Kaboom! Acosta, Sanders Throw Down in WH Briefing; ‘I’m Not Taking Another Question From You’

Monday’s White House press briefing was another one for the ages as CNN’s self-righteous senior White House correspondent Jim Acosta came ready to rumble against Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, but quickly ran into the proverbial buzzsaw during a debate on liberal media bias. 

Acosta fetched plenty of support as journalists could be heard shouting throughout the exchange in efforts to heckle Sanders (led by CNN political analyst, Playboy correspondent, and Sentinel Newspapers writer Brian Karem).

 

 

Politico’s Matthews Nussbaum actually lit the match on this fire, asking Sanders why there’s a “discrepancy” between President Trump’s outrage over mistakes by journalist and government-backed efforts to influence elections (like Russia somehow causing voters to elect Trump). 

Sanders responded that Trump called out The Washington Post’s David Weigel for one such mistake because it was “a very direct and false accusation lodged against him” that was only the latest in a series of outlets having “to retract and change and re-write and make editor’s notes to a number of different stories and some of them with major impacts.”

Acosta then leaped into action, stating that “journalists make honest mistakes and that doesn’t make them fake news.” Sanders shot back that “when journalists make honest mistakes, they should own up to them” but clearly haven’t. 

After an unidentified reporter shouted “we do” from the peanut gallery, the verbal brawl was on:

SANDERS: Sometimes, and a lot of times you don’t. But there’s a difference —

ACOSTA: The President hasn’t!

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The President does it all the time

ACOSTA: The President hasn’t!

SANDERS: There’s a very big — I’m sorry. I’m not finished. 

ACOSTA: Okay.

SANDERS: There’s a very big difference between making honest mistakes and purposefully misleading the American people. Something that happens regularly. You can’t say — 

BRIAN KAREM: You mean like tweeting — 

SANDERS: I’m not done. 

KAREM: —about stuff in the Middle East. 

SANDERS: You cannot say —

KAREM: He tweeted something that was completely fake, Sarah and he admitted it.

SANDERS: — you cannot say that it’s an honest mistake when you are purposely putting out information that you know to be false or when you’re taking information that hasn’t been validated, that hasn’t been offered any credibility and that has been continually denied by a number of people including people with direct knowledge of an incident. 

KAREM: Are you saying that about the President?

SANDERS: This is something that — I’m speaking about the number of reports that have taken place over the last couple of weeks. I’m simply stating that there should be a certain level of responsibility in that process. 

Acosta lamented that they didn’t want to talk about this, but instead of pivoting back to what he wanted to ask Sanders about, the smug liberal journalist implored Sanders to “cite a specific story that you say is intentionally false, that was intentionally put out there to mislead the American people.”

Sanders succinctly cited the false story from ABC’s Brian Ross as “pretty misleading to the American people” and so Acosta attempted to move on, but enough time had elapsed that Sanders wanted to shift to Lifezette’s Jim Stinson.

Of course, Acosta continued throwing a fit:

ACOSTA: Sarah, if I may, though, I was going to ask a question about something else.

SANDERS: Well, you used it on something else. Jim? 

JIM STINSON: Sarah, is —

ACOSTA: If I may — 

STINSON: Sarah —

SANDERS: Not today. We’re going to keep moving, guys. 

ACOSTA: If I can ask about the other — 

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The other Jim!

ACOSTA: — accusations leveled against him.

SANDERS: I’m moving to a different Jim. I’m sorry. 

Acosta shrieked that he wanted to know “once and for all” whether the allegations of sexual misconduct against the President were true, so Sanders decided to use Acosta’s own line against him:

SANDERS: Jim, I’m going to say once and for all that I’m moving on to Jim Stinson and I’m not taking another question from you at this point. 

ACOSTA: I think I was — I was, in my defense, just responding to your attacks on the news media if that’s okay. 

STINSON: Sarah, a question about investments — investment taxes —

ACOSTA: I would like to ask the question that I had about these accusations of misconduct against the President. You said he’s denied them. Can you say whether or not they are false. That’s all I’m asking here.

SANDERS: I’m not going to respond to that question.

Later in the briefing, both Karem and fellow CNN political analyst April Ryan caused similar scenes. It’s interesting how, time and again, CNN’s payroll features most of the reporters who throw temper tantrums and engage in heated exchanges with the White House press secretary.

<<< Please support MRC’s NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>

Here’s the relevant transcript from December 11’s White House Press Briefing:

White House Press Briefing
December 11, 2017
2:26 p.m. Eastern

JIM ACOSTA: And I would just say, Sarah, that journalists make honest mistakes and that doesn’t make them fake news, but the question that I have —

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS: Well, when journalists make honest mistakes, they should own up to them. 

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: We do!

SANDERS: Sometimes, and a lot of times you don’t. But there’s a difference —

ACOSTA: The President hasn’t!

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The President does it all the time

ACOSTA: The President hasn’t!

SANDERS: There’s a very big — I’m sorry. I’m not finished. 

ACOSTA: Okay.

SANDERS: There’s a very big difference between making honest mistakes and purposefully misleading the American people. Something that happens regularly. You can’t say — 

BRIAN KAREM: You mean like tweeting — 

SANDERS: I’m not done. 

KAREM: —about stuff in the Middle East. 

SANDERS: You cannot say —

KAREM: He tweeted something that was completely fake, Sarah and he admitted it.

SANDERS: — you cannot say that it’s an honest mistake when you are purposely putting out information that you know to be false or when you’re taking information that hasn’t been validated, that hasn’t been offered any credibility and that has been continually denied by a number of people including people with direct knowledge of an incident. 

KAREM: Are you saying that about the President?

SANDERS: This is something that — I’m speaking about the number of reports that have taken place over the last couple of weeks. I’m simply stating that there should be a certain level of responsibility in that process. 

[JOURNALISTS SHOUTING]

ACOSTA: This was not —

SANDERS: Brian, I called on Jim. 

ACOSTA: — this is not the line of questioning that I was going down, but can you cite a specific story that you say is intentionally false, that was intentionally put out there to mislead the American people? 

SANDERS: Sure. The ABC report by Brian Ross. I think that was pretty misleading to the American people, and I think that it’s very telling that that individual had to be suspended because of that reporting. I think that shows that the network took it seriously and recognized that it was a problem. Jim? 

ACOSTA: Sarah, if I may, though, I was going to ask a question about something else.

SANDERS: Well, you used it on something else. Jim? 

JIM STINSON: Sarah, is —

ACOSTA: If I may — 

STINSON: Sarah —

SANDERS: Not today. We’re going to keep moving, guys. 

ACOSTA: If I can ask about the other — 

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The other Jim!

ACOSTA: — accusations leveled against him.

SANDERS: I’m moving to a different Jim. I’m sorry. 

ACOSTA: I know, but I needed a chance to ask the question that I wanted to ask which is —

SANDERS: Jim —

ACOSTA:  — can you just say once and for all whether these accusations — 

SANDERS: Jim, I’m going to say once and for all that I’m moving on to Jim Stinson and I’m not taking another question from you at this point. 

ACOSTA: I think I was — I was, in my defense, just responding to your attacks on the news media if that’s okay. 

STINSON: Sarah, a question about investments — investment taxes —

ACOSTA: I would like to ask the question that I had about these accusations of misconduct against the President. You said he’s denied them. Can you say whether or not they are false. That’s all I’m asking here.

SANDERS: I’m not going to respond to that question. 

ACOSTA: You’re not going to?

SANDERS: Go ahead, Jim.

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2v7eUfC

Despite Democrat Leader’s Claims, Puerto Rico Gives $113,000,000 in Bonuses

The 2017 Atlantic hurricane season is over. Houston, Miami and other coastal cities are rebuilding and prospering.

Puerto Rico, on the other hand, is still recovering. And now $113 million in bonus payments to state emplyees has put a giant question mark on the U.S. territory’s priorities.

Many areas are without power, but it’s no longer just because of Hurricane Maria. Puerto Rico was hit hard, but there have been areas that have recovered much quicker from Category 5 storms. Perhaps it has something to do with being under Democrat control for 44 of the past 52 years?

The island was pushed to bankruptcy in May of 2017 thanks to poor financial management.

And the crisis is bringing that record out.

TRENDING: These 2 Freeze Frames Likely Show Why the Jury Acquitted AZ Cop Accused of Murder

That bad management has taken a national stage as the United States gets a front row seat to the rebuilding of Puerto Rico. The painstaking task has been marred by the government of Puerto Rico canceling contracts to turn the power back on and other missteps.

The worst offense yet is still emerging. Puerto Rico is doling out $113 million in Christmas bonuses to current and former government employees, according to Bloomberg.

In the private sector, Christmas bonuses are fine when the company is flush and business is booming. When a company is on hard times, few private employees will see a bonus come Christmas time — but they still might have a job.

Government employees in Democrat-run Puerto Rico don’t have to worry about that kind of fiscal discipline apparently.

One reason for the slow reconstruction is Democrats’ obsession with politicizing a natural disaster. The figurehead of this movement is San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz. She grabbed hold of media attention by slamming President Donald Trump almost immediately. This attack has not let up, even though she let federal aid end up in the dumpster and often gives anti-Trump speeches flanked by pallets of government-provided water.

This is the same “Nasty Woman” who had brand new anti-Trump shirts during her appearances on national television. Remember how those shirts claimed “help us, we are dying?”

Apparently the island bureacracy wasn’t so close to death that it couldn’t scrounge up $113 million in Christmas bonuses for its government employees and pensioners.

RELATED: Taxpayers Pay Nearly $7,000,000 in Mueller’s Wild Goose Chase, No End in Sight

The American media will try to blame all of the island territory’s problems on Trump, of course — unfairness to Trump is part of the game plan.

But most Americans will see that the Republican-run state governments of both Florida and Texas, both hit hard by hurricanes, were thankful for federal help, and worked together to put their cities and counties back on track to normal. Meanwhile, Democrat Puerto Rico still suffers, but the government gives state employees bonuses.

If Cruz would put the people of Puerto Rico first instead of obsessing over how she can best insult Trump on the news, the island would be in a much better place.

Do you think the $113,000,000 was well spent? Share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know.

What do you think about Puerto RIco paying Christmas bonuses as they struggle to rebuild? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

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

NYPD Identifies 27-Year-Old Akayed Ullah as NYC Subway Bomber

NYPD Identifies 27-Year-Old Akayed Ullah as NYC Subway Bomber



Law enforcement sources have identified the man who attempted a bombing at the Port Authority Bus Terminal subway station in New York City on Monday morning as 27-year-old Akayed Ullah.

“Ullah is from Bangladesh and had been living in Brooklyn. He was injured when the device apparently went off prematurely and was rushed to Bellevue Hospital with non-life-threatening injuries. He suffered burns to his hands and other lacerations,” reported CBS News in New York.

According to Police Commissioner James O’Neill, Ullah had two explosive devices, one of which was “affixed to his body with velcro and zip ties.”

The New York Times quoted a “senior city official” who said police had to strip Ullah naked to remove the device affixed to his body.

CBS described one of these devices as “crudely-made” with “wires protruding from it.” The New York Post wrote of a “5-inch metal pipe bomb and battery pack strapped to his midsection.”

“Investigators briefly spoke to the alleged bomber, who told them he made the explosive device at the electrical company where he works,” according to the New York Post report.

By all indications, Ullah was planning a mass-casualty attack, evidently hoping to detonate his bombs in a crowded area. One anti-terrorism officer quoted by the NY Post said he “could have killed a lot of people” if one of his bombs had not detonated prematurely.

There was a good deal of initial confusion about Ullah’s status, with some early reports stating that he was killed or mortally wounded in the explosion, but later reports indicated his injuries were not life-threatening and mostly consisted of burns on his hands and abdomen. Photos released of the suspect in custody display no indication of severe injuries from a bomb blast:

Several sources have described Ullah as “ISIS-inspired” or acting in the name of the Islamic State, a claim most prominently made by former NYPD commissioner Bill Bratton in an MSNBC appearance on Monday morning. Rukmini Callimachi, a New York Times correspondent specializing in Islamic State news, noted that pro-ISIS channels on social media are celebrating him as an Islamic State jihadi:

At the time of this writing, there has been no official statement about Ullah’s motives and no details officially released about what he said to the police.

Update: Reuters reports that Ullah “had a black cab/limousine driver’s license from 2012 to 2015, now expired.”

CNN has posted a clear photograph of Akayed Ullah:

A law enforcement source told CNN that Ullah stated “recent Israeli actions in Gaza” are the reason he carried out his attack.

ABC News states that Ullah “entered the U.S. on an F4 visa, a family-based visa.” According to the ABC report, Ullah described himself to the authorities as “self-inspired from ISIS online propaganda.”

via Breitbart News

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

Young conservatives club banned after posting video of classmates protesting the anthem

Members of the Young Conservatives Club at Edina High School in Minnesota have been banned after posting a video to a social media site showing some of their fellow classmates protesting the anthem during a Veterans Day assembly.


The kids complained to their school principal when they received threats from a far left Antifa-sympathizing group for posting the video. Instead of going after the lefties for their threats, the principal banned the conservative club for “intolerance” and racism. The students are now suing the school district for violating their First Amendment rights.



USA Today:


School officials decided to ban the group after club members posted video of students protesting at the assembly on the social media app GroupMe, according to the lawsuit. Some of the comments to the GroupMe posting included disparaging and racist remarks about the protesters. The conservative students noted in their lawsuit that people who were not members of their club had access to their GroupMe posting and the ability to comment on it.


Someone else, using the handle Edina High School Anti-Fascists and wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, posted an image of the GroupMe posting on a since-deleted YouTube video and threatened the members of the Young Conservatives Club, the plaintiffs allege.


The club’s president, Nick Spades, complained to Edina High School principal Andrew Beaton about the threatening YouTube message. He said the principal demanded he show him the GroupMe posting, and after viewing it told him that the posting of the protesters — as well as the disparaging comments — violated the school’s policies.


Spade said the principal then demanded he not only delete the GroupMe site, but also disband the Young Conservatives Club or face discipline for being in violation of an unspecified policy.


“Our club was disbanded … because we were accused of being intolerant of student protesters during a Veterans Day assembly at our school,” Spades said. “This complete lack of respect, and the fact that school administration did nothing about it, is one of the reasons that we’re here today.”


The school district claims that  it “respects and adheres to state statute and federal law in regard to the free speech rights of all students and staff.” They certainly have a limited view of the First Amendment, don’t they? 


The bottom line is that simply posting a video of student protesters and being critical of them does not constitute “intolerance” in any way and if there were racist comments on the GroupMe site, there is no way to tell if the comments originated with club members. The “intolerance” from this incident originates with the arbitrary decisions made by the school principal, backed up by the school board, who apparently can brook no opposition to political correctness.


 


Members of the Young Conservatives Club at Edina High School in Minnesota have been banned after posting a video to a social media site showing some of their fellow classmates protesting the anthem during a Veterans Day assembly.


The kids complained to their school principal when they received threats from a far left Antifa-sympathizing group for posting the video. Instead of going after the lefties for their threats, the principal banned the conservative club for “intolerance” and racism. The students are now suing the school district for violating their First Amendment rights.


USA Today:


School officials decided to ban the group after club members posted video of students protesting at the assembly on the social media app GroupMe, according to the lawsuit. Some of the comments to the GroupMe posting included disparaging and racist remarks about the protesters. The conservative students noted in their lawsuit that people who were not members of their club had access to their GroupMe posting and the ability to comment on it.


Someone else, using the handle Edina High School Anti-Fascists and wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, posted an image of the GroupMe posting on a since-deleted YouTube video and threatened the members of the Young Conservatives Club, the plaintiffs allege.


The club’s president, Nick Spades, complained to Edina High School principal Andrew Beaton about the threatening YouTube message. He said the principal demanded he show him the GroupMe posting, and after viewing it told him that the posting of the protesters — as well as the disparaging comments — violated the school’s policies.


Spade said the principal then demanded he not only delete the GroupMe site, but also disband the Young Conservatives Club or face discipline for being in violation of an unspecified policy.


“Our club was disbanded … because we were accused of being intolerant of student protesters during a Veterans Day assembly at our school,” Spades said. “This complete lack of respect, and the fact that school administration did nothing about it, is one of the reasons that we’re here today.”


The school district claims that  it “respects and adheres to state statute and federal law in regard to the free speech rights of all students and staff.” They certainly have a limited view of the First Amendment, don’t they? 


The bottom line is that simply posting a video of student protesters and being critical of them does not constitute “intolerance” in any way and if there were racist comments on the GroupMe site, there is no way to tell if the comments originated with club members. The “intolerance” from this incident originates with the arbitrary decisions made by the school principal, backed up by the school board, who apparently can brook no opposition to political correctness.


 






via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc

White House Hits Back at Leftie Skier Lindsey Vonn after Anti-Trump Crack (Video)

White House Hits Back at Leftie Skier Lindsey Vonn after Anti-Trump Crack (Video)

During an interview with CNN earlier this week, Vonn said she does not compete for the president. When asked how it will feel “competing at the Olympic games for the United States whose president is Donald Trump?” Vonn responded with this:

Lindsey Vonn: “Um, well I hope to represent the people of the United States, not the president.”

Vonn was then asked if she would accept an invitation to the White House if she wins gold, she said,

Lindsey Vonn: “Absolutely not. But you have to win to be invited.”

Then this happened…

Lindsey Vonn injured her back on Saturday finishing in 24th place.

She dropped to the ground at the finish line like a sack of flour.

Lindsey was taken from the competition to seek medical help.

On Saturday White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders responded to Lindsey Vonn’s attacks.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders: Fronkly those who do not want to represent our country says a lot more about their character than it does the president’s. The president is very proud to represent this country. He’s very proud to be an American.

Via FOX and Friends:

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Trump’s quietly courageous visit to Mississippi

Rejecting a massive claque of criticism, President Trump went anyway to the opening of the new civil rights museum in Jackson, Mississippi, to praise the “brave men and women” of the civil rights movement. It says something about the partisan politics of the nation that that act took some bravery, too, and Trump was up to the challenge.


The Washington Post reported:



Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who marched with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and was scheduled to deliver the keynote address at the opening, announced Thursday that he would boycott the stage at the public event if Trump were on it. Others called on Trump to change his plans and not attend the opening.


Lewis and other black leaders said the president’s actions and statements since he took office contradicted the values of the civil rights leaders whom the museum was intended to honor. “President Trump’s attendance and his hurtful policies are an insult to the people portrayed in this civil rights museum,” Lewis and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) said in a joint statement Thursday.



John Lewis


Other headlines went like this:


Trump at opening of Miss. civil-rights museum is ‘insult,’ says Rep. Lewis —Providence Journal


‘He does not deserve to be in Jackson’: Trump’s visit to civil rights museum met with protests —Detroit Free Press


Black officials say they don’t want Trump ‘to tell us what civil rights means in Mississippi’ —ABC News


 


and of course, there were some 200 protestors, yelling, “Mr. President, we don’t need you in Mississippi.”


In the wake of the left’s continuous assassination threats against President Trump, it was probably a good idea for him to go to a closed venue with cameras, instead of an open-air event, as the Washington Post notes that he did. But what’s significant here is that he went – and he went because he wanted to go.


Because presidents never make trips where they think they will reach only a hostile audience, right? President Obama was a master of this, refusing to go to the Texas border during the border surge of 2014, and refusing to go to Baton Rouge during its worst-ever flooding, given the number of conservatives who live in that city.


Trump didn’t follow that political-safety first formula. Against a barrage of criticism, he went even though he was promised about the worst welcome a president can expect.


He went anyway, because he knew there was a difference between the civil rights movement of the 1960s and what it eventually morphed into, becoming basically a partisan auxillary of the far left. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a registered Republican all his life, led a moral movement that wasn’t about partisan politics, his movement realigned the country to its very foundations as a free country. What’s left of his movement decades later is often called a plantation, which has pretty much kept large cities one-party states brimming with corruption, ensured bad unionized schools which harm black children most of all, targeted inner city neighborhoods for abortion in line with Margaret Sanger’s racist agenda, and enacted welfare policies that break up the black family. Even members of the inner core of civil rights leaders have fallen into this new trap, such as John Lewis, who refused to share a stage with Trump, and the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who lived up to King’s estimation of him as an opportunist. There are significant exceptions, such as the Rev. Alveda King, King’s niece, who stands up for black children in her fight against abortion, but the press likes to sideline them. 


Trump also knew that preserving the original civil rights movement, with its authentic heroes, such as Medgar Evers, Rosa Parks, and King, is important for future generations to look to. By building this museum, children and others, can discard the disgust they must eventually feel about the current parlous state of the civil rights movement and learn about the real civil rights movement, the one that changed America.



Medgar Evers


Trump understood this. He also understood that it’s a president’s job to give gravitas to this original endeavor. And his move promotes racial unity and healing, a sense that Black Americans and their history are a legitimate part of the American experience and not to be isolated from the broad picture.



Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. in the background


The mobs outside howled and the partisan politicians complained, but Trump went through with it anyway. Much to his great credit. He’s not like other presidents.


It was nice to see Trump take the distinguished surgeon and fine cabinet secretary, Dr. Ben Carson with him:



Trump at the Jackson, Mississippi opening of the Civil Rights Museum // PBS


 


Rejecting a massive claque of criticism, President Trump went anyway to the opening of the new civil rights museum in Jackson, Mississippi, to praise the “brave men and women” of the civil rights movement. It says something about the partisan politics of the nation that that act took some bravery, too, and Trump was up to the challenge.


The Washington Post reported:


Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who marched with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and was scheduled to deliver the keynote address at the opening, announced Thursday that he would boycott the stage at the public event if Trump were on it. Others called on Trump to change his plans and not attend the opening.


Lewis and other black leaders said the president’s actions and statements since he took office contradicted the values of the civil rights leaders whom the museum was intended to honor. “President Trump’s attendance and his hurtful policies are an insult to the people portrayed in this civil rights museum,” Lewis and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) said in a joint statement Thursday.



John Lewis


Other headlines went like this:


Trump at opening of Miss. civil-rights museum is ‘insult,’ says Rep. Lewis —Providence Journal


‘He does not deserve to be in Jackson’: Trump’s visit to civil rights museum met with protests —Detroit Free Press


Black officials say they don’t want Trump ‘to tell us what civil rights means in Mississippi’ —ABC News


 


and of course, there were some 200 protestors, yelling, “Mr. President, we don’t need you in Mississippi.”


In the wake of the left’s continuous assassination threats against President Trump, it was probably a good idea for him to go to a closed venue with cameras, instead of an open-air event, as the Washington Post notes that he did. But what’s significant here is that he went – and he went because he wanted to go.


Because presidents never make trips where they think they will reach only a hostile audience, right? President Obama was a master of this, refusing to go to the Texas border during the border surge of 2014, and refusing to go to Baton Rouge during its worst-ever flooding, given the number of conservatives who live in that city.


Trump didn’t follow that political-safety first formula. Against a barrage of criticism, he went even though he was promised about the worst welcome a president can expect.


He went anyway, because he knew there was a difference between the civil rights movement of the 1960s and what it eventually morphed into, becoming basically a partisan auxillary of the far left. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a registered Republican all his life, led a moral movement that wasn’t about partisan politics, his movement realigned the country to its very foundations as a free country. What’s left of his movement decades later is often called a plantation, which has pretty much kept large cities one-party states brimming with corruption, ensured bad unionized schools which harm black children most of all, targeted inner city neighborhoods for abortion in line with Margaret Sanger’s racist agenda, and enacted welfare policies that break up the black family. Even members of the inner core of civil rights leaders have fallen into this new trap, such as John Lewis, who refused to share a stage with Trump, and the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who lived up to King’s estimation of him as an opportunist. There are significant exceptions, such as the Rev. Alveda King, King’s niece, who stands up for black children in her fight against abortion, but the press likes to sideline them. 


Trump also knew that preserving the original civil rights movement, with its authentic heroes, such as Medgar Evers, Rosa Parks, and King, is important for future generations to look to. By building this museum, children and others, can discard the disgust they must eventually feel about the current parlous state of the civil rights movement and learn about the real civil rights movement, the one that changed America.



Medgar Evers


Trump understood this. He also understood that it’s a president’s job to give gravitas to this original endeavor. And his move promotes racial unity and healing, a sense that Black Americans and their history are a legitimate part of the American experience and not to be isolated from the broad picture.



Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. in the background


The mobs outside howled and the partisan politicians complained, but Trump went through with it anyway. Much to his great credit. He’s not like other presidents.


It was nice to see Trump take the distinguished surgeon and fine cabinet secretary, Dr. Ben Carson with him:



Trump at the Jackson, Mississippi opening of the Civil Rights Museum // PBS


 






via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc

Latest FBI Hate Crime Stats Are Huge Bad News for Liberal Muslims

There is a myth that is perpetrated by the left-wing liberal media. It’s the idea that since 9/11, any attack by Islamist extremists will result in a backlash in hate crimes by the American people against Muslims — putting American Muslims in constant danger.

In essence, the mainstream media story goes, the United States is a nation of ugly Islamophobia.

The latest data in a recent FBI report, however, completely destroys that myth.

To take a first glance at the raw data, you might come to the same conclusion as liberal media; that hate crimes are on the rise. After all, there were 307 hate crime incidents against U.S. Muslims in 2016 alone.

The Truth Revolt writes: “The most recent FBI report does reveal a 20% increase in hate crimes against Muslims from 2015 to 2016, appearing to confirm suspicions that the presidential election sparked anti-Muslim sentiment (in fact, the report reveals that there were increases in most categories of hate crimes, but none as high as anti-Muslim crimes).”

TRENDING: These 2 Freeze Frames Likely Show Why the Jury Acquitted AZ Cop Accused of Murder

However, as the Gatestone Institute points out, there are some underlying truths to these numbers that the main stream media just simply ignores.

Back in 2015, the FBI changed it’s method for the way it classifies hate crimes.

“Before then, ethnicity- or nationality-spurred hate crimes were designated as Hispanic or non-Hispanic. The FBI subsequently revised that classification, breaking down hate crimes into a variety of possible categories. As a result, the most recent data is misleading, making the incidents in which Arabs or Muslims were targeted appear to be more numerous than in previous years,” writes the Gatestone Institute.

Secondly, they make the point that while one hate crime is one too many, there are millions of Muslims within the borders of the United States. With 307 incidents, it’s “hard to argue that the numbers are indicative of a “wave” of hatred sweeping over the nation, either prior to or since the rise of Trump, even if one accepts the assumption that hate crimes are under-reported.”

The Gatestone Institute continues to report that back in 2001 — the year of the 9/11 attacks – hate crimes against Muslims rose to 554. However, just a year later in 2002, it dropped considerably to 171 incidents. That rate would remain around that same level up until 2016, with only just a slight uptick.

Now, that should be good news for any minority: That they live in a land that — while not perfect — is largely welcoming of cultures that are different from the majority. But given the extreme stance of liberal Muslim organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations it’s bad news, because it shows the victimhood they’ve been peddling for years is based on a lie.

While we’re looking at numbers, let’s take a look at one more number: 684.

That’s the number of hate crime incidents reported against Jews in the U.S. That’s more than double the number against Muslims.

RELATED: Actress Cried as Man “Simulated Rape” During Audition for Ashley Judd Film

I don’t hear the mainstream media saying that we are an anti-Semitic nation.

The myth of the Islamophobic backlash against Muslims, is just that: A myth. It’s a liberal narrative that is being shoved down our throats and one that too many Americans believe.

But these numbers tell the real story.

H/T Jihad Watch

Please like and share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about this myth.

What do you think about these latest stats? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

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

Pro-Trump students booted from ‘safe space’ coffee shop

How safe are “safe spaces” on campus? At Fordham University, some “safe spaces” are safer than others – at least, for some people.


In fact, in a campus run coffee shop, there are no safe spaces for those who disagree politically with the majority. Several pro-Trump students found that out the hard way when they were summarily ordered to leave because they were wearing MAGA hats.



The surreal nature of this video cannot be overstated.



New York Post:


It was absolutely insane,” Fordham junior Aaron Spring, 20, told The Post of the Thursday incident. “We weren’t even talking politics — we were talking about finals.”


A video of the encounter appeared Friday on the conservative CampusReform website.


Students wearing Trump’s trademark MAGA ball caps were accosted by a student worker at Rodrigue’s Coffee House, which is run by volunteers and is organized as a club.


“Get out! Five minutes,” the worker barked. “I’m protecting our customers … you are wearing hats that completely violate safe space policy. You have to go. ”


She exploded when Michael Esposito, 19, asked her to explain.


“Fascism, Nazis!” shouted the snowflake. “You have three minutes.”


“I do not see fascism, Nazis on this hat,” Esposito answered. “I see America.”


“It was humiliating to be called a Nazi in front of so many people I go to school with,” Esposito told The Post. “It’s almost scary.”


The students said they were not seeking trouble.


“It’s not like we’re here reading off a manifesto,” said Sebastian Balasov, 21..


The cafe has a lengthy set of “safer space” rules. including “Do not make assumptions about someone’s gender, sexuality, race, class, or experiences” and “No racism – No sexism – No homophobia.”


The rules do not mention headgear.


“They try to say that all are welcome,” Spring said. “But if you talk about diversity, that has to include diversity of thought and opinion, too.”


The ignorance of the snowflakes is absolutely appalling. “Because, fascism…” is not a response to the legitimate question asked. In fact, the answer is the rules are anything we feel like making them and since we disagree with you politically, we will exercise our abitrary power to kick you out.


This is not about “safe spaces” or “diversity” or even “anti-fascism.” This is about the raw exercise of power. No explanation is needed and none will be given. 


This was one student worker, exercising her authority in a petty, vindictive manner and using the excuse of “safe spaces” to cover her meglomania. No doubt  many other patrons silently agreed with the young woman and approved of her actions.


It costs nearly $49,000 in tuition to send a kid to Fordham. The Trump supporting students certainly got an education in that cofffee shop.


 


How safe are “safe spaces” on campus? At Fordham University, some “safe spaces” are safer than others – at least, for some people.


In fact, in a campus run coffee shop, there are no safe spaces for those who disagree politically with the majority. Several pro-Trump students found that out the hard way when they were summarily ordered to leave because they were wearing MAGA hats.


The surreal nature of this video cannot be overstated.



New York Post:


It was absolutely insane,” Fordham junior Aaron Spring, 20, told The Post of the Thursday incident. “We weren’t even talking politics — we were talking about finals.”


A video of the encounter appeared Friday on the conservative CampusReform website.


Students wearing Trump’s trademark MAGA ball caps were accosted by a student worker at Rodrigue’s Coffee House, which is run by volunteers and is organized as a club.


“Get out! Five minutes,” the worker barked. “I’m protecting our customers … you are wearing hats that completely violate safe space policy. You have to go. ”


She exploded when Michael Esposito, 19, asked her to explain.


“Fascism, Nazis!” shouted the snowflake. “You have three minutes.”


“I do not see fascism, Nazis on this hat,” Esposito answered. “I see America.”


“It was humiliating to be called a Nazi in front of so many people I go to school with,” Esposito told The Post. “It’s almost scary.”


The students said they were not seeking trouble.


“It’s not like we’re here reading off a manifesto,” said Sebastian Balasov, 21..


The cafe has a lengthy set of “safer space” rules. including “Do not make assumptions about someone’s gender, sexuality, race, class, or experiences” and “No racism – No sexism – No homophobia.”


The rules do not mention headgear.


“They try to say that all are welcome,” Spring said. “But if you talk about diversity, that has to include diversity of thought and opinion, too.”


The ignorance of the snowflakes is absolutely appalling. “Because, fascism…” is not a response to the legitimate question asked. In fact, the answer is the rules are anything we feel like making them and since we disagree with you politically, we will exercise our abitrary power to kick you out.


This is not about “safe spaces” or “diversity” or even “anti-fascism.” This is about the raw exercise of power. No explanation is needed and none will be given. 


This was one student worker, exercising her authority in a petty, vindictive manner and using the excuse of “safe spaces” to cover her meglomania. No doubt  many other patrons silently agreed with the young woman and approved of her actions.


It costs nearly $49,000 in tuition to send a kid to Fordham. The Trump supporting students certainly got an education in that cofffee shop.


 






via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc

MUSLIMS IN NEW YORK CITY Protest for Slaughter of Jews After Trump Moves US Embassy to Jerusalem (VIDEO)

MUSLIMS IN NEW YORK CITY Protest for Slaughter of Jews After Trump Moves US Embassy to Jerusalem (VIDEO)

Muslims in New York City Protest for Slaughter of Jews After Trump Moves Embassy to Jerusalem

This is a very disturbing video.

The protest was held Friday night in New York City.
The Muslims threatened Jews with the Khaybar slaughter of Jews from the holy Koran.

This protest was called after President Trump declared Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced US embassy move to Jerusalem.

Muslims called for violence against Jews at the massive New York City protest.

Via Reservists on Duty:

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Wall Supporters, Left-Wing Activists Clash at Border Rally

Wall Supporters, Left-Wing Activists Clash at Border Rally



Clashes broke out at a rally held Saturday on Saturday supporting President Donald Trump’s border wall in Otay Mesa, California, as left-wing counter-protesters taunted them and chanted for amnesty for illegal aliens.

According to the local CBS affiliate:

The rumble ensued when a small group of counter-protestors started a chant from the rear of the gathering, apparently yelling “Racists go home!”

A group of wall supporters equal in size carrying flags moved in quickly and engaged in a shouting match with the other side as deputies and police stood by. What began as face-to-face shouting and chest bumping escalated, and seconds after the first shove by a counter-protester the first punch was thrown by a wall supporter.

That fight spawned several others, and in every direction, small huddles of people were kicking up dust — some trying to pull foes off of grounded and outnumbered friends, others turning flags upside down and taking their best shot at opponents’ heads and bodies.

There were no injuries and no arrests.

Videos circulated on social media depicting the clashes (content warning).

Some activists supporting the wall drove from as far away as Arizona to attend:

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) was on hand to support the border wall activists (videos courtesy Arthur Christopher Schaper via YouTube):

“Angel Moms,” who have lost relatives to homicides by illegal aliens, also spoke at the rally:


The San Diego Union-Tribune interviewed counter-demonstrators:

The border wall is a “xenophobic act, reminiscent of Nazi Germany,” said Rafael Bautista, 33, of southeast San Diego. Bautista, who helped organize the protest but isn’t affiliated with a single group, said he migrated to the U.S. from Mexico at the age of 4 and has family on both sides of the border.

“They want to put up walls between two shades of color,” he said. “This is exactly the opposite of what we want in this country.”

Groups sponsoring the rally included “San Diegans for Secure Borders, Unite America First, Frontline America, San Diego Patriots, Latinos for Trump, Make America Great PAC and other pro-border wall groups,” according to the local CBS affiliate.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named one of the “most influential” people in news media in 2016. He is the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

via Breitbart News

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