizens from all walks of life — and also would act as an ongoing restraint on the power of our government.

K.S. Guardiola blogs at “Set the Record – Right!” at rightquestions.blog and can be reached at deplorableurbanite@rightquestions.blog.

A report from the Associated Press claims the individual who attacked Naval Air Station Pensacola hosted a party to watch videos of mass shootings the night before.

According to the AP:

A US official says the Saudi student who fatally shot three people at a Florida naval base had hosted a dinner party the night before to watch videos of mass shootings. https://t.co/gZzeVS9qfk

— The Associated Press (@AP) December 7, 2019

Breitbart News reported that an attacker allegedly used a handgun to fatally shoot three people December 6, 2019, and wound many more. The gunman was shot and killed by Escambia County Sheriff’s Deputies.

The Associated Press reports that the Pensacola gunman was an aviation student from Saudi Arabia, and NBC News reported that the gunman’s name was Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani.

NBC 6 South Florida tweeted a photo of the attacker:

UPDATE: Officials have identified the Pensacola naval base shooting suspect as Mohammed Saeed A Alshamrani. Authorities say they are investigating if the incident is terrorism-related. The latest here: https://t.co/eUmEqv4RU7 pic.twitter.com/dr6bm4CeLO

— NBC 6 South Florida (@nbc6) December 6, 2019

Hours after the Pensacola attack Breitbart News noted a New York Times‘ report indicating six Saudis were detained after the shooting. Three of the six allegedly filmed the entire attack.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

Donald Trump liked Irish Spring bar soap in his shower. But his housekeepers quickly learned not to throw out his soap even if it had worn down to the tiniest sliver: Trump decided when he wanted something discarded. When that happened, with clothes or newspapers, he would toss them on the floor.

and this:

Trump rarely shied away from his staff. He was particular about every aspect of his clubs’ appearance: from the carpets to the chandeliers to the art on the walls. During his visits, he perpetually scanned for flaws — swiping a finger along a picture frame to check for dust; eyeing the shine on a crystal chandelier.

Gabriel Sedano, a Mexican immigrant on the maintenance staff at Bedminster, recalled hanging portraits — many of Trump — around the club, with Trump at his side.

“I carried the paintings,” Sedano said. “He said where he wanted them.”

Banal and boring. Having covered billionaires for Forbes magazine many years ago, it’s all typical billionaire behavior. They are a fastidious bunch, and often cheap-skatey, although in this piece the illegals noted that Trump was quite kind and generous with tips to them.

It’s not just my experience as a reporter about billionaire behavior, either. One of my relatives used to work as a “detailer” for corporate jets, putting on a black bunny suit to act as glorified maids and carwash attendants to clean corporate jets, inside and out. They rubbed and scrubbed to the most spotless finish, proud of their eagle eyes on the matter, because corporate clients who ride in corporate jets like their jets to be eat-off-the-floor clean. Again, it’s how they are. And she actually thought the job was fun.

In other words, nothing to see here, move along. They all act like that. Why is this news?

The purpose of the long windy piece is to embarass Trump. They’re trying what the California far left did on Meg Whitman who ran for governor in 2010, bringing up tales of illegal maids to knock out a political opponent. It worked in California.

But that was when there was still such a thing as shame for being an illegal immigrant and people on both sides of the aisle, however symbolically, still believed the U.S. should have borders.

The Post attempts to justify its piece by saying they’re just writing this to expose Trump’s hypocrisy for hiring illegals instead of being in favor of illegal immigration, given that his company has apparently employed illegals, which is pretty common in the hotel industry.

It piously speaks of how Trump’s election to president “upended their lives.” It trots out two illegal workers, one of whom has somehow had no trouble making herself legal based on having an anchor baby as her sponsor in an impressive gaming of the system. But she and the others are all convinced that Trump owes them amnesty anyway.

 

John Durham, the U.S. attorney tasked with investigating the origins of the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign in 2016, is expected to seek an interview with former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper following an expansion of his investigation.

It was reportedly the meetings Durham and Attorney General William Barr recently had in Rome—where they obtained new evidence—that were the impetus for the broadening of the scope of the probe.

According to Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, her sources told her that Durham is now “very interested to question” Brennan and Clapper.

According to Herridge, the meetings “took place on Aug. 15 and Sept. 27, 2019, in Rome,” and that it was during one or both of these trips, that Barr and Durham “gathered new evidence.”

Ironically, Representative Adam Schiff reported this past week phone records related to President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani recorded on the Monday after Barr and Durham’s trip to Italy, Monday September 30th, 2019.

The records supplied in Schiff’s report show that they are tied to his bogus Permanent Select Committee.  Apparently there may be an ability for Congress to obtain phone records when there is a legal reason.  What was Schiff’s reason?

Phone records (not the content of the calls) are easy for all 3 branches of govt to get -by subpoena or civil investigative demand. The Supremes have said it is not a “search” for 4th Amend purposes. By statute, prosecutors can get a subpoena for them based on a certification./2

— Leslie McAdoo Gordon (@McAdooGordon) December 4, 2019

Democrats will lie, steal, cheat, anything for power!

Hat tip D. Manny