Month: February 2018

Posted on

Tony Dungy Under Fire For Statements About Christianity And Faith. Here’s His Response.

NBC Sports analyst and former NFL coach Tony Dungy has been hit with a backlash after making approving statements about Philadelphia Eagle’s Quarterback Nick Foles’ Christian faith.

On-air, Dungy suggested Foles’ faith would help him play with confidence and boost his performance. He echoed this strain of thought on social media and reported what Foles, who is likewise open about his Christian faith, told him:

This was enough to set-off the perpetually offended. One Twitter user, for example, tagged Dungy’s employer and stated that it was “unbelievable” for the analyst to “spout this nonsense on the air.”

Dungy did not remain silent, but responded to the criticism.

“NBC pays me to express my opinion,” he wrote. “And it was my opinion that Nick Foles would play well because his Christian faith would allow him to to play with confidence. And that he’s a good QB. I think I was right on both counts.”

Houston-based sports writer Stephanie Stradley also chimed-in with discontent over the former coach’s comments. “I’m just not wanting it as a part of football analysis,” she said.

“But if he tells me Christ says that to him, I shouldn’t report it???” Dungy pointedly asked.

The backlash was not constrained to social media. Reacting to the mild Christian-centered commentary, Kyle Koster, writing at The Big Lead, said NBC and the public should check Dungy when his religious beliefs “seep into his analyst role.”

“Dungy expressing his beliefs on his personal time and platform is one thing. And even if I disagree with him sometimes, I appreciate his candor and willingness to open himself up for criticism. But when his beliefs seep into his analyst role — either unintentionally or otherwise — they should be checked, both by NBC and the public,” wrote Koster, in a piece titled, “Is Tony Dungy Analyzing or Evangelizing When It Comes to Nick Foles?”

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

Posted on

College Students Protest Play About Illegal Immigrant But Celebrate ‘Whiteness Group’ That Bars Whites Asking Questions of People Of Color

At Kenyon College, in Gambier, Ohio, a satirical play about one Guatemalan illegal immigrant who wound up at the college drew an incendiary response, forcing the playwright to cancel the play’s production, while at the same time the students celebrate a new student group called “the whiteness group,” whose founder reportedly said at the group’s first meeting, “Racism is a white people problem.”

Professor Wendy Mcleod’s latest play, The Good Samaritan, was partly drawn from the real-life story of a group of men in Marion County smuggling Guatemalan workers and forcing them to work on an egg farm for up to 12 hours per day. Mcleod noted in an email to the college about the play that the immigrants “had been working without pay and living in dire conditions.” As the Kenyon Collegian reports, the play poses the question of what would happen if one of the illegal immigrants escaped from the egg farm and is found by a white student who finds him in the backseat of her car, prompting a discussion in a dorm room by white students deciding what to do.

After deciding to cancel the play after the fury expressed by members of the campus community over the portrayal of the illegal immigrant, Mcleod sent the student body an email, stating, “I know some struggled with script’s satiric elements, but Freud aptly wrote that humor is about ‘bringing the repressed to light.’”

That prompted this sanctimonious response from the editors of the Kenyon Collegian: “The issue here is not one of repression — which can be a self-inflicted act — but of systemic oppression. Mcleod fails to take responsibility for her role in perpetuating damaging stereotypes in a time when profound dangers face those who are undocumented immigrants in this country … In an age when the real lives of immigrants are used as bargaining chips in congressional budget meetings, isn’t it time we take responsibility for our own actions? Isn’t it time that those individuals who hold positions of power are held accountable?”

Meanwhile, a student named Juniper Cruz created a student group called “The Whiteness Group.” The group’s rules state, “No white person can ask a person of color questions; white people must try to answer their questions for themselves. And no spreading rumors about what people say during the meetings.” At the first meeting, some attendees defined whiteness as “power,” or as “lacking a historical perspective.”

Rachel Kessler, the priest-in-charge and chaplain of the Harcourt Parish, who attended the second meeting of the group, emailed the Kenyon Collegian, “As white people, we can become paralyzed by our sense of shame for our racial privilege or by our fear of accidentally saying something problematic. Neither of those impulses are actually productive for combating racism and white supremacy.”

When defenders of Mcleod’s right to produce her play articulated their concerns, they were shot down by students; after Professor Fred Baumann told a panel discussing the cancellation of the play, “Today is the end of [liberal education at Kenyon College],” one student stated on Facebook that if liberal education “necessitates the silencing of marginalized communities, the protection of racism, and our complicity with both, then let the damned thing die.”

Mcleod sent a January 6 email to the campus suggesting a public forum to discuss the play; she intended to explain “what inspired and informed the play, the story it tells, and how comedy can be a force for change.” She later said she would not attend “in the hopes that the community can get to issues larger than a single play.”

The Latinx student association Adelante issued a public statement reading:

It is inexcusable that you fail to offer an apology to the group directly affected by the representations in your play, those of us who, on top of constantly justifying and affirming our presence on this campus, have to now bear the emotional and psychological labor of expressing to the wider Kenyon community, within the confines of ‘civil discourse,’ why these misrepresentations are detrimental … it would be an opportunity for yourself, as well as everyone in attendance, to genuinely hear the voices of Latinx youths, voices that have been historically silenced.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

Posted on

The Progressive Kingdom of Hate

A cacophony of liberal voices are crying that the current climate of rancor and divisiveness that permeates and seems to be splitting these once-United States is the fault of one man — Donald Trump.


Really? How about a little perspective?



Ten years ago, many on the right, myself included, were horrified when Barack Obama was elected president because we considered him a lightweight, a career opportunist whose carefully managed resume touched all the right buttons but was so thin it could have been written on rice paper. Despite having written two books about himself by the age of 45, he hadn’t actually done much.


Leadership is honed, and for presidents, that honing can be done in only three places: business, government, or the military. Obama had no business experience, and he was certainly no Eisenhower, so that left government, and Obama’s record there was rather short and filled with an unusual number of “present” votes, meaning “I was there but didn’t want to commit.”


Even more troubling than Obama’s rice-paper resume was his ideological bent, which seemed to be straight out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky, who, like Obama, had been a “community organizer” with strong socialist leanings.


What we on the right did not do, though, immediately after Obama won the election was start “resist” and “not my president” movements. We did not spend days rioting in the streets. We did not demand that he be impeached even before he took office so that he could not be sworn in, something that I’m pretty sure is a legal impossibility. And I’m not talking about internet trolls or political outliers, I’m talking about elected members of Congress, major media figures, and a shrill and vacuous cast of Hollywood halfwits.


Nor did we demand that Obama’s pick for attorney general immediately recuse himself from, say, the birther controversy. Nor did we insist on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute him. We did not attack Obama’s family. Ninety percent of the media coverage of Obama during his first year in office was not negative. In fact, I suspect the ratio was just the opposite, if not even more favorable than 90 percent.


We did not use a bogus (you can call it unverified if you insist) document paid for by the failed opposition candidate to launch a months-long wiretap of one of Obama’s campaign advisors, with the obvious intent to capture on tape something that we could use to impeach the president.


The Left did that and more. A lot more.


I don’t see a climate of divisiveness so much as I see a climate of unhinged, unmitigated hate, not only for President Trump, but for any of us who voted for him and support him.



To you, we’re not principled people who disagree with you on key issues like taxes, foreign policy, the environment, and immigration. We’re stupid, we’re evil, we’re racists, we’re Nazis, we’re deplorable; we hate women, children, and old people, we support mass shootings, and above all we want to destroy the earth (because we actually have another place to live just waiting for us). In short, we are monsters, at least in your eyes, and you remind us of it every single day.


So if you want to point the finger of blame at someone for this new level of divisiveness, I suggest you point no further than the nearest mirror.


Chuck Hustmyre; www.chuckhustmyre.com; www.imdb.me/chuckhustmyre


A cacophony of liberal voices are crying that the current climate of rancor and divisiveness that permeates and seems to be splitting these once-United States is the fault of one man — Donald Trump.


Really? How about a little perspective?


Ten years ago, many on the right, myself included, were horrified when Barack Obama was elected president because we considered him a lightweight, a career opportunist whose carefully managed resume touched all the right buttons but was so thin it could have been written on rice paper. Despite having written two books about himself by the age of 45, he hadn’t actually done much.


Leadership is honed, and for presidents, that honing can be done in only three places: business, government, or the military. Obama had no business experience, and he was certainly no Eisenhower, so that left government, and Obama’s record there was rather short and filled with an unusual number of “present” votes, meaning “I was there but didn’t want to commit.”


Even more troubling than Obama’s rice-paper resume was his ideological bent, which seemed to be straight out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky, who, like Obama, had been a “community organizer” with strong socialist leanings.


What we on the right did not do, though, immediately after Obama won the election was start “resist” and “not my president” movements. We did not spend days rioting in the streets. We did not demand that he be impeached even before he took office so that he could not be sworn in, something that I’m pretty sure is a legal impossibility. And I’m not talking about internet trolls or political outliers, I’m talking about elected members of Congress, major media figures, and a shrill and vacuous cast of Hollywood halfwits.


Nor did we demand that Obama’s pick for attorney general immediately recuse himself from, say, the birther controversy. Nor did we insist on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute him. We did not attack Obama’s family. Ninety percent of the media coverage of Obama during his first year in office was not negative. In fact, I suspect the ratio was just the opposite, if not even more favorable than 90 percent.


We did not use a bogus (you can call it unverified if you insist) document paid for by the failed opposition candidate to launch a months-long wiretap of one of Obama’s campaign advisors, with the obvious intent to capture on tape something that we could use to impeach the president.


The Left did that and more. A lot more.


I don’t see a climate of divisiveness so much as I see a climate of unhinged, unmitigated hate, not only for President Trump, but for any of us who voted for him and support him.



To you, we’re not principled people who disagree with you on key issues like taxes, foreign policy, the environment, and immigration. We’re stupid, we’re evil, we’re racists, we’re Nazis, we’re deplorable; we hate women, children, and old people, we support mass shootings, and above all we want to destroy the earth (because we actually have another place to live just waiting for us). In short, we are monsters, at least in your eyes, and you remind us of it every single day.


So if you want to point the finger of blame at someone for this new level of divisiveness, I suggest you point no further than the nearest mirror.


Chuck Hustmyre; www.chuckhustmyre.com; www.imdb.me/chuckhustmyre






via American Thinker Blog

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

Posted on

Page: The FBI “shredded the Constitution” in surveilling me

“It sounds a lot worse than reality,” Carter Page tells ABC’s George Stephanopoulos about his previous brush with Russian intelligence, but it’s an assessment that many think applies to the Russia-collusion story, too. Count Page among those, especially since, as he also tells Stephanopoulos, he’s never communicated at all with Donald Trump. Not once. Ever:


ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you’ve been under surveillance from the court since 2016. Since that time have you ever spoken to Donald Trump?

PAGE: I never spoke with him since — I never spoke with him any time in my life.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You have never spoken to Donald Trump in your life.

PAGE: No.

STEPHANOPOULOS: No e-mail, no text, nothing like that.

PAGE: Never.

If that’s the case, then it puts a bit of a dent in the idea that Trump ran a collusion scheme with Russian intelligence to hack the DNC server or propagate disinformation during the election campaign. Of course, all we have at the moment is Page’s assertion for that, but it at least fits the public facts as is known until now. Page has become a bit of a household name among the cognoscenti over the last couple of years because of the collusion probe, but he was one foreign-policy adviser among many in the campaign. He was, however, a notable one for his connections to Russian insiders, as Bloomberg pointed out in March 2016, long before any controversy began.

Adjunct advisers added to presidential campaigns generally don’t directly advise the candidates. They work with campaign staffers to either generate policy positions or to give depth and specificity to the positions candidates already have. George Papadopoulos, another such adjunct adviser, provides an example of the limitations to the position. He apparently thought the position entailed more autonomy than that and tried to conduct a little foreign policy on his own and get the boss into meetings. Campaign staff put the kibosh on those aspirations, perhaps not quickly enough but eventually in a definitive manner, at least as far as we know now.

If Page is being truthful, then all of the collusion theories barked up the wrong tree, at least far as they concern Trump himself.

Page also tells Stephanopoulos that he’s rooting for the New York Times in its fight to get the FISA warrants on his surveillance published. That would be a curious position for a guilty man to take, but it could also just be bravado, too. Page insists that the FBI “shredded the Constitution” in its surveillance of him, but that’s only true if they knowingly made a material misrepresentation to the FISA court. Did they? We don’t know yet — and neither does Page, either. The only way to be sure would be for the FISA court to release the warrants or for the White House to declassify them. The fact that they still haven’t done so seems veeeerrrrry curious indeed.

The post Page: The FBI “shredded the Constitution” in surveilling me appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

Posted on

Democrat Praises Hatemonger Farrakhan as an ‘Outstanding Human Being’

Democrat Rep. Danny Davis has gone on record singing the praises of extremist Louis Farrakhan who he called an “outstanding human being” in an interview with the conservative Daily Caller.

Davis hails from Illinois’ 7th Congressional District which includes a chunk of murder-ridden Chicago and is one of the luminaries of the Congressional Black Caucus. Unlike his CBC cohorts, at least Davis gets some credit for being open about his admiration for an anti-Semitic black identity extremist.

Farrakhan’s name has been in the news as of late following the revelation that the CBC covered up a 2005 picture of the sinister minister with a beaming Barack Obama out of fear that it would prematurely abort Barry’s presidential chances.

Shortly after the publication of that damning photo at a radical black website, a freelance writer found video footage of several CBC members including Maxine Waters warmly embracing Farrakhan in 2006.

Jeryl Bier penned an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal on “The Democrats’ Farrakhan Problem” in which he pointed out how so many black Democrats enjoy a cozy relationship with a man so thoroughly racist and militant that even the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has labeled him as a hatemonger.

Davis’s warmth for Farrakhan is widely shared by his fellow self-segregating racial ghouls in Congress who aren’t as openly proud of it and likely fear that expressing such feelings would be politically damaging so they keep it on the down low.

Via The Daily Caller “Democratic Congressman Claims Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan Is An ‘Outstanding Human Being’”:

Democratic Illinois Rep. Danny Davis defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan as an “outstanding human being” on Monday.

Farrakhan is known for embracing radically anti-Semitic and anti-white views, as even the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center has acknowledged. Farrakhan’s history of racially extreme comments includes blaming Jews for the September 11 attacks, saying white people “deserve to die” and praising Adolf Hitler as a “very great man.”

Davis, who has been in Congress since 1997, defended Obama for meeting Farrakhan and was open about his own ties to the hate group leader in an interview with The Daily Caller on Monday.

“I personally know [Farrakhan], I’ve been to his home, done meetings, participated in events with him,” Davis told TheDC.

“I don’t regard Louis Farrakhan as an aberration or anything, I regard him as an outstanding human being who commands a following of individuals who are learned and articulate and he plays a big role in the lives of thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of people,” he emphasized later.

Davis told TheDC “it wouldn’t be anything out of the ordinary” for him to meet with Farrakhan and said that Farrakhan isn’t considered a fringe character in his hometown of Chicago.

When asked about Farrakhan’s history of anti-Semitic comments, Davis was dismissive and said that many people in politics have a history of inflammatory comments.

A spokesperson for the CBC did not return multiple requests for comment on Farrakhan.

For those unfamiliar with Rep. Davis, he made news late last year when he backed efforts by the California chapter of the NAACP to change the national anthem because it was racist.

He was also one of the CBC members who boycotted President Trump’s State of the Union address last week.

The congressman’s official statement explained why he wasn’t attending:

Congressmen Danny K. Davis (D-IL 07) today announced he will boycott the 2018 State of the Union address by President Trump in Washington and meet instead with constituents in Chicago to examine the State of Our Union and the State of Our Communities and listen to the Democratic response to the SOTU.

Citing the escalating racist, chauvinistic, jingoistic, divisive rhetoric and actions of the President, Davis proclaimed “I cannot in good conscience stand silently by and watch generations of struggle for equal rights, for civil, human and voting rights, for the rights of women, for social and economic justice be undone from the highest office in the land.  Therefore, during the President’s 2018 State of the Union Address, I will be in Chicago meeting with constituents from the 7th Congressional District to explore the Peoples’ State of the Union.”

It’s easy to see how this game works by now. Trump is a racist who uses divisive rhetoric but this guy is not.

via Downtrend.com

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

Posted on

Mark Levin on FISA Memo Revelations: ‘Hillary Clinton Paid for a Warrant — That’s the Easiest Way to Put It’

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” conservative talker Mark Levin laid out his case arguing the release of a FISA memo by the House Intelligence Committee last week raised questions about the previous administration. That included some of those holdovers involved in the day-to-day operations of the Department of Justice, including Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller.

Levin argued those were the questions that should be asked and summed up the circumstances as 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton having “paid for a warrant.”

This is bad. Let me tell you a couple of things here. Now we know why [Adam] Schiff and the rest of them are fighting so hard. Now we know why the left-wing praetorian guard Democrat media are fighting so hard, trashing [Devin] Nunes, me, you, and others. Let’s walk through this quickly. Who are they trying to protect? Hillary Clinton. Sean, who else are they trying to protect? Barack Obama. His name never comes up.

So, let me help everybody with this. Loretta Lynch knew about these FISA warrants. [Sally] Yates, the deputy attorney general, the extensions Rod Rosenstein, now the deputy attorney general. He knew. FBI Director [James] Comey, Deputy Director [Andrew] McCabe, [Peter] Strzok, the head of counterintelligence, [Lisa] Page — his girlfriend.

Who else would know these FISA applications and warrants? Let me tell you a little secret. These are counterintelligence efforts. You have to assume the National Security Council and the White House knew. Why would the FBI, Justice Department, keep that from the National Security Director in the White House? Why would they keep it from the deputy director in the White House?

So why would be left out of the president’s daily intelligence briefing? Which I meantioned in March Congress also needs to get a hold of. I am telling you, we’re looking at the FBI, we’re looking at the Department of Justice, we are not looking at all at the White House. Hillary Clinton paid for a warrant. That’s the easiest way we can put it. Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russians. But it appears the FBI at the seniormost levels colluded with the Russians, too. Whether it was witting or unwitting, it doesn’t matter. That’s a fact.

So, the senior level of the FBI tried to interfere with this election as well. This is why it’s such a big deal. Now, I know Republicans are bending over backwards saying this has nothing to do with Mueller. This has everything to do with Mueller.

It has everything to do with Mueller because it transitions from the counterintelligence investigation into a criminal investigation after Comey, of all things, confesses of all things to being a leaker. And Mueller — Mueller is the former FBI director. Those are his people. That is his environment. He’s not out there as some independent force.

But I want to get back to Barack Obama. It’s his FBI, his Department of Justice, his State Department, his candidate. I cannot believe for a minute that the National Security Council didn’t know about this.

And to show you how elaborate this is, now that more information is coming out, we haven’t even gotten to the incidental collection of intelligence on people, including, by the way, [Jeff] Sessions when he met with and spoke with the Russian ambassador, Michael Flynn when he spoke to the Russian ambassador, the unmasking and leaking of his name, the record number of unmasking of American citizens in the Trump world and so forth and so on.

And the American people have been subjected to a massive propaganda and misinformation campaign by the Clinton campaign, by the Obama administration. Let me ask you a logical question, Sean.

Why would the Russians want Donald Trump to be president of the United States when they could get everything they want from Hillary Clinton — whether it’s uranium, whether it’s undermining defense by cutting military spending, by refusing to secure our border? Why in the world with the Russians want Trump as to Hillary Clinton?

via Breitbart News

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

Posted on

ROGER STONE: Gen. Michael Flynn to File Motion for Dismissal of ALL CHARGES Against Him (VIDEO)

ROGER STONE: Gen. Michael Flynn to File Motion for Dismissal of ALL CHARGES Against Him (VIDEO)

February 5, 2018
by Joshua Caplan

According to legendary political operative and InfoWars correspondent, Roger Stone, lawyers for Gen. Michael Flynn are preparing legal action to have all charges against him dropped.

Credit: The Alex Jones Channel

STONE: “Lawyers for General Mike Flynn will shortly file a motion to dismiss all the charges filed against him, based on reports now confirmed by The Hill, Circa News and Infowars, that Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe told a teleconference of law enforcement officials, “first we f*ck Flynn, then we f*ck Trump.”

Independent journalist and author Jack Posobiec helped spread the news for Stone on Twitter, who was banned from platform last year.

Stone’s report comes amid news that Special counsel Robert Mueller has requested the postponement of Flynn’s sentencing.

“Due to the status of the Special Counsel’s investigation, the parties do not believe that this matter is ready to be scheduled for a sentencing hearing at this time,” the special counsel asked the court last week.

The court filing states a date to sentence Flynn could not be determined by the special counsel at this time and that 90-day extension is be required.

Last year, The Gateway Pundit asked: Was President Trump’s National Security Advisor tricked into meeting with the FBI without a lawyer?

Fox News host Sean Hannity and reporter Sara Carter have suggested Flynn may have been tricked into having the interview with disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok without a lawyer.

Michael Flynn, former National Security Adviser to President Trump, pleaded guilty last year for making false statements to the FBI about contacting Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the transition.

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://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

Hardball: Trump Puts World on Notice… Threatens Aid if Drugs Come Across Border

At a Customs and Border Protection roundtable last week, President Donald Trump threatened countries that fail to stem the rise of drugs with a loss of aid from the United States, according to The Hill.

The remarks, which took place at the Customs and Border Protection National Training Center in Virginia, highlighted the administration’s battle on border security in ways unrelated to illegal immigration.

“I want to stop the aid. If they can’t stop drugs from coming in, ’cause they can stop them a lot easier than us. They say, ‘oh we can’t control it.’ Oh great, we’re supposed to control it,” Trump told gathered officials, according to CNN.

“So we give them billions and billions of dollars, and they don’t do what they’re supposed to be doing, and they know that. But we’re going to take a very harsh action.”

“These countries are not our friends,” Trump added.

TRENDING: Trump So Effective That Navy Officers “Baffled” by How Quickly Iran Retreated

“You know, we think they’re our friends and we send them massive aid.

“I won’t mention names right now, but I look at these countries, I look at the numbers we send them — we send them massive aid and they’re pouring drugs into our country and they’re laughing at us,” he continued.

“So I’m not a believer in that. I want to stop the aid.”

However, Trump seemed to name the countries later, arguing that El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico could do a better job with intercepting drugs.

Do you support President Trump’s threat to revoke aid from countries with significant drug trafficking problems?

“They’re coming in — they’re pouring in from other — El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, all over,” Trump said.

“They’re just pouring into our country. And we’ve stopped it, but the laws make it very tough.”

The remarks came in the same week as the president’s State of the Union address, in which he promised to be “much tougher on drug dealers and pushers.”

“My administration is committed to fighting the drug epidemic and helping get treatment for those in need, for those who have been so terribly hurt,” Trump said.

RELATED: Dems Lose It as Tweet Suggests Trump Ordered Military Vet Deported… Fail to Realize It Was Actually Obama

However, for dealers, traffickers and the countries that make life easier for them, it’s clear that the Trump administration plans to play hardball.

That could be very bad news for a lot of countries, particularly ones that don’t want to work with the president on border security.

Trump might not have wanted to name names, but they know who they are.

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on this story.

What are your thoughts on Trump’s threat? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

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

Posted on

The Only Misleading Claim About Voter Fraud: “It Doesn’t Exist”

Purge the voting rolls and start over.

Via Heritage Foundation:

At the heart of democracy lies not just the right to vote, but the right to vote in a free and fair election. After all, what incentive do voters have to cast ballots if they have no faith in the integrity of the process or the accuracy of the outcome?

That is why, last year, President Donald Trump established the bipartisan Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Its mandate was to investigate all manner of threats and challenges confronting the American electoral system and to propose solutions Congress and the states would be free to adopt, amend, or reject.

Now, six months later, the commission has been disbanded—not because, as some have suggested, it failed to uncover evidence of fraud, but because its work was obstructed and its mission discredited by liberal activist groups and politicians eager to advance and support an agenda antithetical to election integrity.

That their goal was to prevent even the study of this issue speaks volumes. If they are so certain that fraud doesn’t exist, that current safeguards are satisfactory, and that voter rolls are in good shape, why did they not view this commission as an opportunity to vindicate their position?

Perhaps they feared uncovering what they claim doesn’t exist; specifically, evidence of fraud in American elections.

When it comes to election fraud, the question is not “if,” but “how much?” For years, The Heritage Foundation has been documenting instances of proven election fraud in an online, searchable database.

As of this writing, Heritage has gathered 1,107 such instances, spread across 47 states. Each case is carefully researched and supported by court records or other government documents. Nearly 90 percent of those cases resulted in criminal convictions against individuals.

No unbiased individual can look at the Heritage database and see it as anything other than incontestable proof that fraud is a real and a serious issue demanding urgent attention.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us

Posted on

Trump Gives Blistering Response When Asked if He Has Confidence in AG Rosenstein

In the wake of the past week’s memo scandal, all eyes have been on former FBI Director James Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller.

There are growing questions about anti-Trump bias and possible illegal activity within the bureau… but lost in the shuffle is another player who may be far from innocent: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

Rosenstein is one of the officials who gave his word to Congress that there was no widespread bias within the Department of Justice. As that claim seems increasingly untrue, however, the top justice official may be the one facing serious questions next.

For now, Donald Trump was the one fielding questions on Friday. After the scathing memo alleging negligence and bias within the FBI was released, reporters naturally asked the president to comment.

“Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump described the findings ‘a disgrace,’ adding, ‘People should be ashamed of themselves and much worse than that,’” reported the Independent Journal Review.

TRENDING: Pat Sajak Rips Liberals Who Threw a Fit at the SOTU Speech

Then the media asked the president if he still had confidence in Deputy AG Rosenstein. Trump threw out a scathing response.

“You figure that one out,” he shot back, with a look and tone that was clearly frustrated.

That answer is Trump Speak for “of course not, why did you even ask that?” It’s a good point: After all that we now know about bias and the memo, why would Trump still have confidence in a figure at the center of the scandal?

Trump isn’t the only one who is exasperated with excuses coming out of the Department of Justice, particularly from Rosenstein. In December, Trey Gowdy unloaded on Rosenstein during a congressional session.

Do YOU have confidence in Rod Rosenstein?

“What in the hell is going on with the Department of Justice and the FBI?” Gowdy bluntly asked Rosenstein.

“Those who are supposed to make sure there are no conflicts of interest seem to have a few of their own!” Gowdy continued, before listing off examples of bias within the FBI… and that was even before the scathing memo came out.

At the time, Rosenstein offered weak assurances that the country should just trust him.

“What I recommend you tell your constituents is that Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, and Chris Ray are accountable, and that we will ensure no bias is reflected,” the deputy attorney general responded.

RELATED: US Rep: Dems Used Obama DOJ to Infect Intel Community With Anti-Trump Lies

If the now famous House Intelligence Committee memo is correct, however, Rosenstein was significantly biased the whole time… and his fingerprints are all over the FBI wiretapping and dossier scandal.

The memo states that Rosenstein was one of the key officials who signed off on FISA warrant applications on behalf of the DOJ.

That means that even while knowing that the so-called Russian dossier was flimsy or even fabricated — and knowing full well that it came from a biased anti-Trump source — the deputy attorney general still endorsed a wiretap against American citizens at Trump Tower.

Rosenstein may try to pretend that America has his word, but it doesn’t seem to be worth much anymore. The nation deserves answers, and Comey, Mueller, and Rosenstein need to start explaining their actions.

Press “Share on Facebook” to help hold these officials’ feet to the fire!

Is Rosenstein just as culpable as Mueller and Comey? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

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