Jihad-loving Muslim who murdered a US soldier has a prison-diet demand. And a judge is listening.

Who is the inmate and what was his crime?

  • Abdulhakim Muhammad is serving a life sentence without parole for his 2009 drive-by shooting of two soldiers — killing one, Pvt. William Long of the U.S. Army — outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas.
  • He pleaded guilty to capital murder, attempted capital murder and 10 counts of unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, Arkansas Online reported.
  • Before his conversion to Islam, Muhammad was a “middle-class, Baptist kid from Memphis, born Carlos Bledsoe, who played youth basketball and worked at Chuck E. Cheese’s,” the Knoxville News-Sentinel reported.

Why did he carry out the shooting?

  • He was preparing for jihad, the News-Sentinel said.
  • In his own words, “It’s a war out against Islam and Muslims and I’m on the side of the Muslims point blank. … The U.S. has to pay for the rape, murder, bloodshed, blasphemy it has done and still doing to the Muslims and Islam. So consider this a small retaliation the best is to come Allah willing. This is not the first attack and won’t be the last,” the News-Sentinel added.
  • Muhammad sent seven handwritten letters to the Memphis Commercial Appeal regretting his failure to do more harm, the News-Sentinel noted.
  • A law enforcement official told The Associated Press that Muhammad had been under investigation by an FBI-led terrorism task force since his return from Yemen earlier in 2009, the News-Sentinel added.

What is his dietary demand being heard in federal court?

  • Muhammad said the Arkansas Department of Correction is violating his right to religious freedom by refusing to provide him a “halal diet” in accordance with his Muslim religion, Arkansas Online reported.
  • “Mr. Muhammad sincerely believes as a practicing Muslim he must consume a halal diet,” his attorney, Jess Askew, told the outlet.
  • Askew told Arkansas Online that such a diet requires daily consumption of halal meats, which could be fish or other meats except for pork.
  • Muhammad complained in a 2015 lawsuit that court decisions in 2002 and 2006 led the department to begin serving kosher food for inmates whose religions required it, but that it won’t accommodate him in the same way, the outlet said.
  • A judge began hearing testimony Monday, the outlet said.

(H/T: Town Hall)

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

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

Communist West Point Graduate Called Mattis An ‘Evil, Vile F***’

Mattis is possibly the most well-loved military men to come along in a while. Communist is not only evil, but wrong. The real question is who nominated this evil character for West Point and are there more?

Via Daily Caller:

Communist West Point graduate 2nd. Lt. Spenser Rapone called Secretary of Defense James Mattis the most “evil, vile f***” in the entire Trump administration.

After reports emerged tying Rapone to the Twitter account @punkproletarian on Monday, West Point issued a statement distancing itself from Rapone’s tweets, which included calling for political violence against the right, referring to Trump as a fascist, and openly promoting communism while in uniform. West Point also noted that Rapone’s chain of command had opened an investigation.

But one of the tweets which has so far escaped attention is Rapone denigrating Mattis in the most vulgar of terms.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

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

Special Counsel Mueller Uncovered a Long List of Obama Administration Crimes – Will He Investigate?

Guest post by Joe Hoft

Yesterday on The Rush Limbaugh Show, Rush shared post by the Gateway Pundit headlined: “Mueller Investigation Desperate As More Information About Obama’s Illegal Spying Is Uncovered.

 According to Rush, the reason the Mueller investigation keeps hiring people is because they can’t find a crime.

As Rush explained, there wasn’t a Trump crime that got the special counsel going, and yet the special counsel regulation, specifies that the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General has to have an underlying crime for which a special counsel is to pursue.

Mueller’s investigation is based on a lie and Obama used the same lie to get Trump investigated.

What Rush concludes is that he wouldn’t be surprised if Mueller is uncovering plenty of crimes by the Obama Administration.  Rush is right. The Obama Administration has a track record of dishonest and criminal actions while Obama was President so the likelihood that Obama oversaw hundreds of illegal spying activities cannot be far from the truth.

In order for the Obama team to illegally spy on individuals, it had to involve abuse of the FISA court.  The FISA Court was put in place in 1978 when Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):

The Court sits in Washington D.C., and is composed of eleven federal district court judges who are designated by the Chief Justice of the United States. Each judge serves for a maximum of seven years and their terms are staggered to ensure continuity on the Court. By statute, the judges must be drawn from at least seven of the United States judicial circuits, and three of the judges must reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia. Judges typically sit for one week at a time, on a rotating basis.

Pursuant to FISA, the Court entertains applications submitted by the United States Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes. Most of the Court’s work is conducted ex parte as required by statute, and due to the need to protect classified national security information.

We know that every single judge on the FISA Court from May 2016 through President Trump’s inauguration was appointed during Obama’s Administration and all were still on the court through May of 2017.

We know that current Chief Justice John Roberts appointed all the judges to the FISA court.  Judge Roberts is famous for supporting Obamacare in two radical positions, one of which Justice Antonin Scalia, in his withering dissent, refered to as “applesauce”.  Knowing this, it is concerning that Judge Roberts is responsible for the makeup of the current FISA court.

We know that according to ABC News:

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved. From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government.

As noted above, all applications to the FISA Court were signed off on by the Attorney General and therefore all applications that were processed in Obama’s second term were signed off on by Loretta Lynch.  This means that Lynch signed off on all requests for wire tapping President Donald Trump during the Presidential race.

We know that Lynch requested that the Head of the FBI, according to his sworn testimony, refer to the Clinton email investigation in 2016 as a ‘matter’.  Lynch also later released a video calling for the need for more marching, blood and death on the streets.  Perhaps this was her asinine attempt to overthrow the government so she doesn’t go to jail.

We know that the Obama Administration spied on reporters like Sharyl Attkisson and others who condemned the Obama Administration.  Susan Rice spied on Trump officials and requested their unmasking.  Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan targeted Americans to spy onObama UN Ambassador Samantha Power sought to unmask over 260 Americans in 2016.  Why would a UN Director ever need this information?  Obama’s former DNI Director James Clapper, famous for lying in front of Congress and denying that the US spied on Americans in the movie “Snowden“, denied knowing that Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort was spied on after stating he would absolutely know if a FISA warrant existed.

Even a low level former Assistant Defense Secretary admitted spying on Trump and leaking to the press.

Many if not all these actions by the Obama Administration were politically motivated and therefore criminal. 

Spying, lying and denying under oath are all criminal acts.  It will be another crime for the Mueller investigation not to bring charges against the Obama Administration.

 

The post Special Counsel Mueller Uncovered a Long List of Obama Administration Crimes – Will He Investigate? 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

Can We Please Stop Pretending the NFL Protests Have Anything to Do with Free Speech?

Following the lead of the now unemployed Colin Kaepernick and on the heels of some fiery rhetoric from President Trump on the matter, more National Football League players than ever knelt during the National Anthem on Sunday in order to protest the institutional white racism in America that they presume exists. 

Invariably, there are the stock defenders of their actions invoking the First Amendment as an enshrined protection for their actions.  Even some unlikelier defenders, such as National Review, have framed this as a free speech issue.

To be perfectly clear, doing so is an exercise in stupidity.  The First Amendment provides Americans protection to enact displays of protest, certainly.  The question that goes continually and aggravatingly unaddressed is, protection from whom?

It would be wishful thinking, I suppose, to imagine that Americans who support the NFL protesters might take the fifteen or twenty seconds necessary to google and read the First Amendment. 

It reads:

Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

“Congress shall make no law.”  The framers inscribed a document related to the powers and limitations of the federal government.  Therefore, it is only logical to understand that this refers to the federal Congress.  The federal Congress shall make no laws to infringe upon these rights.

So where is the federal law that outlaws kneeling during the National Anthem at a pro football game?  If there were such a law, it would run afoul of the First Amendment.  But there is no such law.

Also, I’m not aloof to the fact that judicial precedent in case law evidences a much broader interpretation of the First Amendment, suggesting that it applies to the state and local governments as well.  Even considering that broader scope raises another question: who is rushing to arrest the kneeling sports star for his violation of any such standing law at the state level?  No one.

So what has the First Amendment to do with any of this? 

Nothing.  Not one single thing.  Anyone with half a brain and thirty seconds to digest the meaning of the First Amendment should be able to understand that without difficulty.

Now let’s move on and consider what these National Anthem protests actually mean.

The kneelers argue that they do not mean to disrespect the flag, or those who have fought and died for this country, or America as a whole.  Of course, their actions certainly disrespect all of those things, and suggesting otherwise should be ridiculous on its face. 

So why, exactly, are they kneeling?

Those kneeling assert that there is an epidemic of white police officers who work their beat every night with the explicit intention to murder innocent black people.  They are suggesting that there is an epidemic of institutional white racism in this country going unaddressed, and that the only way to draw attention to this, the Black Lives Matter narrative, is to kneel during the National Anthem at pro football games.

There is no convincing evidence that either claim is true, and it is a malicious narrative that has arguably already led to a death toll among police officers being targeted for their presumably widespread racism and brutality. 

The left argues that the players’ demonstrations force me to recognize that this narrative exists, as if I’m not forced to recognize the existence of this narrative with the myriad protests and riots infused with this Black Lives Matter-inspired rhetoric and impetus.  They imagine that I and millions of other Americans don’t accept this narrative only because it’s not being adequately thrown in our faces.

I, among millions of other Americans, refuse to accept that.  I therefore find those kneeling during the National Anthem in order to advance that narrative despicable, entitled babies for whom I have no respect and who are undeserving of my financial support.   

Rush Limbaugh’s comments encapsulate my feeling on this matter.  For me, it is sadness more than anger.  But the NFL has, regrettably, created these circumstances.

The aforementioned “free speech” argument touted by defenders of the NFL and the protesters fails on another front, beyond the immediate substance of the First Amendment.  That is, the NFL is quite comfortable censoring free speech, though it’s unmistakable that the speech they choose to prohibit runs afoul of a leftist ideological impulse.  In 2016, the NFL threatened to fine teams who decorated their cleats with a “Never Forget” logo commemorating the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.  They prohibited the Cowboys from wearing helmet decals honoring the five police officers killed by a Black Lives Matter advocate.

Yet while stifling this “free expression,” they have no problems whatsoever with the Rams players taking the field with the “Hands up, Don’t Shoot!” gesture, which was based on an entirely fictitious and dangerous narrative that led to those five Dallas police officers being slain.  And now, when players choose to disrespect the flag and our nation on the fans’ time and the fans’ dime to perpetuate that very same narrative, the NFL is equally conciliatory in allowing it.

And the NFL has the audacity to suggest that the current politicization in football was created by Donald Trump?  Though I don’t agree with him using his platform as president to call for the firing of kneeling players or for a boycott of the NFL, these are certainly not circumstances of his design.

On Monday Night Football this week, the Dallas Cowboys and the Arizona Cardinals both locked arms and knelt before the National Anthem, acknowledging the protesters’ position.  Then they stood and locked arms during the National Anthem.  It was a charade all too obviously meant to placate fans, while still giving a platform to espouse the dangerous and entirely untrue Black Lives Matter narrative.  “Unity” was the theme.  More “division” is what you can expect.

The most troubling thought crossing my mind?  That somewhere, Colin Kaepernick is smiling, quite pleased with himself.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

Following the lead of the now unemployed Colin Kaepernick and on the heels of some fiery rhetoric from President Trump on the matter, more National Football League players than ever knelt during the National Anthem on Sunday in order to protest the institutional white racism in America that they presume exists. 

Invariably, there are the stock defenders of their actions invoking the First Amendment as an enshrined protection for their actions.  Even some unlikelier defenders, such as National Review, have framed this as a free speech issue.

To be perfectly clear, doing so is an exercise in stupidity.  The First Amendment provides Americans protection to enact displays of protest, certainly.  The question that goes continually and aggravatingly unaddressed is, protection from whom?

It would be wishful thinking, I suppose, to imagine that Americans who support the NFL protesters might take the fifteen or twenty seconds necessary to google and read the First Amendment. 

It reads:

Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

“Congress shall make no law.”  The framers inscribed a document related to the powers and limitations of the federal government.  Therefore, it is only logical to understand that this refers to the federal Congress.  The federal Congress shall make no laws to infringe upon these rights.

So where is the federal law that outlaws kneeling during the National Anthem at a pro football game?  If there were such a law, it would run afoul of the First Amendment.  But there is no such law.

Also, I’m not aloof to the fact that judicial precedent in case law evidences a much broader interpretation of the First Amendment, suggesting that it applies to the state and local governments as well.  Even considering that broader scope raises another question: who is rushing to arrest the kneeling sports star for his violation of any such standing law at the state level?  No one.

So what has the First Amendment to do with any of this? 

Nothing.  Not one single thing.  Anyone with half a brain and thirty seconds to digest the meaning of the First Amendment should be able to understand that without difficulty.

Now let’s move on and consider what these National Anthem protests actually mean.

The kneelers argue that they do not mean to disrespect the flag, or those who have fought and died for this country, or America as a whole.  Of course, their actions certainly disrespect all of those things, and suggesting otherwise should be ridiculous on its face. 

So why, exactly, are they kneeling?

Those kneeling assert that there is an epidemic of white police officers who work their beat every night with the explicit intention to murder innocent black people.  They are suggesting that there is an epidemic of institutional white racism in this country going unaddressed, and that the only way to draw attention to this, the Black Lives Matter narrative, is to kneel during the National Anthem at pro football games.

There is no convincing evidence that either claim is true, and it is a malicious narrative that has arguably already led to a death toll among police officers being targeted for their presumably widespread racism and brutality. 

The left argues that the players’ demonstrations force me to recognize that this narrative exists, as if I’m not forced to recognize the existence of this narrative with the myriad protests and riots infused with this Black Lives Matter-inspired rhetoric and impetus.  They imagine that I and millions of other Americans don’t accept this narrative only because it’s not being adequately thrown in our faces.

I, among millions of other Americans, refuse to accept that.  I therefore find those kneeling during the National Anthem in order to advance that narrative despicable, entitled babies for whom I have no respect and who are undeserving of my financial support.   

Rush Limbaugh’s comments encapsulate my feeling on this matter.  For me, it is sadness more than anger.  But the NFL has, regrettably, created these circumstances.

The aforementioned “free speech” argument touted by defenders of the NFL and the protesters fails on another front, beyond the immediate substance of the First Amendment.  That is, the NFL is quite comfortable censoring free speech, though it’s unmistakable that the speech they choose to prohibit runs afoul of a leftist ideological impulse.  In 2016, the NFL threatened to fine teams who decorated their cleats with a “Never Forget” logo commemorating the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.  They prohibited the Cowboys from wearing helmet decals honoring the five police officers killed by a Black Lives Matter advocate.

Yet while stifling this “free expression,” they have no problems whatsoever with the Rams players taking the field with the “Hands up, Don’t Shoot!” gesture, which was based on an entirely fictitious and dangerous narrative that led to those five Dallas police officers being slain.  And now, when players choose to disrespect the flag and our nation on the fans’ time and the fans’ dime to perpetuate that very same narrative, the NFL is equally conciliatory in allowing it.

And the NFL has the audacity to suggest that the current politicization in football was created by Donald Trump?  Though I don’t agree with him using his platform as president to call for the firing of kneeling players or for a boycott of the NFL, these are certainly not circumstances of his design.

On Monday Night Football this week, the Dallas Cowboys and the Arizona Cardinals both locked arms and knelt before the National Anthem, acknowledging the protesters’ position.  Then they stood and locked arms during the National Anthem.  It was a charade all too obviously meant to placate fans, while still giving a platform to espouse the dangerous and entirely untrue Black Lives Matter narrative.  “Unity” was the theme.  More “division” is what you can expect.

The most troubling thought crossing my mind?  That somewhere, Colin Kaepernick is smiling, quite pleased with himself.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

via American Thinker

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

Video: Antifa eats itself

What’s the inevitable result of identity-based social-justice welfare? Ranking of race to stomp out racism, just like the end result of violent “anti-fascist” activism is inevitably fascism. A Twitter account called “Beverly Hills Antifa” (which exists to criticize and provoke Antifa) last night tweeted this video from a protest a month ago in Berkeley, showing an escalating argument between two Antifa activists over authenticity.  The woman accuses the man of epitomizing “the height of white performativeness.” Only true violence and true DNA matter to The Cause, she instructs, as the young man tries to defend himself by providing a brief resumé of his violence.

The clip contains language that’s Not Safe for Work, or for your intellect. You’ve been warned (hat tips to Jeryl Bier and Urban Scorp on Twitter for identifying the event):

Note that this involves three people at a much larger event, so some will say that it doesn’t reflect the movement as a whole. That might be a legitimate point, but not at this event, where the violence was so bad that the LA Times reported it the next day. This was the catalyst for the Left’s backpedal away from Antifa, you’ll recall, where Democrats from Nancy Pelosi on down hit reverse and started denouncing the group.  Add in this woman demanding violence at the top of her lungs to what looks like at least the tacit approval of the crowd and it adds up to a damning portrait.

“White perfomativeness” is apparently grad-school speak for poseur or tourist. This could be a learning experience for the young lad, who has apparently labored under the misapprehension that fighting racism means, well, fighting racism. Don’t expect the obvious to dawn on him, though; anyone who measures his value by the violence he inflicts on others is probably immune to irony and self-reflection, at least in that moment.

But if he is paying attention, the woman’s point at the end makes it clear that in identity politics there is no redemption possible. “You’re still white!” she yells after him. “You’re inherently racist! It’s in your blood!” Say … isn’t that kind of stereotyping by skin color and blood-based judgment … racist?

The post Video: Antifa eats itself appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

YIKES: Survey Finds That Only A Quarter Of Americans Can Name The 3 Branches Of Government

The results of a recent Annenberg Public Policy Center survey that measured average American understanding of the United States Constitution, are intensely disappointing, although not altogether surprising. The survey, which asked questions of 1,013 respondents, found that a majority of Americans are woefully unaware of their rights, and that an even greater number are stunningly uninformed when it comes to our government’s political organization.

According to the results, only 26% of Americans were able to name the three branches of our government, the executive, legislative and judicial branches. The survey results note, that, “in the presence of controls, people who identified themselves as conservatives were significantly more likely to name all three branches correctly than liberals and moderates.” This of course makes sense, since the Left has made it their mission to undermine the values of our founding documents. Why take the time to read old documents that history has left behind?

What’s especially disturbing though, is how the percentage of correct answers has dropped since the last survey in 2011, when 38% — still a depressingly low number — were able to name each branch. This speaks volumes on the efficacy of our Department of Education. The type of learning that is important to the Left has been clear for a long time and doesn’t include government or actual American history. Just ask UNC Charlotte, which offers 345 “diversity” courses.

Respondents did little better on other survey questions. A whopping 37% were unable to name a single right laid out in the First Amendment. Less than half (48%) were able to name freedom of speech. Only 15% were aware that the First Amendment protects religious freedom. Unbelievably, only 10% responded with right to assembly. In direct opposition to the First Amendment, “39 percent of Americans support allowing Congress to stop the news media from reporting on any issue of national security without government approval.”

The APPC survey also explored American understanding of the constitutional rights granted to immigrants who reside in the United States illegally. 67% of self-identifying conservative respondents told researchers that illegal immigrants were not guaranteed rights by our constitution. While not all rights outlined by our constitution apply to illegal immigrants, many do, including due process. In this case, moderates and liberals were slightly more informed (or I’d hazard a guess: more likely to believe that which fits their narrative), with 48% and 46% correct responses, respectively.

In another result, which almost reads as parody, 21% of survey participants didn’t think constitutional rights equally applied to atheists, and another 24% failed to understand that Muslims are included in constitutional protections as well.

This is absolutely terrifying. These people, our fellow Americans, who in many cases know literally nothing about our government and the country’s foundational documents, are voting (likely for Democrats). The education system in this country has failed its citizens in spectacular fashion. One can only hope there’s still time to correct our path and start teaching our youth why this country, its institutions, and its constitutional protections, are the best on Earth.

via Daily Wire

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

It Begins. Owner of Historic US Clothing Company Pulls Ads from NFL Games

Allan Jones is CEO of Hardwick Clothing and Check Into Cash payday loan company announced on Tuesday his is through with sponsoring the wardrobes and advertising on the NFL.

Hardwick Clothing is America’s oldest suit maker.

In his statement Jones said, “Our companies will not condone unpatriotic behavior!”
The Times Free Press reported:

Two years ago, Cleveland, Tenn., businessman Allan Jones was proudly showing off his newly acquired Hardwick Clothing-brand suits by providing the wardrobe for NBC’s on-air talent during the network’s broadcasts of NFL football games.

But after NFL players and coaches challenged President Donald Trump and many took a knee during the national anthem played before their games over the weekend, Jones said he is through sponsoring the wardrobes or advertising on stations that air the National Football League.

Jones, CEO of the payday lending chain Check Into Cash and owner of Hardwick Clothes — America’s oldest suit maker — tweeted his criticism and change of heart Tuesday.

The post It Begins. Owner of Historic US Clothing Company Pulls Ads from NFL Games 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

Rep. Mo Brooks: ‘Terminate All Federal Government Support to NFL’

Rep. Mo Brooks: ‘Terminate All Federal Government Support to NFL’

by Penny Starr27 Sep 20170

27 Sep, 2017
27 Sep, 2017

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) said on Tuesday that the federal government should not financially support the NFL because of players’ disrespectful “take a knee” protests during the national anthem.

“I believe we ought to terminate all federal government support of the NFL,” Brooks told Breitbart News following the Conversations with Conservatives event at the Capitol. “That would include the termination of any and all advertising that is done on behalf of the federal government — military and non-military — to the extent we do any.”

“The same thing with any other professional sport that insults our country and our flag and our anthem as the NFL has done,” said Brooks, who is a member of the House Freedom Caucus.

CNN Money reported in 2015 the NFL teams get “billions in subsidies from U.S. taxpayers.”

The latest round of controversy over the now infamous Colin Kaepernick move in 2016 when the former San Francisco 49ers quarterback took a knee during the national anthem to protest racism in the United States came on Friday. During a campaign rally in Alabama President Donald Trump expressed his opinion on the matter .

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the field right now. He is fired. He’s fired!’” Trump said.

Trump said the protests were a “total disrespect of our heritage” and “a total disrespect of everything that we stand for.”

Trump continued to stoke the controversy on Twitter.

“If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place fast,” Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday. “Fire or suspend!”

Trump said that NFL attendance and television ratings were “way down,” suggesting that the protests from players could harm the sport.

Several NFL owners have sided with their players, saying they have a right to protest.

via Breitbart News

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

America Under Siege: Antifa

Antifa is the third episode in the America Under Siege film series from Dangerous Documentaries (a project of the Capital Research Center) and Cohesion Films. Each episode profiles the influence of radical Marxists on various segments of American society.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/11sy9G3