Preservationist groups are warning that the planned Barack Obama Center in Chicago may violate federal laws against destroying sites placed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The Obama Center is currently planned to spread out over sections of three sites with history stretching back to 1869, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

The portion of Jackson Park that Obama intends to disrupt with his massive new project includes the area where the World’s Columbian Exposition was staged in Jackson Park and the Midway in 1893. Created by famed architect Daniel Burnham—the man who planned New York’s Central Park—the Midway was placed on the historic site registry in 1972.

Obama’s center is also expected to disrupt a portion of Frederick Law Olmsted’s Washington Park, a site that was added to the registry in 2004.

Finally, the Obama plan will also require the closure of Cornell Drive, a roadway that is an integral part of the park system.

According to Curbed Chicago:

As proposed, the Obama Center’s multi-building campus will replace roughly 20 acres of park space, including a number of historic trees. Developed in tandem with a merger between Jackson Park’s golf course with the course at the South Shore Cultural Center, the plan looks to close stretches of Cornell, and Marquette drives as well as construct a new parking structure in the center of the historic Midway Plaisance.

But a historic preservation group called the Cultural Landscape Foundation says that the proposal for Obama’s new center would violate the rules of the historic registry. The group wants the review of Obama’s construction project to be expanded to review the impact it will have on the whole series of protected parklands.

“The need to fully recognize the unity of the South parks is now brought into greater relief by the current proposal to impose a parking garage at the eastern terminus and hinge point of the Midway Plaisance, effectively placing a further barrier to the connection that Olmsted and Vaux first envisioned,” the group’s president, Charles Birnbaum, wrote in a recent letter to the federal government.

Birnbaum added that Olmsted’s design, “was intended to lead visitors on a choreographed journey through passages of landscape scenery. Neither the location nor the disposition of the roads were accidental.” He noted that the Obama Center would erase that journey.

The preservationist also noted that the huge tower planned for the Center itself would also destroy the historic sites.

“Moreover, the (presidential center) tower, as currently conceived, would adversely affect viewsheds from the full expanse of the Midway Plaisance, not just from the portion of it now included” in the government’s review of the plans, Birnbaum said.

“The imposition of a massive high-rise tower, hundreds of feet tall … is directly contrary to the overall concept of the park,” Birnbaum concluded.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Preservationist groups are warning that the planned Barack Obama Center in Chicago may violate federal laws against destroying sites placed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The Obama Center is currently planned to spread out over sections of three sites with history stretching back to 1869, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

The portion of Jackson Park that Obama intends to disrupt with his massive new project includes the area where the World’s Columbian Exposition was staged in Jackson Park and the Midway in 1893. Created by famed architect Daniel Burnham—the man who planned New York’s Central Park—the Midway was placed on the historic site registry in 1972.

Obama’s center is also expected to disrupt a portion of Frederick Law Olmsted’s Washington Park, a site that was added to the registry in 2004.

Finally, the Obama plan will also require the closure of Cornell Drive, a roadway that is an integral part of the park system.

According to Curbed Chicago:

As proposed, the Obama Center’s multi-building campus will replace roughly 20 acres of park space, including a number of historic trees. Developed in tandem with a merger between Jackson Park’s golf course with the course at the South Shore Cultural Center, the plan looks to close stretches of Cornell, and Marquette drives as well as construct a new parking structure in the center of the historic Midway Plaisance.

But a historic preservation group called the Cultural Landscape Foundation says that the proposal for Obama’s new center would violate the rules of the historic registry. The group wants the review of Obama’s construction project to be expanded to review the impact it will have on the whole series of protected parklands.

“The need to fully recognize the unity of the South parks is now brought into greater relief by the current proposal to impose a parking garage at the eastern terminus and hinge point of the Midway Plaisance, effectively placing a further barrier to the connection that Olmsted and Vaux first envisioned,” the group’s president, Charles Birnbaum, wrote in a recent letter to the federal government.

Birnbaum added that Olmsted’s design, “was intended to lead visitors on a choreographed journey through passages of landscape scenery. Neither the location nor the disposition of the roads were accidental.” He noted that the Obama Center would erase that journey.

The preservationist also noted that the huge tower planned for the Center itself would also destroy the historic sites.

“Moreover, the (presidential center) tower, as currently conceived, would adversely affect viewsheds from the full expanse of the Midway Plaisance, not just from the portion of it now included” in the government’s review of the plans, Birnbaum said.

“The imposition of a massive high-rise tower, hundreds of feet tall … is directly contrary to the overall concept of the park,” Birnbaum concluded.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

The elitist talking heads of the mainstream media elite can be sickening at times. In fact, if you’ve ever felt like the mainstream media thinks you’re stupid, you’re probably right. Donald Trump had one such encounter when he had to deal with “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough after one of the campaign debates.

Last Thursday, Scarborough wrote a op-ed piece for The Washington Post. In it, he describes an after debate interaction with a then-candidate Donald Trump.

Scarborough wrote that he and Mika Brzezinski met with Trump after a debate in September of 2015. He described Trump’s debate performance as “bumbling.”

Then, being the “nice” guy that Scarborough is, he asked if Trump was illiterate.

“Mika Brzezinski and I had a tense meeting with Trump following what I considered to be a bumbling debate performance in September 2015. I asked the candidate a blunt question: Can you read?” Scarborough wrote.

TRENDING: Cop-Hating Beyonce Just Lost “Most Admired Woman” to 3 Awesome Republican Women

Yeah, I know; hard hitting questions from an unbiased journalist.

He says there was an awkward silence and again asked Trump, “I’m serious, Donald. Do you read? If someone wrote you a one-page paper on a policy, could you read it?”

Trump looked at him, and then peacefully reached over and grabbed the Bible that his mother gave him. He took the Bible and told Scarborough that he reads it “all the time.”

Boom. He may not be your president, but he’s definitely mine.

Scarborough continued to bash the president in the article claiming that the accusations in “Fire and Fury,” that Trump never reads are true. “The world wonders how the United States will survive Donald Trump. And I ask, what will finally move Republicans to deliver a non-­negotiable ultimatum to this unstable president?” Scarborough wrote.

“Will they dare place their country’s interests above their own political fears? Or will they move to end this American tragedy only when there is nothing left to lose?” he continued.

No, Joe, it’s not the president who’s unstable. It’s you.

You didn’t even have the decency to talk to Donald Trump after that debate like an adult. Instead, you treated him like a child, which shows just how childish you really are.

RELATED: Sarah Shreds Reporters When Asked About Trump’s Mental Health

Why Scarborough would even write this story is puzzling. This story only shows how big of a jerk Joe Scarborough is and is further evidence for why hardly anyone watches MSNBC.

There’s nothing wrong with asking hard hitting questions. However, this takes it to a whole other level.

H/T The Daily Caller

Please like and share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think of Joe Scarborough’s remarks.

Do you think Scarborough was out of line? Scroll down to comment below!

A so-called “transgender” woman (or guy who thinks he’s a woman) who’s serving a 10-year sentence in an Illinois state prison filed a lawsuit last year demanding he be transferred to a women’s prison for his safety and well-being.

According to The Associated Press, in his suit, convicted burglar Deon “Strawberry” Hampton claimed both prison guards and fellow inmates mistreated him because of his status as a “transgender” woman.

“While at the Pinckneyville prison, (he) alleges that guards made (him) and another transgender inmate perform sex acts on each other as the guards hurled slurs and laughed,” the AP reported. “When (he) was transferred to the higher security Menard, (he) says guards there warned they would retaliate for complaints (he) made about Pinckneyville guards.”

Let me point out that the guards’ alleged behavior is deplorable, and they should be punished to the full extent of the law if Hampton’s claims prove to be true.

That said, something else from the AP’s report caught my eye. The publisher noted that not being able to wear his hair or nails long has been damaging to Hampton psychologically.

TRENDING: Cop-Hating Beyonce Just Lost “Most Admired Woman” to 3 Awesome Republican Women

“I feel inhuman,” he was quoted as saying.

It seems clear from this quote that Hampton has sought to present himself as a woman while incarcerated first at the Pinckneyville Correctional Center and then later at the Menard Correctional Center.

In other words, Hampton has made no efforts to concealing his mental illness, despite knowing he must serve time in prison facilities chockablock with murderers, drug dealers, rapists and other sinister thugs.

A couple questions come to mind. Should Hampton have concealed his identity for his own safety? Some would argue yes, because pretending to be a woman around a bunch of libidinous goons is never a wise idea. Others would say no, because Hampton should be allowed to present himself as he chooses.

Here’s a better question: Should the courts grant his request to be transferred to a women’s prison. While that might sound reasonable to liberals, I already see some huge problems with that:

After authorities in Missouri incarcerated another “transgender” woman in a women’s facility last year, that inmate then got caught engaging in sexual activity with his fellow female inmates, as reported at the time by St. Louis station KTVI.

Resolving situations like these clearly isn’t always as easy as it sounds, though this complexity should be expected. I mean, that’s kind of what happens when you sprinkle leftist-concocted concepts about race, gender, whatever, onto society.

The point is that you can’t just mess with the laws of nature and expect everything to turn out OK. For millennia, men have been men, and women have been women. And now, thanks to so-called “progressivism” run amok, we’re supposed to believe people can switch from one to another.

RELATED: Court Strikes Humiliating Blow By Defining What a Trans Man Isn’t

When you screw up society like this, problems usually arise. And in this case, the problem is that we’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.

We can either keep Hampton in a men’s prison and risk him being abused further, or we can transgender him to a women’s prison and risk him having sex with or even raping one of the women there.

Which choice would you make?

Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about what this guy has been experiencing and whether or not you feel his request should be granted.

What choice would you make? Scroll down to comment below!

To say that Michael Wolff’s new book, “Fire and Fury,” has caused some controversy is the understatement of the year. The book makes some pretty outlandish claims, some of which Wolff has admitted he’s not even sure are true. One of the book’s claims concerned the mental health of President Donald Trump.

Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, however, isn’t having any of it.

During a recent news briefing, Sanders began by saying she wasn’t going to address all of the outrageous claims Wolff’s book mentions. “I am not going to waste my time or the country’s time going page by page talking about a book that is complete fantasy and just full of tabloid gossip because it is bad, pathetic, and our focus is going to be on moving the country forward,” she told the press.

Then, a reporter asked about the claim concerning Trump’s mental health for day to day operations. “It’s disgraceful and laughable,” Sanders responded.

“If he was unfit, he probably wouldn’t be sitting there and wouldn’t have defeated the most qualified group of candidates the Republican Party has ever seen. This is an incredibly strong and good leader. That’s why we’ve had such a successful in 2017 and why we’re going to continue to do great things as we move forward in this administration,” she continued.

TRENDING: Female CNN Anchor Caught on Camera Openly Sexually Harassing Male… Media Silent

In an interview with “Fox and Friends,” Sanders doubled down on her statements. “Look, I think it’s absolutely insane to think all of these individuals, reporters and others, who all of a sudden have a medical degree and think that they can diagnose somebody, many times that they’ve never had a conversation with,” she told the panel.

“It’s absolutely outrageous to make these types of accusations, and it’s simply untrue, and it’s sad that people are going and making these desperate attempts to attack the president,” she said.

Sanders response to the media and reporters was excellent.

This man is someone who beat a slew of great candidates in the 2016 election. One has to wonder how someone with mental health issues could pull off such a feat.

Not only did he happen to beat all of the Republican candidates, he was able to beat the Clinton war machine that has taken out so many other candidates.

Furthermore, the stock market is booming, unemployment is down, especially in the black community, and we are winning the war against the Islamic State terror group. Are these the results of a mad man?

I seriously doubt it.

RELATED: James Woods Takes an Ax and Shreds NY Times Huma Abedin Article

The truth is, there are just a lot of people who are still furiously mad that Donald Trump is president of United States. He was a D.C. outsider who was never supposed to be a serious candidate.

Now, he’s president and draining the swamp. Those are two things that the D.C. elite cannot stand, and, as evidenced by the reporters questions, they are continuing to throw their childish hissy fits.

H/T Independent Journal Review

Please like and share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think of Sarah Huckabee Sander’s comments.

What do you think about this claim concerning Trump’s mental health? Scroll down to comment below!

While The New York Times claims to be an impartial news organization, it only took conservative actor James Woods one tweet to shred the paper for its blatant bias.

On Tuesday, the Times published a piece titled “Trump Accuses Former Clinton Aide of Failing to Follow Security Protocols.” The story failed to mention several key details.

Woods fired off a scathing tweet Wednesday linking to the Times article, where he pointed out three major facts the left-leaning paper conveniently failed to mention.

“Only the @nytimes could publish this story without mentioning that a) Abedin emailed a classified password, b) her husband is in prison, and c) she broke federal espionage laws,” Woods wrote.

Only the @nytimes could publish this story without mentioning that a) Abedin emailed a classified password, b) her husband is in prison, and c) she broke federal espionage laws. https://t.co/zlFR0ZG0MZ

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) January 3, 2018

TRENDING: Female CNN Anchor Caught on Camera Openly Sexually Harassing Male… Media Silent

While the Times article does mention that Abedin “forwarded some government passwords to her private Yahoo email account in 2009,” the paper completely failed to note that her actions quite possibly violated espionage laws and that she emailed classified passwords.

The paper also failed to mention that Abedin’s husband, former Democrat politician Anthony Weiner, is serving 21-month sentence for sexting with a minor.

In the article, Abedin’s serial sex offender spouse is referred to as her “estranged husband” and not the pervert he pleaded guilty to being.

“On Friday, the State Department released about 3,000 of Ms. Abedin’s work-related emails. The emails were found on the laptop of Ms. Abedin’s now estranged husband, Anthony D. Weiner, and were released as part of a public records request,” the Times reported.

As noted by The Daily Wire, the paper also downplayed the fact that Abedin illegally had classified and highly sensitive material on Weiner’s laptop by describing it simply as a “sore spot” for then Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

“The emails found on Mr. Weiner’s computer are a sore spot for Mrs. Clinton. James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, had notified Congress shortly before the 2016 election about the existence of newly discovered emails that could be relevant to the closed investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state,” the Times wrote.

The paper continued: “Mrs. Clinton, in a book released last year, said Mr. Comey’s disclosure hurt her campaign’s momentum and helped Mr. Trump win the election.”

Then, an article that was supposed to detail how Abedin violated federal law veers into a hit piece against President Donald Trump.

RELATED: Finally: GOP Senators Move to Investigate Dossier Author

Rather than beginning the article with context on Abedin’s background, how she served as a top confidant to the Clinton’s for many years, and why her husband was in prison, the paper instead scolds Trump for his tweets about Clinton and Abedin.

The Times article spent more time excoriating Trump for a tweet he sent on on Tuesday than on Abedin’s careless behavior.

Check out his tweet below:

Crooked Hillary Clinton’s top aid, Huma Abedin, has been accused of disregarding basic security protocols. She put Classified Passwords into the hands of foreign agents. Remember sailors pictures on submarine? Jail! Deep State Justice Dept must finally act? Also on Comey & others

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 2, 2018

Woods eviscerated the Times with his tweet because the left-leaning paper was so determined to attack Trump, they failed to mention that Abedin more than likely violated a slew federal laws by being so careless with classified information.

That’s something she more than likely learned from Clinton, one would assume.

Once again, Woods does what he does best: exposes liberals and the mainstream media for their blatant hypocrisy and bias.

Please like and share this story if you’re glad James Woods exposed The New York Times for the biased reporting that shielded the severity of Huma Abedin’s illegal actions.

What do you think about Woods taking an ax to The New York Times’ article?  Scroll down to comment below!