YouTube Attacks Navy Veteran – Terminates His Channel After He Exposed Nathan Phillips As A Fraud

The purge continues.

After exposing Native American, Nathan Phillips as a fraud, YouTube has terminated the account of Retired Navy Seal, Donald W. “Don” Shipley.

YouTube Deplatforms Retired Navy SEAL Who Exposed Tribal Elder Nathan Phillips’ Stolen Valor

Nathan Phillips, you’ll recall, is the lying democrat activist who led an ambush against a group of teenage boys innocently waiting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial for their bus ride home.

Nick Sandmann’s Lawyer Files $250 MILLION Lawsuit Against the Washington Post for Their Covington Catholic Smears

It was Don Shipley who exposed that Phillips was lying about his military career.

What reason did YouTube give for terminating this American Hero’s account?

The reason given by YouTube for the termination of the account was “multiple or severe violations of YouTube’s policy prohibiting content designed to harass, bully or threaten.”

So, according to YouTube, exposing people who are guilty of stolen valor is bullying, harassing, or threatening?

When do we have the Million MAGA March on Silicon Valley?

The post YouTube Attacks Navy Veteran – Terminates His Channel After He Exposed Nathan Phillips As A Fraud appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

The Resistance is Everything They Accuse Trump of Being

The defining characteristic of today’s Democrats is that most unattractive of human failings, hypocrisy.  Since Donald Trump’s improbable election, Dems and their media mouthpieces have been demanding that the rest of us recognize the existential threat he poses to the nation.  Their demands are based on a litany of accused authoritarian character traits and fascistic conduct that Trump obviously doesn’t hold and in fact never committed.  The reality is the Democrats are projecting — accusing Trump of the very outrages that they themselves practiced in their obsession to prevent and then overturn his election.


The most ridiculous of these accusations is that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election. Setting aside for the moment the massive economic damage Trump’s energy policies have inflicted on Russia’s fragile economy, let’s examine the Democrat’s actions to protect us from the Russian Bear.



The fictitious dossier, written by a foreign spy citing unnamed Russian intelligence sources, was deployed to smear Trump.  When the dossier failed to defeat him, it was used to justify endless investigations, congressional hearings, and ominous news coverage that hobbled his presidency, wrecked his efforts to improve relations with Russia and greatly diminished voters’ confidence in our democracy.  Only after this witch-hunt was set in motion was it revealed that the bogus dossier was a product of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.


In classic KGB style, Obama’s administration deployed our nation’s intelligence agencies to infiltrate and spy on their political opponents.  Using paid informants — believed to include, at minimum, Joseph Mifsud, Stefan Halper, Henry Greenberg and Felix Sader — the political appointees heading our FBI and CIA attempted to entrap Trump’s campaign with monetary enticements and promises of Russian kompromat on Hillary Clinton.


Fearful of being held accountable and panicked after Trump’s long-shot election, the deputy attorney general and acting FBI director then conspired to unconstitutionally remove the incoming president using the 25th Amendment, which was intended to facilitate succession in the event of presidential physical or mental incapacitation.  Since Trump suffered no such incapacity, and it was never the DOJ or FBI’s role to allege that he did, this conspiracy is rightly seen as an attempted administrative coup d’etat similar to those against Soviet leaders Nikita Khrushchev and Mikhail Gorbachev.


Having failed, the same Deep State actors that committed these outrages then appointed a former FBI director to cover up their unconstitutional misdeeds. Robert Mueller organized a team of zealous Democrat partisans who promptly began a series of selective, political prosecutions — of matters unrelated to collusion — designed and conducted to terrorize and silence Trump associates. Under threat of financial ruin to their families and spending decades in Mueller’s gulag, many of the targets of these selective prosecutions predictably negotiated guilty pleas.  


While these outrages have gone on, our very own American Pravda — the Democrat’s mouthpieces in the mainstream media — have published a steady stream of disinformation and propaganda designed to turn reality on its head and portray Trump as Vladimir Putin’s puppet instead of the target of Soviet-inspired tactics employed by Obama’s police state.  Long after Russiagate has been debunked by the emerging alternative media, the legacy media and leftwing cable outlets continue to perpetrate this hoax.  


As important as propaganda to the Soviet’s control of their citizens was suppressing dissident voices.  Silicon Valley’s Democratic tech titans are engaged is a similar effort to silence opposing opinions. Using their near-total control of internet search, Google and YouTube are downranking content that they deem noncompliant with leftist dogma.  On social media, Facebook, and Twitter now regularly deplatform and censor users who speak verboten right-wing thoughts. All the while the Democrat’s media “watchdogs” orchestrate well-funded campaigns to scare advertisers away from conservative broadcasters and internet sites.


When all else failed, the Soviets engaged in violence to punish and suppress political opposition.  In America today we have  a domestic terror group, Antifa, organized in all our major cities, and boasting scores of Facebook groups, assaulting Trump supporters in the streets.  Far from condemning their actions, the Democrats and their media shills have justified and even encouraged Antifa.  In the 2016 election, as documented on hidden camera by Project Veritas, Democrats sent paid provocateurs into Trump rallies to incite violence.


In their win-at-all-costs war against Trump, the Democrats have unduly divided America, created fear and loathing among her citizens and torn at the fabric of our democracy.  Soviet-styled totalitarianism is indeed a great danger to our free republic, but contrary to what you’re being told, that threat is coming from the Democrats and not from President Trump.


The author would like to thank Russia historian Stephen F. Cohen and John Batchelor for the information presented on their series Tales of the New Cold War on the John Batchelor Show.


The author hosts Right Now with Jim Daws, a webcast on news, politics and culture from and American nationalist perspective  https://twitter.com/RightNowJimDaws










The defining characteristic of today’s Democrats is that most unattractive of human failings, hypocrisy.  Since Donald Trump’s improbable election, Dems and their media mouthpieces have been demanding that the rest of us recognize the existential threat he poses to the nation.  Their demands are based on a litany of accused authoritarian character traits and fascistic conduct that Trump obviously doesn’t hold and in fact never committed.  The reality is the Democrats are projecting — accusing Trump of the very outrages that they themselves practiced in their obsession to prevent and then overturn his election.


The most ridiculous of these accusations is that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election. Setting aside for the moment the massive economic damage Trump’s energy policies have inflicted on Russia’s fragile economy, let’s examine the Democrat’s actions to protect us from the Russian Bear.


The fictitious dossier, written by a foreign spy citing unnamed Russian intelligence sources, was deployed to smear Trump.  When the dossier failed to defeat him, it was used to justify endless investigations, congressional hearings, and ominous news coverage that hobbled his presidency, wrecked his efforts to improve relations with Russia and greatly diminished voters’ confidence in our democracy.  Only after this witch-hunt was set in motion was it revealed that the bogus dossier was a product of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.


In classic KGB style, Obama’s administration deployed our nation’s intelligence agencies to infiltrate and spy on their political opponents.  Using paid informants — believed to include, at minimum, Joseph Mifsud, Stefan Halper, Henry Greenberg and Felix Sader — the political appointees heading our FBI and CIA attempted to entrap Trump’s campaign with monetary enticements and promises of Russian kompromat on Hillary Clinton.


Fearful of being held accountable and panicked after Trump’s long-shot election, the deputy attorney general and acting FBI director then conspired to unconstitutionally remove the incoming president using the 25th Amendment, which was intended to facilitate succession in the event of presidential physical or mental incapacitation.  Since Trump suffered no such incapacity, and it was never the DOJ or FBI’s role to allege that he did, this conspiracy is rightly seen as an attempted administrative coup d’etat similar to those against Soviet leaders Nikita Khrushchev and Mikhail Gorbachev.


Having failed, the same Deep State actors that committed these outrages then appointed a former FBI director to cover up their unconstitutional misdeeds. Robert Mueller organized a team of zealous Democrat partisans who promptly began a series of selective, political prosecutions — of matters unrelated to collusion — designed and conducted to terrorize and silence Trump associates. Under threat of financial ruin to their families and spending decades in Mueller’s gulag, many of the targets of these selective prosecutions predictably negotiated guilty pleas.  


While these outrages have gone on, our very own American Pravda — the Democrat’s mouthpieces in the mainstream media — have published a steady stream of disinformation and propaganda designed to turn reality on its head and portray Trump as Vladimir Putin’s puppet instead of the target of Soviet-inspired tactics employed by Obama’s police state.  Long after Russiagate has been debunked by the emerging alternative media, the legacy media and leftwing cable outlets continue to perpetrate this hoax.  


As important as propaganda to the Soviet’s control of their citizens was suppressing dissident voices.  Silicon Valley’s Democratic tech titans are engaged is a similar effort to silence opposing opinions. Using their near-total control of internet search, Google and YouTube are downranking content that they deem noncompliant with leftist dogma.  On social media, Facebook, and Twitter now regularly deplatform and censor users who speak verboten right-wing thoughts. All the while the Democrat’s media “watchdogs” orchestrate well-funded campaigns to scare advertisers away from conservative broadcasters and internet sites.


When all else failed, the Soviets engaged in violence to punish and suppress political opposition.  In America today we have  a domestic terror group, Antifa, organized in all our major cities, and boasting scores of Facebook groups, assaulting Trump supporters in the streets.  Far from condemning their actions, the Democrats and their media shills have justified and even encouraged Antifa.  In the 2016 election, as documented on hidden camera by Project Veritas, Democrats sent paid provocateurs into Trump rallies to incite violence.


In their win-at-all-costs war against Trump, the Democrats have unduly divided America, created fear and loathing among her citizens and torn at the fabric of our democracy.  Soviet-styled totalitarianism is indeed a great danger to our free republic, but contrary to what you’re being told, that threat is coming from the Democrats and not from President Trump.


The author would like to thank Russia historian Stephen F. Cohen and John Batchelor for the information presented on their series Tales of the New Cold War on the John Batchelor Show.


The author hosts Right Now with Jim Daws, a webcast on news, politics and culture from and American nationalist perspective  https://twitter.com/RightNowJimDaws




via American Thinker

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

WATCH: Sen. Tim Scott’s Powerful Speech On Senate Floor After Democrats Refuse To Protect Born-Alive Babies

The day after Senate Democrats blocked a bill designed to protect babies born alive from botched abortion, Republican Senator Tim Scott (SC) took to the Senate floor to address his Democrat counterparts about the intrinsic value of every child’s life.

“We are a nation that must continue to value life, and for some reason, somehow, this body missed that opportunity to reinforce that value system before the American public, to say each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” said Scott.

The senator opened his remarks by explaining that he missed the vote on Republican Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act by four minutes due to a flight delay, which he found “quite frustrating.”

“But what’s frustrating even more than that,” Scott said, “is that, in a nation of good conscious, that we would be debating, having a conversation about, a child who was born — sitting there: alive — separated from her mother. And that there would be a question of whether or not that child should be able to continue to live.”

Scott noted that the issues of late-term abortions and infanticide were recently raised in New York and Virginia. Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) recently signed a bill to allow abortion up to the moment of birth for virtually any reason. In Virginia, Governor Ralph Northam (D) endorsed infanticide during a radio interview, again under the guise of feminism.

“This is an issue that has raised by comments coming out of New York, and more recently comments coming out of Virginia, when the governor, who happens to be, from my understand, a pediatric surgeon, suggested that it is okay to allow that child to die,” Scott said.

“I cannot imagine, whether you pro-life like I am, or you are pro-choice like others, that this would even be an issue of debate or discussion within the two sides. There is no side on this topic. There cannot be a side about life separated from the mother, whether or not that life should continue to live. This is common sense. This is human decency. This is not an issue of being pro-life, or pro-choice, this is being pro-child, which we all should be,” he continued.

Scott said there is no gray area when he speaks to Americans across the country from both sides of the aisle, from all demographics, regarding the value of children.

“There was no disagreement on the issue of infanticide,” he said of the folks attending a Black History Month event in South Carolina. “There was no disagreement, whatsoever. .. The one thing in common was the value of life.”

“There is nothing to debate regarding the sanctity of born children,” Scott said, adding, “We’re all come to the same conclusion, and that is that a child born deserves to live. This is a place of universal agreement.”

“Each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” concluded the senator.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would amend the criminal code to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

“If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” the legislation states.

“Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care,” it states.

WATCH:

via Daily Wire

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

107 Democrats to Launch ‘Medicare for All’ Bill; Eliminates Private Health Insurance; No Funding Plan

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and 106 other Democrats will launch a “Medicare for All” bill on Wednesday that will shift every American to government health insurance and eliminate private insurance — with no funding plan.

Politico reported Tuesday:

The bill, co-sponsored by 107 House Democrats, doesn’t include a price tag or specific proposals for financing the new system, which analysts estimate would cost tens of trillions of dollars over a decade.

The proposal calls for a two-year transformation of Medicare into a universal single-payer system, eliminating nearly all private health plans. It would also expand Medicare coverage to include prescription drugs, dental and vision services, and long-term care, without charging co-pays, premiums or deductibles — and would provide federal funding for abortions. It would also potentially pave a path for a future Democratic administration to extend coverage to undocumented immigrants.

A few states have tried similar proposals, with no success. Vermont, the home state of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders — who is running on a “Medicare for All” platform for president again — abandoned a similar single-payer health care plan several years ago: “[W]hen you just see the price tag, it’s very shocking,” one expert told NPR.

California’s State Senate passed a similar bill in 2017, but the speaker of the State Assembly refused to allow the measure to come to a vote, pointing out that legislators had made no plans to pay for the cost of covering everyone in the state, estimated at two to three times the entire current state budget. (He received death threats as a result.)

When Obamacare was proposed in 2009, Republicans objected, many arguing that the doomed-to-fail design was just a “Trojan horse” for a completely socialist medical system. Democrats and the media protested otherwise.

Another sweeping recent Democratic plan, the “Green New Deal,” likewise fails to include any funding proposals.

House Democratic leadership has avoided explicitly backing either of these two plans, though sympathetic to both.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

via Breitbart News

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

House Democrats Pass Bill Nullifying Trump National Emergency with Less Than Veto-Proof Majority

The House passed a resolution Tuesday that would nullify President Donald Trump’s national emergency declaration that would allow him to build a wall along America’s southern border. The House passed the bill with less than a two-third’s majority, which would not override a potential veto.

The House passed H.J.Res. 46, 245-182, a resolution that would terminate Trump’s national emergency declaration on February 15. The vote featured strong Democrat support for the bill and little Republican support for the resolution.

The Democrat resolution passed; however, it did not obtain enough votes to potentially override Trump’s veto of the resolution, should it also pass through the Senate.

Only 13 Republicans defected and voted with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) introduced the resolution last Friday and quickly gained more than 200 cosponsors. Few House Republicans came out in support of the House resolution to nullify the national emergency; however, Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) quickly came out in favor of the Democrat resolution. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) also voted for the resolution, contending that only Congress has the power to appropriate money.

Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) and Dusty Johnson (R-SD) also voted for the Democrat resolution.

Congressman Massie tweeted in a thread here.

The Senate will likely take up the resolution in the next few weeks, where it appears that the bill may pass with some Republican support. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Tom Tillis (R-NC) have already voiced their support for the legislation, meaning that if all 47 Senate Democrats vote for the resolution, they would only need one more Republican defector for the resolution to pass. However, it remains unclear whether Sens. Doug Jones (D-AL) or Joe Manchin (D-WV) will vote for the bill, given that they have voted for wall funding in the past.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who chairs the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, said in February that a “handful” of Republicans will back the resolution; however, not Republicans will defect to override a veto.

“A handful. … [But] there will be enough [left] to sustain a veto,” Graham said.

Trump’s national emergency serves as a rallying cry for Republicans, as a poll in February found that 85 percent of Republicans approve of Trump’s use of national emergency powers to build the wall along the southern border. The national emergency also bodes well for Trump as 80 percent of GOP voters said that Trump’s national emergency would make it more likely for them to vote for the president in 2020.

Trump has already signaled that he will veto the Democrat resolution should it pass through Congress and Democrats, and recalcitrant Republicans would need a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress to override the president’s veto.

Sean Moran is a congressional reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3.

via Breitbart News

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

Cross Case Before SCOTUS

Cross Case Before SCOTUSWASHINGTON, D.C.—The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case tomorrow involving the Bladensburg Peace Cross, a 40-foot cross in the median on a Maryland highway honoring those who died during World War I.

The challenge to the 93-year-old cross began with The American Humanist Association which filed a 2014 lawsuit against Maryland officials, which argued that the cross “discriminates against patriotic soldiers who are not Christian.” Both lower court decisions ruled that the cross violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

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

House votes to block Trump’s declaration of national emergency at the border, 245-182

The vote was academic, as there would obviously be enough support in a Democratic House to pass a resolution rebuking Trump and nowhere near the dozens of Republican crossovers needed to override his eventual veto.

Pelosi wanted a few GOPers to support the resolution, though, so that she could say that opposition to the emergency decree was bipartisan. She got 13.

That’s a mix of Republicans who have cultivated their own brands independent of Trump for different reasons — moderates like Stefanik, principled small-government ideologues like Amash, and members who represent border districts and/or districts with large Latino populations like Hurd. Pelosi’s more than 30 votes short of what she’d need for a veto-proof majority so the fate of this congressional effort to stop Trump is already sealed.

But that doesn’t mean there’s not still intrigue in the Senate. It’s almost certain that Schumer will have the 51 votes he needs to pass the House resolution (McConnell can’t block a floor vote in this case, remember) but he’s been stuck at 50 for the past day or so. Collins, Murkowski, and Thom Tillis are all on board and Politico claims that the caucus let Mike Pence have it during their lunch with him today when he tried to sell them on supporting Trump’s order. “I didn’t think his argument was very good. ‘We’ve got a crisis, that means the president can do this.’ That’s essentially the argument,” said one senator who was there. But that fateful 51st vote is proving stubborn, as no Senate Republican wants to be known as the person that put Democrats over the top. The state of play as of this afternoon:

Gardner’s facing a tough reelection in a Hillary state and Alexander is retiring and has slammed the emergency decree as an affront to separation of powers so I assume both votes are a done deal. How about Mr. Constitutional Conservative, Ted Cruz, though? Is he still worried about executive overreach like he was from, say, 2013 through early 2017?

He is. Sort of.

There’s a little wiggle room at the end there inasmuch as Cruz might decide Trump’s actions are constitutional and therefore this particular overreach is OK. Having just won reelection in November and knowing that there’s no chance of Trump’s veto being overridden, he’s basically free to vote his conscience here. It’ll say a lot about him if he can’t muster the nerve to cross Trump even when there’s effectively no penalty for doing so — until 2024, I mean, when he runs for president again and Tom Cotton clobbers him for having opposed the royal decree of a border emergency.

Cruz’s home state, where much of the wall is slated to be built, isn’t crazy about this whole process, by the way. New from Quinnipiac:

Note the independent numbers there. Again, this isn’t a poll of the U.S. population, this is Texas. Texans are deadlocked 48/48 on the wall and 45/52 on whether there’s an emergency at the border or not. Trump’s job approval is 47/50. If not for his presidential ambitions, this vote would be a no-brainer for Cruz. As it is, what odds can I get that he votes no on the Democratic resolution?

Here’s Bill Kristol’s group, Republicans for the Rule of Law, reminding Cruz and others that they once opposed DACA on grounds of overreach. That’s a different issue with a different legal posture, but yes, a constitutional conservative should be skeptical of emergency power grabs by the executive, especially when that emergency didn’t seem to be urgent enough for the president to act until Congress refused to appropriate what he was demanding. By the way, one interesting idea stirring in the House tonight is to change the law after this such that national emergencies *automatically* expire in 60 days after the president has declared them unless Congress passes a resolution extending them. I wonder how many very serious proponents of Article I prerogatives will wimp out and vote no on that one too.

The post House votes to block Trump’s declaration of national emergency at the border, 245-182 appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

No One Is Safe in Maduro’s Venezuela

Univision news anchor Jorge
Ramos and his team were detained in
the presidential palace of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela on Monday evening.

After Ramos inquired about electoral
fraud and human rights abuses, and played a video of
hungry Venezuelans rummaging through garbage, Maduro’s thugs confiscated their
equipment and apprehended the journalists.

They were released and later expelled from the country, but without their equipment and footage from the interview. In efforts to deflect blame, Maduro’s propaganda minister ludicrously claimed that Univision and U.S. President Donald Trump’s State Department staged the detention.

Ramos and members of his crew
are American citizens and for the regime to detain them demonstrates a new
level of recklessness. 

Even with international attention now focused on Venezuela, Maduro and his thugs continue to behave with impunity.

Ramos isn’t the only American
who Maduro has detained. For more than a year, six Americans who are employees of
Citgo have been unlawfully incarcerated in Venezuela.

The arrest of the Citgo 6 was a power move by Maduro to appoint the late Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez’s cousin as president of the company.

Maduro’s sadism extends even to
his own people. Interim Venezuelan President Juan Guaido requested critically needed humanitarian assistance from the U.S. and other
foreign donors. Guaido and his supporters planned to peacefully import the
shipments of food and medicine into the country.

Instead, the border region descended into chaos. Maduro blocked various bridges and severed diplomatic relations with neighboring Colombia, where the aid convoys were staged.

Paramilitaries loyal to Maduro known as “colectivos” and Venezuelan armed forces reportedly burned trucks filled with much-needed supplies.

A U.S.-flagged ship from Puerto Rico carrying American citizens also was threatened by Maduro’s military. The colectivos and armed forces ended up wounding 287 people, detaining more than 50, and killing 14 during the skirmishes.

Following the events at the
border, the U.S. Treasury Department implemented targeted sanctions against four Maduro-aligned governors for not permitting the entry of
humanitarian assistance.

For the U.S., the Maduro regime is not just a threat to Venezuelans, but also a threat to our regional allies and to U.S. interests. The situation is particularly tense with neighboring Colombia. Venezuela’s longest border is with Colombia, the U.S.’ largest foreign-aid recipient in Latin America.

Maduro’s destruction of the
Venezuelan economy has produced a dire humanitarian crisis. That in turn has
created Latin America’s worst migration crisis, with more than 3.3 million Venezuelans fleeing their country. Colombia has already taken in
1.5 million Venezuelans. Without a democratic transition in Venezuela, the
conditions driving the migration exodus will most likely worsen.

As unpopular as Maduro may
be, the regime controls many levers of power within the country. Also, his made-in-Havana police state is the envy of dictators around the world.

Maduro cannot be allowed to remain in power. The U.S. and 50-plus countries that recognize Guaido as the country’s legitimate leader must maintain a strategy of ramping up pressure.

Coalition partners should reciprocate the U.S.’ targeted sanctions against officials of the Maduro regime. They are criminals and not politicians, and they should be treated as such. The international community cannot let freedom-deprived Venezuelans down.

The post No One Is Safe in Maduro’s Venezuela appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

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

GOP Leadership Punks Trump — Now Unsure About Supporting Trump’s Emergency Declaration on Border Wall

Earlier this month Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made a deal with Republican President Trump.
McConnell promised to support the President’s emergency declaration on the southern border if President Trump would sign another bloated spending bill that included little to no money for a border barrier.

The Washington Post reported:

Congress on Thursday approved a massive budget deal to avert an impending government shutdown, and President Trump promised to sign it, but only after announcing he would also declare a national emergency so he can get more money for a border wall.

Moments after Trump disclosed his intentions in a phone call with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), McConnell announced the news on the Senate floor, ending days of uncertainty over whether the president would support the $333 billion spending deal, which includes less than a quarter of the money he’s sought for a steel wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Senate swiftly passed the legislation on an 83-to-16 vote, and the House followed suit hours later, approving the bill 300 to 128.

President Trump signed the bloated spending bill — got no money for a wall and little money for border barriers but now Republican Senators are balking on their promise to the Republican President.

They punked him.
Republicans are backing away from their latest promise to President Trump.

Via Columbia Bugle:

The post GOP Leadership Punks Trump — Now Unsure About Supporting Trump’s Emergency Declaration on Border Wall appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

Donald Trump Jr.: Democrats Are Trying to Distract Trump in Vietnam Talks – They Hate President Trump more Than They Love America (VIDEO)

Donald Trump Jr. joined Tucker Carlson on Tuesday to censorship by the social media giants against conservative users.

Donald Trump Jr. was asked about the Democrat plan to hold public testimony with former Trump attorney Michael Cohen at the same time as the Trump nuclear talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

Don Jr. unloaded on the Democrats and their disgusting tactics against the American people.

Donald Trump Jr.: I have my father. I know he’s in Vietnam right now trying to negotiate a peace settlement with nuclear North Korea after 60 years of failed attempts, trying to end the war, trying to end nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula. You have finally a president who’s willing to do it… And for the Democrats to try to counter-program that kind of progress, trying perhaps to try to distract him with this nonsense with a convicted felon whose been lying to those same committees, it just goes to show you how much those Democrats really disdain Trump but also America. I mean who wants to try to stymie that process? Who doesn’t want peace in the Korean peninsula?… It’s crazy but they show you that they really hate Trump much more than they like America. Because I get nothing from counter-programming those kind of peace talks with this nonsense that’s been proven with a convicted felon other than they just want Trump to fail even if it means America fails.

Via Tucker Carlson Tonight:

The post Donald Trump Jr.: Democrats Are Trying to Distract Trump in Vietnam Talks – They Hate President Trump more Than They Love America (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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