May 23, 2019

Smollett’s Story Falls Apart

Politicians who jumped on Smollett race attack claim before they knew the facts are suddenly left in a pickle as his story unravels

Another False Flag Liberal Hate Claim Debunked

Democratic politicians are backtracking from their initial comments about what was originally described as a hate crime against “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett, after a Chicago police spokesperson said over the weekend the “trajectory of the investigation” shifted and they no longer consider Smollett a victim in the case.

When the incident was first reported last month, Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker called it “an attempted modern-day lynching.” But on Sunday, Booker told reporters he is now withholding comment on the case “until all the information actually comes out from on-the-record sources.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Jan. 29 tweeted that the “racist, homophobic attack” against Smollett is “an affront to our humanity.” But over the weekend, Pelosi’s tweet had been deleted.

Smollett, who is black and openly gay, has claimed he was attacked by two masked men early on Jan. 29 as he walked to his Chicago apartment from a Subway restaurant. Smollett alleged the men shouted racial and anti-gay slurs at him.

Last week, Chicago police questioned two Nigerian brothers in the reported attack but released them Friday without charges. Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said the pair had given officers information that had “shifted the trajectory of the investigation.” Local reports have cited sources saying the attack was a hoax, though the Chicago Police Department has not confirmed that.

“While we are not in a position to confirm, deny or comment on the validity of what’s been unofficially released, there are some developments in this investigation and detectives have some follow-ups to complete which include speaking to the individual who reported the incident, ” Guglielmi said Sunday.

Smollett received an outpouring of support from politicians and celebs when he first went public about the alleged attack in January. Smollett has claimed at least one of the attackers said to him, “this is MAGA country,” in reference to President Trump’s campaign slogan.

While some lawmakers are now backtracking, others have stayed mum as the narrative rapidly shifts. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, called out Democrats on Twitter who were outspoken initially about the case, but haven’t said anything since the new developments.

“I’m wondering if @KamalaHarris still wants #JusticeForJussie? Will she be as vocal about it now or has she moved on?” Trump Jr. tweeted.

Last month, Sen. Harris, like Booker, referred to the incident as “an attempted modern day lynching.”

“No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin,” the 2020 presidential candidate said. “We must confront this hate.”

Others, like New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said last month, “There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.”

John Dickerson, the co-anchor of CBS This Morning, responded to Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday and asked, “Is there an update on this?”

Meanwhile, Smollett’s attorneys, Todd S. Pugh and Victor P. Henderson, are vehemently denying that the attack was a hoax.

“As a victim of a hate crime who has cooperated with the police investigation, Jussie Smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that the perpetrators are individuals he is familiar with,” the lawyers said in a weekend statement. “He has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack. Nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying.”

Fox News’ Mike Tobin and Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.


Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

Trump Declares National Emergency to Divert Billions for Wall

Trump declares emergency on border, eyes $8B for wall as he plans to sign spending package

President Trump said Friday he is declaring a national emergency on the southern border, tapping into executive powers in a bid to divert billions toward construction of a wall even as he plans to sign a funding package that includes just $1.4 billion for border security.

“We’re going to confront the national security crisis on our southern border … one way or the other, we have to do it,” Trump said in the Rose Garden.

The move is expected to face a swift and forceful legal challenge that could stall the attempt in the courts for the near future. But the declaration and other money-moving plans allow Trump to continue to fight for border wall construction while also averting another partial government shutdown — which would have been triggered at midnight absent the new funding package.

Trump, in the Rose Garden, declared once again that “walls work” as he confirmed he’ll sign the emergency declaration.

“We’re talking about an invasion of our country,” Trump said.

And in an almost-casual tone, the president predicted a legal fight that will wind up before the Supreme Court.

“We will have a national emergency, and we will then be sued,” Trump said, adding that the federal appeals courts could well rule against his administration. “Then we’ll end up in the Supreme Court, and hopefully we’ll get a fair shake, and we’ll win at the Supreme Court — just like the [travel] ban.”

A senior administration official told Fox News that the White House plans to next move $8 billion in currently appropriated or available funds toward construction of the wall. Of that, $3 billion could be diverted with help from the emergency declaration.

That money includes about $600 million from the Treasury Department’s forfeiture fund. That money has been described as “easy money” that the White House can use however it wants. The White House is also expected to use drug interdiction money from the Department of Defense.

But by declaring an emergency, Trump would also seek to unlock money from the Defense Department’s military construction budget as well, to the tune of $3.5 billion.

Breaking down the national emergency and how it can fund the border wall

Video

Diverting Pentagon funding, however, is expected to set off a legal battle and has already prompted fierce opposition from Democrats in Congress.

“The President’s declaration of a national emergency would be an abuse of his constitutional oath and an affront to the separation of powers. Congress has the exclusive power of the purse, and the Constitution specifically prohibits the President from spending money that has not been appropriated. … This is a gross abuse of power that cannot be tolerated,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in a statement.

This is far from the only declared national emergency. According to the Congressional Research Service, there are at least 30 “national emergencies” in effect, including those concerning blocking Iranian government property, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other terror-related acts. But none of the emergencies have involved the president of the United States spending money that had not been specifically appropriated by Congress

The president’s decision to declare a national emergency comes after a review of the spending package. The compromise package, which was negotiated for weeks in a bipartisan conference committee, passed both the House and the Senate on Thursday. But the deal would provide only a fraction of Trump’s originally proposed figure of $5.7 billion for border security and construction of a wall or physical barrier along the southern border.

The bill also imposed a number of restrictions on the White House, with legislative language preventing the administration from moving funding around to get a barrier or a wall — a factor that may have contributed to the emergency declaration decision.

The package, as it stands, is enough to build just 55 miles of barrier. And notably, the word “wall” does not appear once in the 1,768 pages of legislation and explanatory materials.

The funding battle follows the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. From Dec. 22 through Jan. 25—for 35 days—the White House and congressional Democrats battled over border security funding. Trump requested $5.7 billion for construction of the wall, while Democrats vowed to block any spending proposal that included such funding. The shutdown left more than 800,000 federal employees and contractors furloughed or working without pay. At the end of last month, though, Trump signed a short-term spending package that funded the government through the Friday deadline.

The prior fight left little appetite on either side of the aisle for another shutdown, leading to the passage Thursday of the compromise measure.

Trump, though, has talked for weeks about taking executive action to divert money from other programs for wall construction, without congressional sign-off—despite his criticisms of former President Barack Obama for using executive action.

Fox News’ Alex Pappas and Bret Baier and The Associated Press contributed to this report.Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.


Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

Dershowitz: FBI Plot To Oust Trump ‘Clearly an Attempt at a Coup d’etat’

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s descriptions of Justice Department meetings where he said officials discussed ousting the president.

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on Thursday said the Department of Justice’s discussions to employ the 25th Amendment to oust President Trump– if true– amounted to an attempted coup.

NEW YORK, NY – FEBRUARY 03: Alan Dershowitz attends Hulu Presents “Triumph’s Election Special” produced by Funny Or Die at NEP Studios on February 3, 2016 in New York City. (Photo by John Lamparski/Getty Images for Hulu)

Dershowitz appeared on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” to give his take on former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s descriptions of Justice Department meetings where he said officials discussed ousting the president.

“If [McCabe’s comments are] true, it is clearly an attempt at a coup d’état,” Dershowitz said.

Evoking the 25th Amendment, Dershowitz added, would be a fundamental misuse of its original purpose. He said it was originally “about Woodrow Wilson having a stroke. It’s about a president being shot and not being able to perform his office.”

DOJ held meetings on how to oust President Trump

Video

Dershowitz said any justice official who discussed the 25th Amendment in the context of ousting the president “has committed a grievous offense against the Constitution.”

Dershowitz, who authored the book: “The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump,” further argued that using the 25th Amendment to circumvent the impeachment process or an election, “is a despicable act of unconstitutional power grabbing.”

McCabe, who was fired from the bureau in March 2018 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions after it was determined he lied to investigators about a leak, sent shock waves through Washington on Thursday for comments he made during an appearance on CBS News’ “60 Minutes.”

The excerpts detail the eight days between the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. After Comey’s firing, McCabe was acting director of the FBI.

“These were the eight days from Comey’s firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel,” Scott Pelley, the ’60 Minutes’ host said. “And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president.” He said people involved were “counting noses” and considering who might agree to the idea.

“I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage. And that was something that troubled me greatly,” McCabe said in one excerpt, referring to a phone call he had with Trump on May 10, 2017.


President Trump later fired off a round of tweets, two blasting McCabe and another that quoted Dershowitz’s appearance on Fox News.Bradford Betz is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bradford_betz.


Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

TUCKER CARLSON: Senate Dems Now Admit Trump-Russia Collusion Never Happened

There was no Russian collusion — It was all fake. It’s negligence on a stunning scale

We have news for you, breaking news, that for whatever reason is being downplayed or ignored by other media outlets, but we think you want to know about it. Five simple words describe it, there was no Russian collusion. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Trump campaign conspired in any way with the government of Vladimir Putin during the last presidential election.

That is apparently the conclusion of the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee. That Committee spent two years investigating this question. Of course, hundreds of interviews, reams of classified documents, untold millions in taxpayer dollars. No collusion at all. That is what we are hearing on Tuesday evening that they have found.

Now, if you’ve been following the story at all, and of course you have been, you will not be surprised by this. No Russian collusion is a lot like the moon landing actually happened or the abominable snowman was probably a long-haired mountain goat. You knew that already because you are not an idiot, but if so, compare your mental acuity to that of prominent political figures here in Washington.

The next time you feel dumb, remember what these Democrats said:

ADAM SCHIFF: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, CALIFORNIA: I think there is plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight.

MAXINE WATERS, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, CALIFORNIA, DEMOCRAT:  Trump has the Kremlin clan surrounding him. There is more to be learned about it. I believe there has been collusion.

JOHN PODESTA, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: It is starting to smell more and more like collusion.

NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:  We saw cold, hard evidence of the Trump campaign and, indeed, the Trump family eagerly intending to collude, possibly with Russia.

“Smells like collusion.”…”Plenty of evidence of collusion.” “Hard evidence of collusion.”

In the end, it was all fake. And they knew that, they knew it wasn’t real.  They were lying from the very first day.  Only their remarkable aggression, their willingness to say literally anything no matter how outrageous or slanderous or vile, kept the rest of us from catching on to what they were doing.

If the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is willing to call someone a traitor to this country, there’s gotta be some truth to it, right?

Actually, no, there wasn’t. It was always a hoax.

Adam Schiff is an unscrupulous charlatan — that is the real lesson here.  Don’t expect people like Schiff to apologize though or correct the record, much less repair the lives of the people they have destroyed.

Carter Page still can’t find a job. Roger Stone is still facing life in prison.  Meanwhile, Schiff’s PR team on the other channel continues like none of this ever happened.

Here is Malcolm Nance of MSNBC explaining the results of a two-year Senate investigation mean nothing. People are guilty because we say they are guilty, we must punish them.

“Let me just say one thing. When Benedict Arnold gave the plans to West Point to Major Andre and they captured Major Andre, they do not have any real information linking those plans to Benedict Arnold, other than the fact that it was in his presence at one point during that day.  But everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him.  So at some point, there is going to be a bridge of data here that is going to be unassailable.”

“No one had any evidence, but everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man and they hung him.”

That says it all. Let’s repeat that, once again, slowly so you can write down those words and put them on your fridge as a memento of the terrifying mass hysteria we have all just lived through: “Everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him.”

That is our country now. That is what the Russia insanity has done to us, the real government shutdown has lasted for nearly two and a half years. That’s one percent of this country’s entire existence.  We no longer have meaningful policy dates in Washington, we have investigations, instead. Nobody can think clearly, everybody is afraid.

Tucker Carlson Tonight – Tuesday, February 12

The country’s core problems don’t even rate as interesting anymore, either to legislators or to TV pundits who comment on legislators. The suicide rate just hit a 50-year high, did you know that?  We are in the middle of the worst drug epidemic in the history of America, including the one after the Civil War and the heroin epidemic of the ’70s and the crack epidemic of the ’80s, this is way worse, and it’s one of the reasons the life expectancy, in many parts of the country, is dropping.

This is starting to look like Boris Yeltsin’s Russia, and yet nobody in Washington even notices. All Adam Schiff and the rest of the wild-eyed morons can think about is “Vladimir Putin,” “collusion,” “our hacked democracy” and all the other mindless slogans they have repeated long enough to half believe.

We’ve spent two years perpetuating a fraud, and they are still doing it. What is this? It is negligence on a stunning scale. It has nothing to do with Trump, it has everything to do with running this country, and they are not.

Historians will look back on this moment in amazement and in sadness — who put these crock-pots in charge and let them break things? Why didn’t any responsible person in the media say anything about it? Why did they collude in the charade? What the hell happened to America?

History will judge us for this moment. Adam Schiff’s grandkids will be ashamed of what he did.

Adapted from Tucker Carlson’s monologue on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on February 12, 2019.Tucker Carlson currently serves as the host of FOX News Channel’s (FNC) Tucker Carlson Tonight (weekdays 8PM/ET). He joined the network in 2009 as a contributor.


Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

U.S. Attorney Huber Moving to Indict Clintons and Others

U.S. Attorney for the state of Utah John Huber was appointed by Attorney General Jeff Sessions over a year ago to investigate accusations of abuse of power and corruption at the highest levels of the State Department, FBI and Justice Department.

A.G. Sessions mistakenly recused himself from any investigations surrounding accusations of collusion between the Russian government and its operatives, and members of the Donald Trump for President election campaign. He was then duped into appointing Robert Meuller as Special Prosecutor to investigate such allegations. Meuller immediately appointed dozens of Democratic Party operatives to the investigation, resulting in no evidence of collusion from the Trump camp, but a great deal of evidence of collusion between Hillary Clinton’s team and Russian operatives.

U.S. Attorney Huber was appointed by sessions not under any special counsel statute, but within the normal operational standards of the Department of Justice, and tasked with investigating all those that Meuller seemed reluctant to investigate—including Meuller himself. Huber was also selected because Sessions assumed that a Grand Jury selected from among the citizens of Utah would be willing to provide an unbiased response to evidence of wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton and those in the upper echelons of Washington, D.C. bureaus and law enforcement agencies.

U.S. Attorney for the state of Utah John Huber

Although Huber’s work has remained shrouded in mystery, without leaks, we have obtained information from an inside source that Huber has been presenting evidence of felonious activities to the Grand Jury against several high level government actors, and will soon be bringing indictments against Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director James Comey, Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, CIA Director John Brennan, Associate Deputy Director Bruce Ohr, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Christopher Steele, and several other principals of Uranium One, The Clinton Foundation and Fusion GPS.

According to our source, the sealed indictments will be made public within the next 4 months.

PUBLIUS



Tired of Facebook? Check out Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

Watch this 30 sec. video about PlanetUS:

Conservative-friendly social media. Join FREE today: PlanetUS

TRUMP: America Will Never Be a Socialist Country

“America Will Never Be A Socialist Country”; “We Were Born Free And We Will Stay Free”

President Trump said the United States will never become a socialist country in his 2019 State of the Union address.

“We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom — and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair,” Trump said Tuesday night.

“Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country,” the president said. “America was founded on liberty and independence – not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free.”

[RELATED: CNN Instant Poll: 76% Of Viewers Approved Of Trump State Of The Union]

“Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country,” Trump declared.

[RELATED: CBS News Instant Poll: 72% Approve Of Trump’s Immigration Ideas]

The Expansion of Socialism

One hundred years ago most people of the world were laborers. Hard working people naturally looked for ways to rise above their humble circumstances, and in America that meant innovating and giving extra effort. Not all nations afforded their working classes the opportunities preserved to Americans by the U.S. Constitution.

Revolutions

In 1776 Americans declared their independence from the tyranny of the British Crown. In 1917 the Russian peasants and working classes revolted against the government of Tsar Nicholas II, led by Vladimir Lenin and a group of revolutionaries called the Bolsheviks. In the 1920s the Chinese Red Army led the revolution and marched across China killing anyone who had an education or who owned more than 1 acre of land. NAZIs came to power in Germany and marched across Europe.

The Difference

Americans enjoyed the liberties guarantied by their Constitution, and they were free to apply themselves, and work harder or smarter than their competition, and earn more than their parents had ever dreamed. The free-trade economy catapulted America from a backwater British colony to a world power in mere decades. Russia and China invoked socialism, which is government control of production and distribution. This form of government promises “fairness” among all of its citizens, asserting that none will rise above others (presumably at the expense of others). Socialism comes in various forms: Democratic Socialism, Communism and Fascism (where socialist government officials control the economy through corporations).

Socialism Has Murdered 100 Million

Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Kim Jong-un, Kim Jong-il have ordered the extermination of millions of their citizens, totaling around 100,000,000 in the 20th Century. Why? Because socialism is about power and control. It is anti-liberty. When power to redistribute wealth is given to government, it must exercise that power to force its citizens to live under its edicts. Because socialism guaranties equal receipt of goods and services, regardless of effort or risk, socialist economies always stall from lack of innovation. They wither and die—without exception.

Socialism Today

Venezuela is the latest victim of socialism. What was an oil-wealthy growing economy just 10 years ago has become another victim on the ash heap of socialism. To quote a Venezuelan woman featured on a CNN report the other day, “This socialist utopia has left nearly all stomachs hungry.” Indeed, in a nation rich in oil those who can scrape together a box of rapidly devaluing currency must wait in gasoline lines from 3 days and nights to fill their tanks. This is the natural course of socialism.

Before Venezuela it was Cuba, and the USSR, and Communist China. Each of these nations enslaved their working people and plunged them into poverty, while elites who ran the government lived lavishly. It was only as each country began to allow capitalism to take root and expand that the economies grew and the people began to thrive.

Socialist economies produce shortages of every consumer item, including food. Bread lines like this are common daily experiences in socialist nations.

What About Democratic Socialism in Scandinavia and Europe?

We have heard American socialists point to socialism “successes” in Europe as they espouse such economic schemes for the U.S. They tell us that countries like Denmark and Sweden enjoy a high standard of living while guaranteeing equality among their citizens. To a lesser extent, other European nations have moved sharply left toward socialism.

Here is the reality. Scandinavian countries are small, with homogenous populations. Because they are defended by America’s military, they spend very little on defense, and divert that money to social welfare programs. They are in “voluntary agreement” socially that none will rise above the rest, and agree to high tax rates to support this philosophy. Unfortunately, the era of being defended by America is abruptly ending, and President Trump is demanding that Europe increase defense spending (rendering him quite unpopular in Europe). Also, millions of Muslims have moved into Europe and overwhelmed the social welfare systems, crashing them and draining their semi-capitalistic economies.

Democratic-socialism only survives when it is it supported by the economic engine of capitalism. As UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher observed, however, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Indeed, when democratic socialism has drained the resources of the capitalist engine, it leaves its people waiting in long lines for scarce food and other resources—many of which will not arrive in time.

Why Do Democrats Love Socialism?

Socialism is about power and control. It is a bait-and-switch fraud scheme. It promises “fairness.” It promises forced equality. It promises something for nothing. The reality of socialism is that it transfers the wealth and power of The People to the government, with the promise of “We will now provide for all of your needs.” The people are lured into giving up their property and personal choices under this scheme. They surrender their healthcare system to this form of government, with such false promises as “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” President’s weekly address, June 6, 2009: “If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. If you like the doctor you have, you can keep your doctor, too. The only change you’ll see are falling costs as our reforms take hold.” As always happens, this is a lie told by the socialist government to trick the citizens into surrendering their wealth and power. This is followed by higher taxes, higher national debt, and a proliferation of government regulation.

Socialism Devalues God and Human Life

We note that anywhere that socialism has been imposed, human life and family relationships are diminished tremendously, as is the worship of our Creator. The surrender of power to the government necessitates that nothing else compete with the state’s supremacy. An iron fist rules a socialist society, and anything that threatens the state’s authority is eliminated. Because individualism is nurtured by the family social structure and a belief in divine parentage, socialism breaks down the family structure wherever possible and eliminates God from public and private life. In socialist nations like China and the USSR, we saw atheism replace faith, and the government deciding who you could marry and how many children you could have. Human life is devalued as the state replaces deity, and concepts like abortion and Eugenics supplant love of fellow humans.

All of this is dependent on government’s ability to control every aspect of our lives, of course, so socialism controls the flow of information eliminates the ability of the citizens to protect themselves from the government through the confiscation of firearms.

Does Any of This Sound Familiar?

Of course, since the Bolshevik Revolution socialists have seen America’s individual liberty and economic success as the greatest threat to the myth of socialism, and therefore, the transfer of all wealth and power to a small group of elites. This is why socialists have focused on penetrating the American media and educational systems over the past 100 years, completely overtaking them in the past two decades. Now, our children are bombarded daily in classrooms with a steady diet of socialism, as are we with every news and entertainment program on television.

An entire political party has been overtaken by socialists, and they have become so embedded that they are now emboldened to the point of speaking openly about their socialist platform. They promise “equality” and “fairness,” asserting that someone else will pay for the benefits they are promising. Of course, even the mathematically-challenged Democrats know in their heart-of-hearts that nothing they promise is true. It is all smoke and mirrors. It is all a lie, as it has always been. There is no universal healthcare, and there is no guarantied salary or college education. Even if money grew on trees, there aren’t enough leaves on trees in America to pay for the promises being made by Democrats. They add up to hundreds of trillions of dollars. Plus, as they were imposed, our economy would crash and there would be no money for even the basics—and we would soon be just like every other people that ever embraced socialism: impoverished and enslaved.

The American Democrat Party has been taken over by far left socialists, who employ socialist propaganda techniques developed in previous national takeovers. Indeed, Democratic Party leaders like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid have made tens of millions of dollars while in office, while their constituents fall deeper into poverty.

Socialism is a Ponzi Scheme

Socialism is a farce. It is a fraud. It is the political equivalent of Big Foot. Every policy of the left is packaged to appear to give something to someone to make his life more “fair,” but in reality, it is nothing more than a scheme to transfer more power or wealth from the citizens to the ruling class. Every issue in politics and society fits within this rubric. Gun control has nothing to do with saving lives. Indeed, the places where gun control is strongest, where Democrats reign, gun violence is exponentially worse. Welfare spending does not eliminate poverty. Abortion does not improve women’s health. Taxation and regulation do not enrich the poor. Government healthcare does not increase health levels. It is all a fraud. A hoax. It is directly out of the playbook of socialism—promise what the people like to hear, in exchange for their wealth and power. Once you have taken their wealth and power, rule over them with an iron fist. This is the sum total of socialism.

Americans enjoy the highest degree of individual liberty and wealth in human history. It can’t be taken from us by force. Only fraud and deceit can convince us to surrender our superior way of life in exchange for the enslavement and poverty of socialism. The siren’s song sounds sweet, and promises such lovely things—but it is a lie, and our very existence is in jeopardy because of the encroachment of socialism in our nation. We must reject it and root it out. It is cancer. It is deadly. We must attack it with the force it deserves.

By James Thompson. James is a political commentator and professional ghostwriter.


PlanetUS is conservative-friendly social media. Get set up on PlanetUS before Facebook deletes you.

Tired of Facebook stealing your information and selling it? Tired of the bias and propaganda? Set up your free account today at PlanetUS.com

Walls Work

Democrats know it, but they want President Trump to fail.

Of all the Democrats’ arguments against a southern border wall, the shadiest is that it would not work.

According to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), President Donald J. Trump is “forcing American taxpayers to waste billions of dollars on an expensive and ineffective wall.” As he joined Pelosi in rebutting the president’s January 8 Oval Office address, Senate Democrat leader Chuck Schumer of New York decried Trump’s “ineffective, unnecessary border wall.” Schumer added: “We can secure our border without an expensive, ineffective wall.”

In fact, walls work. Love them or hate them, their effectiveness is indisputable.

• “Part of our area is covered with some fencing on our east side. That accounts for about 6 percent of our traffic,” Border Patrol chief Raul Ortiz told journalists during President Trump’s January 10 visit to Rio Grande Valley, Texas. “Where we have no fencing, over 90 percent of our traffic occurs in those areas.” A day earlier, Ortiz added, 450 people were apprehended in the unfenced sector, including 133 from such non-Latin nations as India, Pakistan, and Romania.

• Some 560,000 illegals were caught astride San Diego and Tijuana in Fiscal Year 1992, when a border wall was installed there. By FY 2017, the Border Patrol says it snared 26,086 — down 95.3 percent.

• A barrier between the Tucson, Ariz., sector and Nogales, Mexico, was erected in 2000. That year’s 616,346 arrests plunged to 38,657 in FY 2017 — down 93.7 percent.

• A fence installed at the border between Yuma, Arizona, and Los Algondones, Mexico brought apprehensions from 138,438 in FY 2005 to 12,847 in FY 2017 — down 90.7 percent.

“Crime has significantly decreased in the Yuma area,” then–acting homeland security secretary Elaine Duke wrote in USA Today in August 2017, “and smugglers now look for other less difficult areas of the border to cross — often areas without fencing.”

• A 150-mile barrier between Israel and southern Egypt cut the number of illegal-alien entrants from 17,000 in 2011 to 43 in 2013, after the fence’s completion, Israel’s Ministry of the Interior states — down 99.7 percent.

This wall “has stopped all illegal immigration,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasts. But Esteban Flores of Harvard International Review argues that “other measures enacted by the Israeli government have also been of immense importance.” He explains: “Israel has passed two laws targeting immigrants — one prohibiting immigrants from transferring money out of the country and another forcing employers to deposit 20 percent of an immigrant employee’s salary into a bank account which can only be withdrawn upon exit of the country.”

Flores unwittingly reinforces President Trump’s argument that a wall is necessary, though not sufficient, to boost border security and hinder illegal immigration. Other protections include sensors, more Border Patrol agents, extra detention space, additional immigration judges, E-Verify (to confirm employees’ legal status), and harsher penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens.

• Bulgaria erected a barrier on its Turkish perimeter in 2013. That year’s 11,000 illegal crossings dropped to 4,000 in 2014 — down 63.6 percent.

• Just as British Gibraltar dangles from Spain’s underside, Spanish Ceuta and Melilla surf atop Morocco. Multiple fences and barriers there sliced 2014’s 2,100 arrests at the Spanish-territorial/Moroccan frontier to 2015’s 100 — down 95.2 percent.

The strongest proof that walls work is that Democrats once loved them.

Former and current senators Joe Biden, Tom Carper, Hillary Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Debbie Stabenow, and Ron Wyden were among the 26 Democrats who voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006. It authorized 700 miles of double fence. All 54 Senate Democrats voted unanimously in June 2013 for $46 billion in border security, including 350 miles of new steel fence.

“Between 2005 and 2015, polls show that nearly half of Democrats continued to support building a border barrier of some kind,” Cato Institute scholar Emily Ekins wrote in The Federalist. “However, things changed in 2015 when Donald Trump announced his bid for the presidency,” she continued. “Democratic support shifted more swiftly starting in the fall of 2015 onward. Now only about 12 percent of Democrats support a border wall or fence.”

Meanwhile, Republicans consistently have endorsed a wall, Ekins reported: 73 percent in October 2015; 71 percent today.

Courtesy of the Cato Institute

So, Trump Derangement Syndrome actually causes Democrats’ borderphobia.

Indeed, and amazingly, Ekins elaborated, “Reuter/Ipsos found that simply telling Democrats Trump supports a policy turns them against it — even universal health care.” Normally, regarding health care, 68 percent of Democrats think “government should take care of everybody, and the government should pay for it.” However, when told that Trump believes this, Ekins wrote, “only 47 percent supported government guaranteed health care — a 21-point drop.” She concluded: “Thus, even on an issue as central to the Democratic policy agenda as government-guaranteed universal health subsidies, Trump can turn Democrats against it. So, certainly he can turn them against a border wall, too.” 17

Walls work, and Democrats know it. But they want this president to fail. So, Democrats battle effective border protection so they can “resist Trump” — national security be damned. The Democratic party truly is America’s arsenal of hypocrisy.

Michael Malarkey furnished research for this opinion piece.

Deroy Murdock — Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor of National Review Online.


Tired of Facebook shadow banning and deleting conservative viewpoints? It’s only a matter of time before they delete your account.

JOIN conservative-friendly PlanetUS.

The Problem With Socialism

One hundred years ago most people of the world were laborers. Hard working people naturally looked for ways to rise above their humble circumstances, and in America that meant innovating and giving extra effort. Not all nations afforded their working classes the opportunities preserved to Americans by the U.S. Constitution.

Revolutions

In 1776 Americans declared their independence from the tyranny of the British Crown. In 1917 the Russian peasants and working classes revolted against the government of Tsar Nicholas II, led by Vladimir Lenin and a group of revolutionaries called the Bolsheviks. In the 1920s the Chinese Red Army led the revolution and marched across China killing anyone who had an education or who owned more than 1 acre of land. NAZIs came to power in Germany and marched across Europe.

The Difference

Americans enjoyed the liberties guarantied by their Constitution, and they were free to apply themselves, and work harder or smarter than their competition, and earn more than their parents had ever dreamed. The free-trade economy catapulted America from a backwater British colony to a world power in mere decades. Russia and China invoked socialism, which is government control of production and distribution. This form of government promises “fairness” among all of its citizens, asserting that none will rise above others (presumably at the expense of others). Socialism comes in various forms: Democratic Socialism, Communism and Fascism (where socialist government officials control the economy through corporations).

Socialism Has Murdered 100 Million

Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Kim Jong-un, Kim Jong-il have ordered the extermination of millions of their citizens, totaling around 100,000,000 in the 20th Century. Why? Because socialism is about power and control. It is anti-liberty. When power to redistribute wealth is given to government, it must exercise that power to force its citizens to live under its edicts. Because socialism guaranties equal receipt of goods and services, regardless of effort or risk, socialist economies always stall from lack of innovation. They wither and die—without exception.

Socialism Today

Venezuela is the latest victim of socialism. What was an oil-wealthy growing economy just 10 years ago has become another victim on the ash heap of socialism. To quote a Venezuelan woman featured on a CNN report the other day, “This socialist utopia has left nearly all stomachs hungry.” Indeed, in a nation rich in oil those who can scrape together a box of rapidly devaluing currency must wait in gasoline lines from 3 days and nights to fill their tanks. This is the natural course of socialism.

Before Venezuela it was Cuba, and the USSR, and Communist China. Each of these nations enslaved their working people and plunged them into poverty, while elites who ran the government lived lavishly. It was only as each country began to allow capitalism to take root and expand that the economies grew and the people began to thrive.

Socialist economies produce shortages of every consumer item, including food. Bread lines like this are common daily experiences in socialist nations.

What About Democratic Socialism in Scandinavia and Europe?

We have heard American socialists point to socialism “successes” in Europe as they espouse such economic schemes for the U.S. They tell us that countries like Denmark and Sweden enjoy a high standard of living while guaranteeing equality among their citizens. To a lesser extent, other European nations have moved sharply left toward socialism.

Here is the reality. Scandinavian countries are small, with homogenous populations. Because they are defended by America’s military, they spend very little on defense, and divert that money to social welfare programs. They are in “voluntary agreement” socially that none will rise above the rest, and agree to high tax rates to support this philosophy. Unfortunately, the era of being defended by America is abruptly ending, and President Trump is demanding that Europe increase defense spending (rendering him quite unpopular in Europe). Also, millions of Muslims have moved into Europe and overwhelmed the social welfare systems, crashing them and draining their semi-capitalistic economies.

Democratic-socialism only survives when it is it supported by the economic engine of capitalism. As UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher observed, however, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Indeed, when democratic socialism has drained the resources of the capitalist engine, it leaves its people waiting in long lines for scarce food and other resources—many of which will not arrive in time.

Why Do Democrats Love Socialism?

Socialism is about power and control. It is a bait-and-switch fraud scheme. It promises “fairness.” It promises forced equality. It promises something for nothing. The reality of socialism is that it transfers the wealth and power of The People to the government, with the promise of “We will now provide for all of your needs.” The people are lured into giving up their property and personal choices under this scheme. They surrender their healthcare system to this form of government, with such false promises as “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” President’s weekly address, June 6, 2009: “If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. If you like the doctor you have, you can keep your doctor, too. The only change you’ll see are falling costs as our reforms take hold.” As always happens, this is a lie told by the socialist government to trick the citizens into surrendering their wealth and power. This is followed by higher taxes, higher national debt, and a proliferation of government regulation.

Socialism Devalues God and Human Life

We note that anywhere that socialism has been imposed, human life and family relationships are diminished tremendously, as is the worship of our Creator. The surrender of power to the government necessitates that nothing else compete with the state’s supremacy. An iron fist rules a socialist society, and anything that threatens the state’s authority is eliminated. Because individualism is nurtured by the family social structure and a belief in divine parentage, socialism breaks down the family structure wherever possible and eliminates God from public and private life. In socialist nations like China and the USSR, we saw atheism replace faith, and the government deciding who you could marry and how many children you could have. Human life is devalued as the state replaces deity, and concepts like abortion and Eugenics supplant love of fellow humans.

All of this is dependent on government’s ability to control every aspect of our lives, of course, so socialism controls the flow of information eliminates the ability of the citizens to protect themselves from the government through the confiscation of firearms.

Does Any of This Sound Familiar?

Of course, since the Bolshevik Revolution socialists have seen America’s individual liberty and economic success as the greatest threat to the myth of socialism, and therefore, the transfer of all wealth and power to a small group of elites. This is why socialists have focused on penetrating the American media and educational systems over the past 100 years, completely overtaking them in the past two decades. Now, our children are bombarded daily in classrooms with a steady diet of socialism, as are we with every news and entertainment program on television.

An entire political party has been overtaken by socialists, and they have become so embedded that they are now emboldened to the point of speaking openly about their socialist platform. They promise “equality” and “fairness,” asserting that someone else will pay for the benefits they are promising. Of course, even the mathematically-challenged Democrats know in their heart-of-hearts that nothing they promise is true. It is all smoke and mirrors. It is all a lie, as it has always been. There is no universal healthcare, and there is no guarantied salary or college education. Even if money grew on trees, there aren’t enough leaves on trees in America to pay for the promises being made by Democrats. They add up to hundreds of trillions of dollars. Plus, as they were imposed, our economy would crash and there would be no money for even the basics—and we would soon be just like every other people that ever embraced socialism: impoverished and enslaved.

The American Democrat Party has been taken over by far left socialists, who employ socialist propaganda techniques developed in previous national takeovers. Indeed, Democratic Party leaders like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid have made tens of millions of dollars while in office, while their constituents fall deeper into poverty.

Socialism is a Ponzi Scheme

Socialism is a farce. It is a fraud. It is the political equivalent of Big Foot. Every policy of the left is packaged to appear to give something to someone to make his life more “fair,” but in reality, it is nothing more than a scheme to transfer more power or wealth from the citizens to the ruling class. Every issue in politics and society fits within this rubric. Gun control has nothing to do with saving lives. Indeed, the places where gun control is strongest, where Democrats reign, gun violence is exponentially worse. Welfare spending does not eliminate poverty. Abortion does not improve women’s health. Taxation and regulation do not enrich the poor. Government healthcare does not increase health levels. It is all a fraud. A hoax. It is directly out of the playbook of socialism—promise what the people like to hear, in exchange for their wealth and power. Once you have taken their wealth and power, rule over them with an iron fist. This is the sum total of socialism.

Americans enjoy the highest degree of individual liberty and wealth in human history. It can’t be taken from us by force. Only fraud and deceit can convince us to surrender our superior way of life in exchange for the enslavement and poverty of socialism. The siren’s song sounds sweet, and promises such lovely things—but it is a lie, and our very existence is in jeopardy because of the encroachment of socialism in our nation. We must reject it and root it out. It is cancer. It is deadly. We must attack it with the force it deserves.

By James Thompson. James is a political commentator and professional ghostwriter.

PlanetUS is conservative-friendly social media. Get set up on PlanetUS before Facebook deletes you.

Tired of Facebook stealing your information and selling it? Tired of the bias and propaganda? Set up your free account today at PlanetUS.com

Texas Finds 95,000 Non-citizens on Voter Rolls; 58,000 Have Voted

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Friday that the state has discovered 95,000 non-citizens on the voter rolls going back to 1996, 58,000 of whom have voted in at least one Texas election  — an announcement likely to raise fresh concerns about the prospect of voter fraud.

Texas has some of the toughest voter ID laws in the nation and has been one of the main battlegrounds in the Republican-led fight against alleged voter fraud. The office, in a statement, said that 33 people were prosecuted for voter fraud last year, and 97 were prosecuted between 2005-17. There are 16 million people in Texas registered to vote.

“Every single instance of illegal voting threatens democracy in our state and deprives individual Texans of their voice,” Paxton said in a statement.

The New York Times reported that the findings were a result of of an 11-month investigation into records at the Texas Department of Public Safety. Gov. Greg Abbott praised the findings and hinted at future legislation to crack down on voter fraud.

“I support prosecution where appropriate. The State will work on legislation to safeguard against these illegal practices,” Abbott tweeted.

The revelation is likely to have national consequences and stir debate and the role of voter fraud. President Trump created a commission in 2017 to investigate allegations of voter fraud in the 2016 election. But it was eventually dismantled by Trump after the group faced lawsuits, opposition from states and in-fighting among its members.

Trump said at the time that Democrats refused to hand over data “because they know that many people are voting illegally.” Democrats have dismissed claims of voter fraud and accused Republicans of trying to disenfranchise minority voters with tight voter ID laws.

NC fraud probe could prompt new primary, general elections

Dallas state Rep. Rafael Anchia told The Associated Press that “because we have consistently seen Texas politicians conjure the specter of voter fraud as pretext to suppress legitimate votes, we are naturally skeptical.”

Paxton’s office noted that there have been a number of convictions of voter fraud in the state in recent years, including a charge against a non-citizen this month for illegal voting in Navarro County.

Fox News’ Kaitlyn Schallhorn and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

PlanetUS is conservative-friendly social media. Get set up on PlanetUS before Facebook deletes you.

Tired of Facebook stealing your information and selling it? Tired of the bias and propaganda? Set up your free account today at PlanetUS.com

Supreme Court Upholds Pentagon Limit On Transgender Military Service

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Pentagon to restrict military service for transgender individuals while the Trump administration’s policy is litigated in the lower courts.

The ruling reversed the orders implemented by lower courts, which had prevented the Pentagon from proceeding with the plan.

The decision came after the Justice Department requested that the Supreme Court bypass the lower courts and decide the issue—a request the high court rejected on Tuesday, instead directing the case to work its way through the appeals and lower courts.

The Department of Defense had barred military service by transgender people until former President Barack Obama’s administration began to allow transgender people already in the military to serve openly. The Obama administration also moved to set an official date for transgender people to be able to enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.

But early in his presidency, President Trump sought to restrict service to those who do not seek to undergo gender transitions — after initially announcing a ban.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals court sided with the Trump administration, ruling that it was wrong to block the Pentagon from implementing plans to block the service of transgender individuals. The appeals court ruling said the military’s plan appears to rely on the “considered professional judgment” of “appropriate military officials.” It noted that the plan “appears to permit some transgender individuals to serve in the military.”

Brooke Singman

By Brooke Singman, Bill Mears | Fox News

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Conservative friendly social media. PlanetUS.com

Ginsburg’s Imminent Departure from Supreme Court

This week marked the first time Ruth Bader Ginsburg has missed oral arguments since the associate justice joined the Supreme Court in 1993.

The 85-year-old, who is recovering from recent cancer surgery, has repeatedly said in the past that she would retire from the nation’s highest court only when she can no longer “do the job full steam.”

The court’s public sessions are set to resume Monday. No date has been set yet for when Ginsburg will return to the bench, a court spokesperson said.

Ginsburg underwent lung surgery last month to remove cancerous growths, and is continuing to recover. After weeks out of public view, she was spotted Wednesday morning leaving her Washington, D.C., apartment, TMZ reported.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has cancerous growths removed from lung

But Ginsburg’s recent absence has stirred speculation on whether she was considering retiring, given her previous comments on the topic.

The justice, dubbed “the Notorious RBG” by supporters, has said at least since 2013 that she would continue to serve on the court as long as she can, as pointed out by the Washington Examiner. Supreme Court appointments are for life, though many justices over the years have chosen to retire at some point.

“As long as I can do the job full steam, and that, at my age, is not predictable,” Ginsburg told the New York Times in 2013.

Three years later she told NPR that she would “retire when it’s time. And when is it time? When I can’t do the job full steam.”

“I will retire when it’s time. And when is it time? When I can’t do the job full steam.”— Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

As recently as last year she repeated that she would remain on the court as long as she can be fully engaged.

“As long as I can do the job full steam, I will be here,” she said during an event at the Adas Israel Congregation in Washington.

“I said I will do this job as long as I can do it full steam,” she said last month at the premiere of a movie about her early career.

But Ginsburg’s absence from the court and participation from home is also not unprecedented. The late Chief Justice William Rehnquist also worked from home and even authored several opinions while undergoing cancer treatment from 2004-05.

Ginsburg also has already hired clerks for the term that extends into 2020, suggesting possible retirement isn’t being planned.

By Lukas Mikelionis |The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Conservative-friendly social media. Because Facebook will delete you one day soon. Get you FREE account at PlanetUS.com

Facebook’s Zuckerberg Blasted for ‘Out of Touch’ Year-end Post after Scandal-plagued 2018

After a year plagued by privacy scandals, hate speech controversies, the viral spread of disinformation and the public airing of his company’s internal communication, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg used his year-end note to focus on the positive ー drawing the scorn of critics who blasted the billionaire as “tone deaf” and “out of touch.”

As he looked back on a year that saw his company’s stock price drop and scores of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle calling for new, strict privacy regulations in the wake of Cambridge Analytica, Zuckerberg spent a chunk of his note boasting that 2 billion people now use one of Facebook’s services and the tech giant has empowered countless small businesses.

“I’m proud of the progress we’ve made,” he wrote in the letter, which notes that Facebook now employs 30,000 people who focus on safety, but does not dwell on the specifics of any particular challenge or scandal.

Zuckerberg wrote that Facebook is a “very different company” than it was two years ago and has “fundamentally altered [its] DNA” to prioritize the prevention of harm. He also wrote that he learned a lot in the last year, but a range of critics took issue with the tone of his note.

“When read as a whole, the post simply confirms one thing about Facebook. No change has affected (or is designed to affect) the leading cause of Facebook’s problems ー the business model,” wrote Paul Armstrong, a tech adviser, in Forbes. “Without this, Facebook is doomed to become irrelevant to other platforms or become extremely dangerous and be broken up.”

Armstrong’s advice to Facebook for 2019 includes banning all political advertising, “atomic bombing” Facebook’s algorithm-driven Newsfeed and verifying all “news sources” on the network.

Mark Zuckerberg “is a bit out of touch with people’s perception,” Mark Douglas, CEO of digital advertising platform SteelHouse, told Cheddar. “It’s going to be a rocky year, that’s clear.”

Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc. attends the Viva Tech start-up and technology gathering at Parc des Expositions Porte de Versailles on May 24, 2018 in Paris.

Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc. attends the Viva Tech start-up and technology gathering at Parc des Expositions Porte de Versailles on May 24, 2018 in Paris. (Getty Images)

“They are the least trusted company in tech. They are going to have to rebuild the trust with the users or they are going to lose those users,” Douglas explained.

Although Facebook has continued to see its monthly active users increase globally, the company is confronting flat growth in parts of North America and decreased growth in Europe. Besides that fact that it was harnessed by Russia to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, Facebook confronted a series of false rumors on WhatsApp, which it also owns, that led to more than 20 people being lynched in India.

Cesar Sayoc, who stands accused of sending 13 pipe bombs through the mail to a range of prominent Democrats and critics of President Trump, trafficked in conspiracy theories, white supremacy and anti-Semitism on his Facebook profile. And the Menlo Park, Calif. company stands accused of furthering “ethnic cleansing” in Myanmar, where the military has targeted the country’s mostly Muslim Rohingya minority group with severe violence.

A number of critics called on Zuckerberg to step down or take a break from leading the company.

Leslie Miley, former CTO of the Obama Foundation, said the 34-year-old Silicon Valley executive should “resign and find a pursuit that will teach him humility and help him find his moral compass.”

The executive director of Color of Change, a racial advocacy group that has tangled with Facebook over its treatment of minorities, told the Guardian that Zuckerberg “desperately needs to begin implementing systemic solutions, in a way that is transparent, rebuilds the public trust and provides a safer platform for all people.”

The head of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit digital rights organization, told the Guardian that Zuckerberg should find a new job in 2019, while TechCrunch called the CEO’s letter “tone deaf.”

Some other critics were not as harsh.

“It means personally committing to a Facebook that doesn’t accidentally make decisions that aid violent regimes, white supremacists and other bad actors,” Dia Kayyali, program manager at Witness, told the Guardian. “Above all, it means simply being honest about Facebook’s largely detrimental role in global society. That would be the biggest challenge of all”

Facebook has managed to make enemies on both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill, with Democrats calling for more regulation and some Republicans claiming the network is biased against them, and it faces FTC and FBI probes.

“2019 is not starting out better, that’s for sure,” Douglas said.

Christopher Carbone covers technology and science for Fox News Digital. Tips or story leads: christopher.carbone@foxnews.com. Follow @christocarbone.

Tired of Facebook stealing your information and selling it? Tired of the bias and propaganda? Set up your free account today at PlanetUS.com

Why Dems Fight Against a Border WALL

A nation without borders is not a country—it is an open territory. If a nation fails to delineate its sovereign boundaries, and enforce its borders, it becomes impossible for that nation to care for its citizens or defend them from outside aggression.

So why are democrats dead set against establishing a solid border in the form of an impenetrable WALL?

First and foremost, most democrats benefit from an influx of illegal migrants who are uneducated and unskilled. These people are dependent on the welfare state—the power base of the Democratic Party. Democrats thrive on the existence of a permanent underclass, and count on the votes of all those who depend on government handouts. Indeed, those who receive government benefits in one form or another vote almost exclusively democrat.

But don’t democrats say they support border security? No. They say they prefer secondary support systems—electronic surveillance, drones, monitors, etc.

Aren’t these forms of border monitoring just as effective as a WALL? No!

Here’s why. Think about our current immigration system. It is a mess, and as soon as an illegal crosses the border, he or she is taken into custody, and in many cases is eventually released into the country after promising to show up in court to determine the proper immigration status. Almost no one shows up to the hearing. They are lost into the crowd of millions of illegal aliens living in our country.

A WALL stops that process. With a WALL at the border, no one and nothing gets through. Illegals don’t get through. Victims of human trafficking don’t get through. Drugs don’t get through. Terrorists don’t get through.

That is exactly why democrats are fighting the WALL so vehemently. They know that only a WALL will stop those foreign invaders who weaken America and render it easy for political takeover. That is their endgame—so it benefits them. If democrats were truly representing the American people, as is the president, there would be no question—the border WALL would be built and illegal crossings would end.

By James Thompson. James is a political commentator and professional ghostwriter.

Next Step for Gov’t Shutdown – Permanent Pink Slips

Temporary government “shutdown” amounts to a slowdown for a few days.

Most educated people understand that a government “shutdown” amounts to nothing more than a paid vacation for a small percentage of ‘nonessential’ federal employees. After the dust has settled – usually within mere days of the fracas – everyone goes back into the office, and the only ones who suffer any inconvenience at all are a few tourists attempting to get into federal parks. Of course, like most pointless government activities, these partial, temporary shutdowns are expensive.

Here’s a question: If no one really notices the problem of a government shutdown, why is everyone so excited to get the government up and running again?

Followup question: Why does our government employ nonessential people?

At a time when the president, duly elected by the people, would like to weed out Obama-era holdovers who covertly undermine the people’s will by secretly sabotaging the president’s policies, it seems like the perfect opportunity to start handing out pink slips.

Under normal circumstances, it’s really difficult to fire a bad apple federal employee, thanks to sweetheart union contracts authored by democrats. At a time when the government is shut down, and theoretically never needs to start up again, it seems like a perfect time to start saying goodbye to bureaucratic dead wood.

Start the government printing presses, and unpack the pink paper. It’s time to do something that will benefit the people. Fire the deep-state holdovers.

By James Thompson. James is a political commentator and professional ghostwriter.

It’s THANKSGIVING DAY, not Turkey Day

For many generations Americans have rightly paused on Thanksgiving Day to give thanks to a generous God, who is our Heavenly Father. America was founded on principles of Judeo-Christian ethics, and a shared faith in a personal God, who caringly watches over the affairs of humanity with a concerned eye (while leaving us to exercise free will).

As socialists have struggled to wrestle our personal liberties from us, one of their main tools has been to secularize our society. Indeed, the ACLU, Democratic Party and similar leftist organizations have led the fight to remove any mention of God or His Son, Jesus Christ, from the public’s vernacular.

As a result of this attempt to make God and Christ politically incorrect in our nation, we have recently been greeted with “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas,” and with “Happy Turkey Day” instead of “Happy Thanksgiving Day.”

We can see why the left would seek to take Christ out of Christmas, but why the shift from Thanksgiving Day to Turkey Day? Because “Thanksgiving” implies there is a reason to be thankful, and someone to whom we should give thanks–and that’s God.

I for one am careful to wish everyone I meet, at the store, at work, or in other public places, a hearty Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas. As a child of our Heavenly Father, I would much rather offend an anti-American, than offend God.

Happy Thanksgiving Day America, and may God bless us.

By James Thompson

 

Conservative-friendly social media: PlanetUS

Trump Speaks on Acosta, Obama’s Private Advice on Greatest US threat

President Trump, speaking exclusively to Fox News’ Chris Wallace in a wide-ranging interview, revealed what President Obama told him was the biggest challenge facing the U.S., discussed pending high-level departures from his administration and admitted that he occasionally enjoys calling on CNN reporter Jim Acosta.

“Actually I like to do it, but in many cases I don’t,” Trump acknowledged. In ruling that the administration temporarily has to restore Acosta’s White House access pass on Fifth Amendment due process grounds, federal judge Timothy J. Kelly noted that Trump could simply choose to ignore Acosta. (The judge, in his preliminary decision, did not rule on CNN’s First Amendment claim.)

But Trump, speaking to Wallace, floated another idea for handling Acosta.

“I think one of the things we’ll do is maybe turn the camera off that faces them, because then they don’t have any air time, although I’ll probably be sued for that and maybe, you know, win or lose it, who knows,” Trump mused. “I mean, with this stuff you never know what’s going to happen.”

Calling Acosta “unbelievably rude to [White House Press Secretary] Sarah Huckabee, who’s a wonderful woman,” Trump said his administration is currently formulating “rules and regulations” for White House reporters. “And if he misbehaves, we’ll throw him out or we’ll stop the news conference,” the president added.

As President Donald Trump points to CNN's Jim Acosta, a White House aide takes the microphone from him during a news conference in the East Room of the White House, Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

As President Donald Trump points to CNN’s Jim Acosta, a White House aide takes the microphone from him during a news conference in the East Room of the White House, Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Trump also defended Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker against Democrats’ calls that he should recuse himself because he has written critically of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe.

“I did not know that,” Trump said, when asked if he was aware prior to appointing him that Whitaker had argued Mueller’s authority and funding could justifiably be limited. “I did not know he took views on the Mueller investigation as such.”

Trump added that he “would not get involved” in Whitaker’s decisions as he oversees Mueller’s probe in his new role as head of the Justice Department. The DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion affirming the constitutionality of Whitaker’s temporary appointment without Senate approval.

“Look he — it’s going to be up to him,” Trump said. I think he’s very well aware politically.  I think he’s astute politically.  He’s a very smart person.  A very respected person.  He’s going to do what’s right.  I really believe he’s going to do what’s right.”

FILE -Then-Iowa Republican senatorial candidate and former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker watches before a live televised debate in Johnston, Iowa.

FILE -Then-Iowa Republican senatorial candidate and former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker watches before a live televised debate in Johnston, Iowa. (Associated Press)

The president added that he has personally responded to Mueller’s written questions in the Russia probe and that they would be submitted “very soon.” Trump said his team is “writing what I tell them to write” in response to the inquiries.

Turning to another one of his frequent critics — former President Barack Obama — Trump took something of a victory lap, following news that some of the top candidates Obama had backed in the midterm elections had come up short.

“I won against President Obama and Oprah Winfrey and Michelle Obama in a great state called Georgia for the governor,” Trump said, referring to defeated Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams’ top surrogates. “And it was all stacked against Brian [Kemp], and I was the one that went for Brian, and Brian won.” (Abrams acknowledged in a fiery speech this week that she would not win the race, but strongly suggested Republican Brian Kemp had prevailed because of voter suppression, and vowed a lawsuit.)

“Look at Florida,” Trump continued. “I went down to Florida. [GOP Senate candidate] Rick Scott won, and he won by a lot.  I don’t know what happened to all those votes that disappeared at the very end.  And if I didn’t put a spotlight on that election before it got down to the 12,500 votes, he would have lost that election, OK?  In my opinion he would have lost.  They would have taken that election away from him. Rick Scott won Florida.”

The results of a manual recount in the Florida Senate will be reported on Sunday, and Scott is expected to prevail over Democratic incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson, following a series of lawsuits and snafus that exposed long-running issues with ballot counting in the state. In the gubernatorial race, Democrat Andrew Gillum conceded this weekend in his close fight with Republican Ron DeSantis.

Michelle Obama, right, is greeted by Oprah Winfrey to discusses her new book during an intimate conversation to promote "Becoming" at the United Center on Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2018, in Chicago. (Photo by Rob Grabowski/Invision/AP)

Michelle Obama, right, is greeted by Oprah Winfrey to discusses her new book during an intimate conversation to promote “Becoming” at the United Center on Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2018, in Chicago. (Photo by Rob Grabowski/Invision/AP)

But Trump also revealed that Obama, who also campaigned against Trump in several other states, had offered him some important guidance in the White House shortly after his 2016 election.

“I think North Korea’s been very tough because you know we were very close. When I took that over — President Obama right in those two chairs, we sat and talked and he said that’s by far the biggest problem that this country has,” Trump told Wallace.  And I think we had real decision as to which way to go on North Korea and certainly at least so far I’m very happy with the way we went.”

Addressing national security matters, Trump told Wallace that he has been briefed on the audio recording of journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s apparent murder in Turkey, but said he hasn’t listened to it, calling it a “suffering tape” that he was advised not to hear.

“You saw we put on very heavy sanctions, massive sanctions on a large group of people from Saudi Arabia,” Trump said. “But at the same time we do have an ally and I want to stick with an ally that in many ways has been very good.” He also said it “takes two to tango” to resolve the conflict in Yemen, where Iranian-backed insurgents are facing off in a proxy war against Saudi-backed forces, noting that “I want Saudi to stop, but I want Iran to stop also.”

Trump went on to defend his administration’s decision to pull hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan, saying the country doesn’t do “a damn thing for us” and charging that its government helped terror leader Osama bin Laden hide there.

“They don’t do a damn thing for us.”

— President Trump on Pakistan

“You know, living – think of this – living in Pakistan, beautifully in Pakistan in what I guess they considered a nice mansion, I don’t know, I’ve seen nicer,” Trump said, referring to bin Laden and his former compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The compound was demolished shortly after United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group forces, in a daring late-night helicopter raid, killed bin Laden there in 2011.

“But living in Pakistan right next to the military academy, everybody in Pakistan knew he was there,” he added.  “And we give Pakistan $1.3 billion a year . … [bin Laden] lived in Pakistan, we’re supporting Pakistan, we’re giving them $1.3 billion a year — which we don’t give them anymore, by the way. I ended it because they don’t do anything for us, they don’t do a damn thing for us.”

And Trump sounded a note of regret for not visiting Arlington National Cemetery in Washington, D.C., on Veterans Day — which Obama did several times when he was in office.

“I should have done that,” Trump said. “I was extremely busy on calls for the country, we did a lot of calling, as you know. …  I probably, you know, in retrospect I should have and I did last year and I will virtually every year.  But we had come in very late at night and I had just left, literally, the American cemetery in Paris and I really probably assumed that was fine and I was extremely busy because of affairs of state doing other things.”

Trump, who spent nearly an hour Thursday at the Marine Barracks in Washington, D.C. — where tables were lined with miniature pumpkin pies ahead of Thanksgiving — said he has some plans to potentially visit U.S. troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan for the first time.

“Well, I think you will see that happen,” the president said, after Wallace noted that Obama and former President George W. Bush had each visited soldiers in war zones. “There are things that are being planned.  We don’t want to talk about it because of — obviously because of security reasons and everything else.”

Two Central American migrants walk along the top of the border structure separating Mexico and the United States Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2018, in Tijuana, Mexico. Migrants in a caravan of Central Americans scrambled to reach the U.S. border, catching rides on buses and trucks for hundreds of miles in the last leg of their journey Wednesday as the first sizable groups began arriving in the border city of Tijuana. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)

Two Central American migrants walk along the top of the border structure separating Mexico and the United States Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2018, in Tijuana, Mexico. Migrants in a caravan of Central Americans scrambled to reach the U.S. border, catching rides on buses and trucks for hundreds of miles in the last leg of their journey Wednesday as the first sizable groups began arriving in the border city of Tijuana. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)

Explaining why he canceled a trip to visit a World War I memorial ceremony in Paris, Trump cited the weather and sharply criticized the media for making a “big deal” out of the situation. The president noted he attended an event the next day in the rain at a cemetery just outside Paris on Armistice Day.

“They said, ‘Sir,’ the Secret Service said, ‘Sir, you cannot go. We are not prepared. You cannot go,'” Trump said. “Because it was supposed to be helicopter, but the helicopter couldn’t fly because of zero visibility.”

Calling media reports that he is bitter and resentful following the midterm elections nothing more than “disgusting fake news,” Trump next addressed some potential high-level departures from his administration.

On Department of Homeland Security head Kirstjen Nielsen, Trump suggested he wants to see an improvement on border security. The first members of a large Central American migrant caravan arrived in the Mexican city of Tijuana last week and were photographed attempting to climb a border fence there.

A Catholic nun gives travel advice to Central American migrants riding in the bed of a semi-trailer, as they move toward the U.S. border, in Ixtlán del Rio, Nayarit, Mexico, Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2018. The U.S. government said it was starting work Tuesday to "harden" the border crossing from Tijuana, Mexico, to prepare for the arrival of a migrant caravan leapfrogging its way across western Mexico. (AP Photo/Marco Ugarte)

A Catholic nun gives travel advice to Central American migrants riding in the bed of a semi-trailer, as they move toward the U.S. border, in Ixtlán del Rio, Nayarit, Mexico, Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2018. The U.S. government said it was starting work Tuesday to “harden” the border crossing from Tijuana, Mexico, to prepare for the arrival of a migrant caravan leapfrogging its way across western Mexico. (AP Photo/Marco Ugarte)

“Well, I like her a lot. I respect her a lot,” Trump said, referring to Nielsen. “She’s very smart.  I want her to get much tougher and we’ll see what happens there. But I want to be extremely tough. …  I like her very much, I respect her very much, I’d like her to be much tougher on the border — much tougher, period.”

He added there’s a “chance” that Nielsen, who was accosted in a restaurant this summer by far-left progressive activists as her security detail kept close watch, will continue in her role.

Trump definitively told Wallace that Chief of Staff John Kelly will “move on” at some point, even as he claimed there was still some chance Kelly will stay with the administration through 2020.

“There are certain things I love what he does,” the president said. “And there are certain things that I don’t like that he does — that aren’t his strength. It’s not that he doesn’t do — you know he works so hard. He’s doing an excellent job in many ways. There are a couple of things where it’s just not his strength. It’s not his fault, it’s not his strength. … But John, at some point, is going to want to move on. John will move on.”

Multiple reports have suggested that Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff, Nick Ayers, will replace Kelly.

White House Chief of Staff John Kelly takes questions from the media while addressing the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., October 12, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque - HP1EDAC1F1Q8V

White House Chief of Staff John Kelly takes questions from the media while addressing the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., October 12, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque – HP1EDAC1F1Q8V (REUTERS)

And on Deputy National Security Adviser Mira Ricardel, whom the White House announced would depart her role this week, Trump offered a blunt assessment.

“I met with Mira two days ago, and we’re going to move her around,” Trump said. “She was with me for a long time, although I don’t know her.  She’s really somebody I don’t know very well.  But we’re going to move her around because she’s got certain talents. But, frankly, she is not — she’ll never be put in the United Nations, let me put it that way. … She’s not too diplomatic, but she’s talented.”

Taking stock of the administration’s progress after two years, amid some past and apparently pending roster changes, Trump gave himself high marks — literally.

“I think I’m doing a great job.  We have the best economy we’ve ever had,” the president said. “We’re doing really well. We would have been at war with North Korea if, let’s say, that administration continued forward.”

Trump continued: “I would give myself, I would – look, I hate to do it, but I will do it, I would give myself an A+, is that enough? Can I go higher than that?”

 

Conservative-friendly social media. Because Facebook hates conservatives. PlanetUS.com

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg Hospitalized After Fall

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fractured three ribs after a fall at her office Wednesday evening, the court said in a news release.

Ginsburg, 85, later experienced discomfort and was admitted to George Washington University Hospital “for observation and treatment.”

Tests showed the justice fractured three ribs on her left side. The justice broke two ribs in a fall in 2012. She has had two prior bouts with cancer and had a stent implanted to open a blocked artery in 2014.

The justice, who studied at Harvard Law School, was nominated to the highest court in the land by former President Bill Clinton. She was the president’s first Supreme Court appointment.

Ginsburg is the court’s oldest member and there has been much speculation on her retirement. She is one of the four liberal justices that sits on the bench.

Ginsburg has became a liberal icon and has appeared on late night television shows including the “The Late Show” with Stephen Colbert where she showed him her workout routine.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Kathleen Joyce is a breaking/trending news producer for FoxNews.com. You can follow her at @Kathleen_Joyce8 on Twitter. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Conservative-friendly social media PlanetUS.com

 

Jeff Sessions Resigns as Attorney General; Matthew Whitaker Steps In

Jeff Sessions, once one of President Trump’s most loyal and trusted advisers before infuriating Trump over his recusal from the Russia investigation, has resigned as attorney general at the request of the president.

“At your request, I am submitting my resignation,” Sessions wrote in the Wednesday letter to Trump.

The president tweeted that Matthew Whitaker, who currently serves as chief of staff to Sessions, will become the acting attorney general.

“We are pleased to announce that Matthew G. Whitaker, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, will become our new Acting Attorney General of the United States. He will serve our Country well,” he said.

Trump added: “We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service, and wish him well! A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date.”

Sources told Fox News that Trump did not call Sessions, but rather White House Chief of Staff John Kelly  informed him of the president’s request for him to resign. Sessions is expected to leave the Justice Department by the end of the day and Whitaker is expected to be sworn in Wednesday.

In his resignation letter, Sessions said was “honored to serve” as attorney general and said his Justice Department “restored and upheld the rule of law – a glorious tradition that each of us has a responsibility to safeguard.”

Sessions’ departure from the Justice Department is not unexpected, as the president has signaled changes to his administration after the midterms. But no one faced more rumors of an imminent dismissal than Sessions.

For more than a year, Trump has repeatedly lambasted Sessions over his recusal, saying he wouldn’t have installed Sessions as the country’s top law enforcement officer had he known his attorney general would recuse himself from the Russia probe.

In September, Trump said of his strained relationship with Sessions, “I don’t have an attorney general. It’s very sad.”

Shortly after taking office, Sessions removed himself from the Russia investigation in March of 2017, citing his involvement as a high-profile surrogate and adviser to Trump’s campaign.

 

The investigation into the Russian government’s attempted meddling in the election has hung over the president since he took office. Trump and his aides have denied any collusion with the Russians.

Sources told Fox News Whitaker will now be overseeing the Russia investigation. However, Justice Department ethics officials have not yet determined whether Whitaker will be able to hold that responsibility, or whether he may also eventually have to recuse himself from the investigation.

It’s unclear if Special Counsel Robert Mueller was informed before the announcement.

In March 2017, Sessions announced his plans to recuse himself after reports surfaced detailing undisclosed conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the campaign. Sessions has said he was acting in his capacity as a Republican senator from Alabama.

At the time of his recusal, Sessions said he met with the “relevant senior career department officials” to discuss the issue.

“Having concluded those meetings today, I have decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States,” Sessions said.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein then took control of the investigation and decided to appoint Mueller to take over the probe.

Trump’s falling out with Sessions was remarkable, considering the pivotal and trusted role the Alabama Republican played for Trump during the campaign.

Sessions — who bonded with Trump over their populist views on trade and immigration — became the first sitting senator to endorse Trump in February 2016 when he announced his support of the New York businessman’s then-underdog campaign.

The endorsement was seen as a blow to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Trump’s conservative rival in the Republican race whose path to victory included a strong performance in Southern states. Trump won Alabama.

Sessions went on to become one of Trump’s most outspoken and prominent surrogates during the campaign. A number of Sessions’ top staffers – including Rick Dearborn and Stephen Miller – took senior White House roles. When other Republicans abandoned Trump after the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape just days before the general election, Sessions stood by Trump.

After Trump won the White House, Sessions, who faced no opposition in his 2014 re-election to the Senate, gave up a safe seat to become Trump’s attorney general.

During his confirmation hearing, Sessions denied accusations from Democrats that he had made racially insensitive statements in the past. Though most Democrats voted against their former colleague, his confirmation was seen as redemption for Sessions, whose nomination for a 1986 federal judgeship was rejected by the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time.

As attorney general, Sessions cracked down on illegal immigration, vowing to enforce federal law.

Sessions’ former Senate colleagues on Wednesday praised him for his service.

“As our country’s top law enforcement official, he has been integral in fighting the opioid epidemic, keeping violent criminals off our streets, and supporting victims,” Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said in a statement. “Those who know him understand his commitment to the rule of law, and his deep and abiding concern for our country.”

But Sessions also had his critics.

“Jeff Sessions was the worst attorney general in modern American history,” American Civil Liberties Union executive director Anthony D. Romero said.

 

Get conservative-friendly social media: PlanetUS.com

President Trump’s Closing Argument: Vote Republican and Continue the Jobs Boom

OP ED by President Donald J. Trump.

For many Americans, the Great Recession brought dark days we will never forget – and never want to repeat. It wasn’t long ago that economists told us sluggish growth and flat wages were here to stay.

Pundits talked about a “jobless recovery.” And politicians promised hope and change but never delivered.

But now, thanks to Republican leadership, the United States has the best economy in the history of our country – and hope has finally returned to cities and towns across America.

Since I was elected, we have created 4.5 million new jobs. In the last month alone, we added another 250,000 jobs, and nearly a half-million Americans returned to the workforce. We have added nearly 500,000 manufacturing jobs to our economy – jobs that many self-proclaimed experts said would never return.

The unemployment rate just fell to the lowest level in nearly 50 years. More Americans are working today than ever before. And wages are now rising at the fastest rate in a decade.

Today, if you want a job, you can get a job. If you want a better job, you can get a better job. African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Asian-Americans have the best job prospects in history. The employment outlook for women is the best in more than 65 years.

Students graduating from high school and college are entering the workforce with an abundance of opportunities.

These things didn’t happen by accident. They happened because Republicans are putting American workers and families first.

To reclaim America’s competitive edge, Republicans passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. In addition to saving the average family $2,000 per year, our tax cuts kicked off a growth boom as businesses expanded and hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign profits flooded back into our country.

By doubling the child tax credit, providing a $500 tax credit for non-child dependents, and lowering tax rates, Republicans delivered the tax relief that working families need and deserve.

Republicans have waged the largest regulatory reduction campaign in our history – eliminating unnecessary regulation after unnecessary regulation that killed jobs and drove businesses overseas.

We have unleashed American energy resources. We ended ObamaCare’s punitive individual mandate and created new, affordable health-care options with lower premiums for families and businesses. And we are fixing broken trade deals and cracking down on foreign trading abuses that have, for decades, plundered America’s wealth.

Democrats adamantly, aggressively and hysterically opposed every one of these policies.

The top Democrat in Congress even predicted our tax cuts would lead to “Armageddon.” But here we are, two years later, and America has never been more prosperous or more optimistic.

Now America faces a critical choice: whether to build on the extraordinary prosperity that Republican policies have delivered for our nation – or whether to allow Democrats to take control and take a giant wrecking ball to your economy and your future.

If House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., take control of Congress, they will drag America back into the economic abyss we struggled so hard to climb out of.

The Democrats have promised to raise taxes, restore job-killing regulations, restrict American energy production, and impose socialism through a government takeover of your health care that would bankrupt our country with a $32 trillion price tag.

Put simply, the Democrats will pursue economic policies that are the exact opposite of the successful policies that Republicans have implemented. Democratic economic policies will drive our factories overseas, destroy the American health-care system, and obliterate American jobs, American wages and American wealth.

We have already tried the Democratic way – and it produced the worst so-called economic recovery on record. Why would we ever go back?

Instead, I am asking you to vote for a Republican House, a Republican Senate, and Republican governors so we can continue the incredible economic success that families across the nation are now enjoying.

America’s red-hot economy is the envy of the world, and it is only getting stronger every day. A strong jobs economy helps working Americans lift up the people they love: children, parents, friends, and neighbors.

A strong jobs economy also means that our government can protect the American people with the strongest military in the world, protect Medicare and Social Security for our great seniors, protect Americans with pre-existing conditions, and protect our borders.

With your vote for Republican candidates, we can keep our economy growing and our nation on the right track.

With your vote, we will keep lifting millions of our citizens from welfare to work, dependence to independence, and poverty to prosperity. And together, we will build a future of safety, security, prosperity, and freedom for all our citizens.

 

Donald J. Trump is president of the United States.

 

Conservative-friendly social media. Set up your free account today. PlanetUS.com

 

Trump Executive Order to End Illegal Birthright Citizenship

President Trump said in a newly released interview he plans to sign an executive order ending so-called “birthright citizenship” for babies of non-citizens born on U.S. soil — a move that would mark a major overhaul of immigration policy and trigger an almost-certain legal battle.

Birthright citizenship allows any baby born on U.S. soil to automatically be a U.S. citizen.

The policy, which stems from a disputed but long-recognized interpretation of the 14th Amendment, has given rise to what Trump considers abuse of the immigration system. Trump told “Axios on HBO” that the U.S. is the only country in the world “where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States … with all of those benefits.”

Despite Trump’s claim, the U.S. is not the only nation to have birthright citizenship, but the policy is rare outside of the Americas. Trump called birthright citizenship “ridiculous” and said that “it has to end.”

Under current policy, anyone born in the U.S. – regardless of whether they are delivered by a non-citizen or undocumented immigrant – is considered a citizen. The interpretation has been blamed for so-called ‘birth tourism’ and chain migration.

The 14th Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Trump, should he pursue the executive order, would face court challenges, and it remains unclear whether he could prevail. Many legal scholars would argue such a change requires a constitutional amendment. But some conservatives argue the existing amendment holds room for interpretation.

Michael Anton, a former national security adviser for Trump, pointed out in July that “there’s a clause in the middle of the amendment that people ignore or they misinterpret – subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

“What they are saying is, if you are born on U.S. soil subject to the jurisdiction of the United States – meaning you’re the child of citizens or the child of legal immigrants, then you are entitled to citizenship,” Anton told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson in July. “If you are here illegally, if you owe allegiance to a foreign nation, if you’re the citizen of a foreign country, that clause does not apply to you.”

The interview was released after Trump told Fox News that Central American migrants who are approaching the U.S.-Mexico border in caravans are “wasting their time” and vowed, “they are not coming in.”

Trump spoke to “The Ingraham Angle” hours after the Pentagon announced it would deploy some 5,200 troops to the southern border in what the commander of U.S. Northern Command described as an effort to “harden the southern border” by stiffening defenses at and near legal entry points.

“When they are captured, we don’t let them out,” Trump told host Laura Ingraham. “We’re not letting them out … We’re not catching, we’re not releasing … We’re not letting them into this country.”

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals judge James C. Ho, who was appointed by Trump, has argued that it would be “unconstitutional” to change how the 14th amendment was written and that the line subject to debate applies to the legal obligation of all foreigners and immigrants to follow U.S. law, Axios reported.

 

/Benjamin Brown is a reporter for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bdbrown473./Fox News’ Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report

 

 

 

Conservative-friendly social media. Facebook will eventually delete you and ban your free speech. PlanetUS.com