53percenter's Blog

(CNSNews.com) – At the Capitol Hill Tea Party rally against socialism, activist and author Jennifer Zeng, who migrated from Communist China, urged Americans to steer clear of socialist rhetoric because “socialists promise Heaven on Earth but they always end up giving you a one-way ticket to Hell.”

Another migrant at the Sept. 19 “Choose Freedom” rally, Oskar Arreaza from Venezuela, said he hopes to “spread the word” that “21st century socialism only covers [hides] the ignorance” of the politicians around the world that advocate for it.

Zeng, the author of Witnessing History: One Chinese Woman’s Fight for Freedom and Falun Gong,  said that when she came to the United States she was running away from persecution of her religious beliefs.

She said she was “thrown into prison” on four occasions and was also taken to a labor camp and forced to squat with her hands behind her head while looking at the floor for more than 15 hours.

“Here in the U.S. I am starting to feel that it [socialism] has followed me,” Zeng said. “Not only many politicians are making socialism sound so sweet but the majority of young Americans are attracted by it.”

Zeng said that the since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) assumed power more than 70 years ago more than half of the population lives under persecution and more than 8 million people have died of unnatural deaths.

“In the world there are two wars,” Zeng said. “One is the war between the free world and the CCP, another one is right here, in the United States, between the American founding principles and traditional values, and the importation of communism.”

Overall, as a result of Communist policies, more than 65 million people have died in China, according to the Black Book of Communism (Harvard University Press).

Oskar Arreaza a migrant from Venezuela — which is ruled by socialist Nicolas Maduro — said he wanted to spread the message and open the eyes of people who have not yet opened their eyes to  the reality of socialism.

“The socialism that attacked Venezuela, they called it the socialism of the twenty-first century, what [Hugo] Chavez called ‘the revolution,’” said Arreaza, but this “only covered up the ignorance of the people who were in power, and their lack of preparation to be able to lead the country.”  

Arreaza also said that in order to keep a healthy government, it is important to keep checks and balances on the government, and the opportunity to debate, to speak freely, is one of the most important freedoms.

Tea Party Patriots Chairman Jenny Beth Martin expressed her support of Zeng and Arreaza.

“It is not just about keeping liberty alive in America for Americans, which we want, but it is also about keeping liberties alive in America so we have a place for people like Jennifer [Zeng] to go after they have experienced something like she has experienced,” said Martin.

The “Stop Socialism, Choose Freedom Rally” was held on the West Lawn of the Capitol on Sept. 19, 2019. Some of the other speakers included Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), Debbie Dooley, head of Conservatives for Energy Freedom, and U.S. Army National Guard hero Alek Skarlatos, who helped stop a guman on a Paris-bound train in 2015.

(CNSNews.com) – At a Capitol Hill Tea Party rally against socialism, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) criticized the New York Times for publishing an unsubstantiated attack on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, stressing that the story wasn’t fit for a high school paper.

Cruz added that The Times ran the story, which they had to correct, “because they are trying to scare the court.” The smear against Kavanaugh shows “just how crazy” the Democratic candidates are, said Cruz, who noted that the candidates “want free, tax-payer abortion for transgender women.”

The Tea Party Patriots’ “Stop Socialism, Choose Freedom Rally” was held on Friday, Sept. 20, on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol. In addition to Sen. Cruz, some of the speakers included Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), Tea Party Patriots’ Chairman Jenny Beth Martin and author Jennifer Zeng.

Cruz continued, “This week, the story they came up with is two guys said another guy said he saw something 30 years ago. We did not talk to the guy who said he saw it, and the woman who is the alleged victim, we are not going to mention this in the initial story, but she is not in fact the alleged victim because she is not alleging anything, and she says she doesn’t remember it at all. What?”

The New York Times story, based on a book from its reporters, claimed that Kavanaugh participated in a very lewd form of sexual harassment but The Times did not report that the alleged victim has said she does not remember any such incident taking place.

As The Hill reported on Sept. 16, “The Times in the story … reported a former classmate of Kavanaugh’s named Max Stier said he witnessed the now-justice expose himself and force a female classmate to touch his penis at a dorm party. The Times said it corroborated the story with two other officials who had heard the same report from Stier.

“However, the woman involved in the alleged incident did not speak to the Times and, according to the correction, her friends say she does not recall that it happened.” 

“They are doing it because they are trying to intimidate the court,” said Cruz. “They are doing that because they are trying to scare John Roberts. They are doing that because there is going to be another vacancy in the next year on the Supreme Court.”

Jenny Beth Martin also said she supported Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“I am part of the women for Kavanaugh,” she said. “You won’t intimidate us — those of you on the left, we are not going away!”

Cruz also said comments on abortion made in the first Democratic debate showed that the candidates “are bat crap crazy” because they support candidate Julian Castro’s “free taxpayer funded abortion for transgender women” idea.  

“I readily admit I am not smart enough to follow all the new terminology,” Cruz said. “But if I understand correctly what he is talking about, when he refers to a transgender woman he is talking about someone who is born biologically men, now […] I am pretty sure if that is the equipment you were born with, pregnancy is not in your future.”

On his show “The Mark Levin Show” on Friday, nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin disagreed with Speaker Nancy Pelosi on indicting a sitting president, suggesting that if we were to indict a sitting president, we the people would suffer.

“Let’s say the president’s convicted,” stated Mark Levin. “Does he go to prison? Does the president go to prison? There is nothing that says he had to resign. So is he going to govern from prison? ‘Well, we’ll impeach him.’ Maybe they will. Maybe they won’t.

“So, who suffers?” asked Levin later in the program. “We the people, we suffer. Who benefits? Well, his political opponents, and our enemies, they benefit. Because obviously a president is going to be burdened. He’s going to be distracted. You’re going to have the same media pushing indictments, pushing convictions, pushing sentencing. It would be an impossible burden not just for the president as a citizen but for the nation – but for the nation.

Mark Levin’s remarks stem from an exclusive interview Speaker Nancy Pelosi had with National Public Radio (NPR). During the interview, Speaker Pelosi suggests that it is necessary to pass laws for future presidents to be indicted, further stating that “[t]he Founders could never suspect that a president would be so abusive of the Constitution of the United States, that the separation of powers would be irrelevant to him and that he would continue, any president would continue, to withhold facts from the Congress, which are part of the constitutional right of inquiry.”

Below is a transcript, in pertinent part, of Mark Levin’s remarks from his show on Friday:

“Now Nancy Pelosi has a great idea, and, of course, tongue and cheek.

“Pelosi says ‘Congress Should Pass New Laws So Sitting Presidents Can Be Indicted.’ This is [National Pubic Radio].

“‘House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested a new law is needed to be able to indict a sitting president for potential lawbreaking while in office.

“‘In an exclusive interview with NPR, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she has not changed her mind on pursuing impeachment but is ready to change the law to restrain presidential power […] make it clear that a sitting president can, in fact, be indicted.

“‘“I do think that we will have to pass some laws that will have clarity for future presidents. [A] president should be indicted, if he’s committed a wrongdoing

“‘[I]f he’s commited a wrongdoing’? He should be indicted ‘if he’s committed a wrongdoing’?

“‘“There is nothing anyplace that says the president should not be indicted,”’ she said.

“Now, I’m going to address this. You know, years ago, when I was a young man who hadn’t experienced, you know, the soberness of age and so forth, I used to say, ‘Yeah. We ought to be able to indict a sitting president,” and then I really started thinking about it. It’s like Convention of States. I said, ‘Now let’s think this through.’

“Look at the environment today. If you could indict a sitting president. Now, she doesn’t explain herself because she’s incapable of explaining herself. Does she mean any federal prosecutor can indict a sitting president? Does she mean state prosecutors? Does she mean local DAs? What does she mean? She doesn’t know what she means. Somebody will have to tell her what she means. She’s dimwitted.

“Alright, well, let’s move on from there.

“How about a federal prosecutor?

“Well, ladies and gentlemen, how many U.S. attorneys are there, at least how many U.S. attorney offices are there? There are 93. So there’s 93 U.S. attorneys or acting United States attorneys. There are thousands of assistant United States attorneys – thousands. That’s a lot.

“And so, when you have a U.S. attorney and assistant U.S. attorney who wants to investigate a president, let’s say for campaign finance issues or nondisclosure agreements, or they want to investigate a president because they think the president has violated the emoluments clause or they think the president of the United States has obstructed or they think this, that or the other. What kind of a president will you have? What kind of a presidency will we have? They’ll be crippled.

…

“Let’s say the president’s convicted. Does he go to prison? Does the president go to prison? There is nothing that says he had to resign. So is he going to govern from prison? ‘Well, we’ll impeach him.’ Maybe they will. Maybe they won’t.

“Let’s take it a few steps further. The president is still a citizen. He’s a citizen. So at the same time he is trying to defend himself in all these phases of an investigation in a court case – he’s dealing with Iran; he’s dealing with China, North Korea, immigration, a thousand issues – that when a president isn’t threatened with an indictment. It takes years and years off their lives. It is an incredibly difficult job, even without the threat of a criminal prosecution.

“So, who suffers? We the people, we suffer. Who benefits? Well, his political opponents, and our enemies, they benefit. Because obviously a president is going to be burdened. He’s going to be distracted. You’re going to have the same media pushing indictments, pushing convictions, pushing sentencing. It would be an impossible burden not just for the president as a citizen but for the nation – but for the nation.

“‘Well, Mark, the president isn’t above the law.’ The president of the United States is one of a kind, whatever the party, whomever it is. There’s only one president. There’s hundreds of members of Congress. There’s hundreds of judges. There’s one president of the United States.

“And so, you could have one prosecutor, one prosecutor, decide, essentially, to reverse the course of an election just by bringing a charge – one prosecutor.

“‘Well, Mark, it would have to be coordinated with the attorney general’s office.’ No, it wouldn’t. Maybe, maybe not, we don’t know. It’s never happened. But let’s say it’s coordinated with the attorney general. So then you would have a cabinet member, who wasn’t elected by anybody, a cabinet member comes under enormous pressure from the editorial page of The New York Slimes and The Washington Compost, the daily drumbeat from the so-called newsrooms. Look at the attorney general in Israel. Look at how he buckled – and they do buckle. Look at our chief justice, how he buckles to media attention and media pressure. One attorney general might be no different.

“So, you would have a circumstance with the president of the United States, who, coming into office, would have his hands tied.”

Mark Levin also disagrees with Ben Shapiro, who agreed with Speaker Pelosi that a sitting president should be able to be invited, Shapiro suggesting in a tweet, “Curbing the executive through prosecution shouldn’t be off the table. In fact, I argued that with regard to the Obama administration. She should be careful what she wishes for.”

(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House intelligence committee, says he wants to hear the complaint filed by an intelligence community whistleblower that has so far been withheld from Congress by the Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire.

“I mean, we want to — we want to hear from that whistle-blower,” Nunes told Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo. “But it sure looks like the scheme has backfired. And this — like I said, I think this is probably the end of Biden’s campaign.”

“End of his campaign?” Bartiromo asked.

“I really do,” Nunes said. “I mean, not that he’s — he’s still formidable. He still has a bloc of support. But if you look, his lead is basically down to zero. If you look what happened in Iowa now, it looks like Elizabeth Warren is in the lead.”

On Sunday, President Trump told reporters that the conversation he had with newly elected Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky in July “was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place, and largely the fact that we don’t want our people like Vice President Biden and his son (contributing) to the corruption already in the Ukraine.”

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump urged Zelensky to investigate the Bidens eight times.

All of this has renewed calls for impeaching Trump, with Democrat Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.) tweeting on Saturday: “At this point, the bigger national scandal isn’t the president’s lawbreaking behavior — it is the Democratic Party’s refusal to impeach him for it.”

Asked to comment on AOC’s tweet, Nunes noted that she is a “socialist.”

“So what do socialists do? They want full control. They want one-party control,” Nunes said. “So the only way to get one-party control right now is to impeach the president.

“So that’s what they’re trying to do. So the more I think that they’re — that they’re out there promoting this kind of craziness and silliness, I think the more the American people are going to be put off, and I think the higher likelihood that President Trump is reelected.”

Nunes said there are questions that former Vice President Biden needs to answer “as to what he was doing talking to Ukrainian leadership at the time when his son has a contract” (with a Ukrainian natural gas company). Biden (and others) called for the firing of a Ukraine prosecutor who was investigating Biden’s son.

“We want to get to the bottom of that, also,” Nunes said. “But this scheme seems to have backfired on Biden. I mean, Biden is already dropping in the polls, and this probably could be the end.”

On Sunday, President Trump tweeted:

Now the Fake News Media says I “pressured the Ukrainian President at least 8 times during my telephone call with him.” This supposedly comes from a so-called “whistleblower” who they say doesn’t even have a first hand account of what was said. More Democrat/Crooked Media con…..

..Breaking News: The Ukrainian Government just said they weren’t pressured at all during the “nice” call. Sleepy Joe Biden, on the other hand, forced a tough prosecutor out from investigating his son’s company by threat of not giving big dollars to Ukraine. That’s the real story!

Biden responded to the latest Trump controversy via tweet and the spoken word.

“Desperate Donald Trump knows that I can beat him, so now he’s enlisting the help of a foreign government — once again. It’s an abuse of power and violates every basic norm of the presidency. We cannot give him four more years in the White House,” Biden tweeted (or his campaign did).

Biden said much the same thing in Iowa on Saturday, as he demanded that a transcript of Trump’s July phone call be released.

“Trump’s doing this because he knows I’ll beat him like a drum,” Biden said. “And he’s using the abuse of power and every element of the presidency to try to do something to smear me.

Biden said he had “never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.”

Trump said that’s a lie. And so it goes.

Maguire is scheduled to testify in open session on Thursday, Sept. 26. And President Trump will meet with the Ukraine president this week at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.