Saturday, April 20, 2024
Home Blog Page 505

Jerry Brown Signs Bill That Could Let Illegal Aliens Vote

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Jerry Brown Signs Bill That Could Let Illegal Aliens Vote

by WILLIAM BIGELOW               12 Oct 2015         

On Saturday, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1461, the New Motor Voter Act, which will automatically register people to vote through the DMV, and could result in illegal aliens voting.

Any person who renewed or secured a driver’s license through the DMV may now register to vote, or choose to opt out of doing so. Because illegal immigrants are now eligible for obtaining driver’s licenses, they could be allowed to vote in elections if the Secretary of State’s office fails to verify their eligibility properly.
Brown and the California Democratic party know exactly what they are doing; as a Public Policy Institute survey showed, among unregistered adults, 49% lean toward the Democratic Party and 22% toward the Republican Party. Any bill permitting illegal immigrants to vote would cement the Democratic Party’s hold on California.
True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht stated, “This bill is terrible. It makes an already bad situation much, much worse,” adding that California’s registration databases “lack the necessary safeguards to keep noncitizens off the voter rolls.”

Election Integrity Project of California President Linda Paine echoed that AB 1461 “will effectively change the form of governance in California from a Republic whose elected officials are determined by United States citizens and will guarantee that noncitizens will participate in all California elections going forward.” The Election Integrity Project of California had joined True the Vote to demand that brown veto the bill, calling it a path to “‘state sanctioned’ voter fraud.”
Although noncitizens’ driver’s licenses in California feature the phrases “Federal Limits Apply” and “not valid for official federal purposes,” True the Vote spokesman Logan Churchwell pointed out that state officials “specifically chose not to make noncitizen license holders searchable in their DMV database.”
California Secretary of State Alex Padilla countered that the increase in voters will benefit the state, arguing, “The New Motor Voter Act will make our democracy stronger by removing a key barrier to voting for millions of California citizens. Citizens should not be required to opt in to their fundamental right to vote. We do not have to opt in to other rights, such as free speech or due process.”
California follows Oregon, where Democratic Gov. Kate Brown signed a bill in March allowing the automatic registration of all eligible Oregonians to vote when they obtain or renew a driver’s license or state identification card.
But Stephen Frank of California Political Review bluntly asserted that the bill will reduce voter turnout because voters will sniff fraud in the polls: “AB 1461 assures corruption of our elections–our elections will look like those of Mexico and other corrupt nations–and honest people will stop voting since illegal aliens will out vote them.”

2017 State of the State Response

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Matthew Besler headshot 25 retouched

2017 State of the State Response

By Matthew Besler
 
“These problems are ours to solve. We can and we must do better.” Governor Rauner delivered his annual State of the State address, re-emphasizing his commitment to growth, opportunity, and empowerment for Illinois families.
 
rauner_at_state_of_the_state_ap_photo-seth_perlman
 
Leaders come in many forms and often from unexpected places. Some hold seats in the legislature; some run a small business; some volunteer in their community. But there are certain qualities that are common among all leaders. Leaders never relent. Nor do they abandon their principles when faced with a challenge.
 
We need Governor Rauner to lead us now more than ever.  We need him (and those in the legislature that care more about people than politics) to steadfastly press for the reforms he campaigned on two years ago. Reforms that can save Illinois.
 
Otherwise, people will continue to flee our state because state government does not reflect their values or protect their interests. Illinois families pay the highest property taxes in the nation, and are saddled with one of the highest overall tax burdens in the nation, yet services are being cut because we have the worst funded government pensions in the country and the highest paid state workers.
 
We must succeed. People are suffering, opportunities are dwindling, and families are fleeing.
 
Illinois has great potential. This state is rich in energy and agricultural resources. We are a transportation hub, with world-class educational institutions, a highly skilled workforce, and a diverse base of industries. Illinois’ economy should be leading the Midwest. We should be setting the standards for efficiency. Instead, state government has spent decades stiffing vendors, raising taxes and tolerating unacceptable service levels.
 
It is time state government lived by the same values as Illinois’ families and businesses.
 
While we don’t expect change overnight, we share the Governor’s belief that, with a few significant reforms, Illinois can create a more welcoming business environment, encourage investment, serve those truly in need, and secure some fiscal stability. By achieving these goals, Illinois will be better poised for progress.
 
That is what we, at the Illinois Opportunity Project, believe. That is where we stand. That is what we’ll fight for.
 
As Governor Rauner noted in his address, “We cannot be compassionate, because we have not been competitive.” We call on state legislators to support the reforms that the people of Illinois need and that the Governor outlined today. These policies address the real roadblocks to improving Illinois’ economy.
 
We call on you—the families and businesses of Illinois—to hold your legislators to the promises they made during their campaigns: to act independently, to improve the economy for you and your families, and to bring jobs to Illinois.
 
We call on you to take every action and make every change that will make our state a place of growth that magnetizes people from all walks of life, instead of one that drives them out.
 
We call on you to never relent and to never abandon the principles of prosperity—regardless of pressure or expediency.
 
We call on you to lead—now more than ever before.

School Choice is very important in reviving our cities

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Editors note: School choice is the most important step in increasing the quality of education we as a society provide. I the tax dollars spent per student followed the student to whichever school they get accepted to, students will not go to schools that are seen as lacking. This will force schools to improve since they will all be in competition for students. Children will no longer be forced into their neighborhood school. Competition will force improvement. Chicago  carnage must be cleaned up, but how is the 6 million dollar question. One thing I am sure of is education is a big part of the solution. Education will enable children to grow and eventually get jobs.
 

National School Choice Week
This week is National School Choice Week, which includes the largest series of education-related events in US history. Our reporters were on the ground to bring you the latest stories from the front lines of the growing movement for better education options for all students.
 

Students and parents rallied for school choice this week in Austin, and they have a good reason to: Texas istrailing 28 states that have embraced choice programs. Kenric Ward reports on the legislative efforts to expand opportunity in the Lone Star State to meet the growing demand.
 

While progress has been made in Mississippi, still only a small percentage of students can participate in the state’s school choice programs, trapping far too many students in failing schools. Steve Wilson breaks down what took place at this week’s rally in the Capitol rotunda.
 

http://franklincenterhq.org/12817/the-rise-of-the-google-administration/The Vermont Board of Education has waged an all-out assault on school choice, but that has only emboldened choice supporters, including a group of high school students who joined this week’s rally at the Capitol. Emma Lamberton has the latest on bills to rein in Vermont’s educrats.

Goodings Grove students kicked off their annual Jump Rope for Heart campaign

By
Steve Balich
-
0

News Release
Homer CCSD 33C
Goodings Grove   Luther J. Schilling   William E. Young   William J. Butler
Hadley Middle   Homer Jr. High
 
Contact: Charla Brautigam, Communications/Public Relations Manager
cbrautigam@homerschools.org | 708-226-7628
 
For Immediate Release:
Jan. 26, 2017

Goodings Grove students are excited about their efforts to fight heart disease.

 
Goodings Grove students pumped about Jump Rope for Heart
Kick off their annual fitness challenge, fundraiser Jan. 25
 
Goodings Grove students kicked off their annual Jump Rope for Heart campaign this week for the American Heart Association.
 
Joining them were American Heart Association Senior Director Stefani White who spoke to students about the Association’s work and how they can help fight heart disease.
 
She also challenged students to start living a healthy lifestyle with the help of the Association’s lifesaver friends, The Zoo Crew.
 
“We are so excited to teach students how to care for their hearts while raising lifesaving donations to fight the nation’s #1 killer,” said P.E. teachers Tammie Ebel and Nathan Keasler.
 
Students will be learning how to care for their heart while raising donations for the American Heart Association.
 
Like us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/homer33c?fref=ts&ref=br_tf
 

Final Nail in Planned Parenthood’s Coffin

By
Steve Balich
-
0
Will This Be the Nail in Planned Parenthood’s Coffin?

Will This Be the Final Nail in Planned Parenthood’s Coffin?
Written By Laurie Higgins

capture44
The national pro-life organization Live Action has just released a bombshell video that darn well better be the final nail in the coffin of Planned Parenthood—a coffin brimming with baby corpses.
Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, in a futile effort to persuade the public that the pro-death organization she heads is all about women’s “health,” has publicly stated that Planned Parenthood provides prenatal care. In so doing, she clearly suggested and the gullible public believed that all Planned Parenthood facilities provide prenatal care. Surprisingly, that’s not what Live Action found in its undercover investigation.
Of the 97 Planned Parenthood facilities Live Action contacted, only 5 provided prenatal care. Live Action’s short video provides persuasive evidence that Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards lied through her pearly whites.
Here’s a sampling of the responses featured in Live Action’s video:

Tempe, AZ: “Planned Parenthood offers abortions, so they don’t offer prenatal care.”
Albany, NY: “No Planned Parenthood does prenatal care, hon.”
Farmington, NM:“We don’t offer prenatal care at Planned Parenthood…We specialize in abortions. You know that’s what our ultrasounds are for, to see how far along the, um, patient is.”
Elizabeth, NJ: “We do birth control, things like that—terminations.
Cornell, NY: “We tell you you’re pregnant, and then we offer…to do the abortions.”
Merrillville, IN: “No, we don’t do prenatal services. I mean it’s called Planned Parenthood. I know it’s kind of deceiving.
Dallas, TX: “We only offer termination services.”

Ironically when the undercover patient asked where she could receive prenatal care, the Planned Parenthood operative recommended Care Net, the type of crisis pregnancy center that “progressives” accuse of not caring about women and babies.
Racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, and today’s money-sucking  organization bears the morally corrupt values of its founder. While blacks comprise 12 percent of the population, they comprise 28 percent of abortions, a statistic that would please Sanger who was hell-bent on ridding the world of blacks:
We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.
In Sanger’s proposed “baby code” she recommended the extermination of those deemed unfit:

[F]eeble-minded persons…those afflicted with inheritable disease, and others found biologically unfit by authorities…should be sterilized or, in cases of doubt, should be so isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding.”

Which populations do “progressives” today exploit to promote abortion as an act of compassion? Don’t death merchants talk about feticide as a compassionate act for babies with tragic physical anomalies? Aren’t children with Down Syndrome—in earlier, less enlightened times referred to a “feeble-minded”—being aborted in numbers that should offend and outrage all decent people?
Cecile Richards is an attractive corporate mask that conceals incomprehensibly evil acts, and where there is evil, there is deception.

Congress likely to kill Obama’s Social Security gun grab

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Congress likely to kill Obama’s Social Security gun grab

Posted on by Sam RolleyViews: 1,724

79 Shares

An Obama administration edict that threatened the 2nd Amendment rights of millions of elderly and disabled Americans is likely headed for the congressional chopping block.
In what the National Rifle Association has described as “the largest gun grab in history,” the Obama administration created a plan to deem ineligible for gun ownership as many as 4 million Americans who receive Social Security benefits through a “representative payee.”
The plan mandated that the Social Security system report any recipient who receives pension or disability payments through a designated payee as potentially ineligible for firearm ownership.
The administration claimed the move would keep guns out of the hands of only people who are mentally unstable. But 2nd Amendment supporters noted that declaring anyone who has been assigned a representative payee could affect Social Security beneficiaries who have things like memory, gambling or past addiction or financial problems but who are otherwise fit for gun ownership.
The plan was also not relegated to the SSA. Based on the memorandum, government officials were directed to use “all relevant federal records” to find Americans who should be stripped of their gun ownership rights. That means bureaucrats were being given the greenlight to scour files from the departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Transportation, along with “such other agencies or offices as the Chair may designate,” looking for reasons to strip 2nd Amendment rights.
The biggest issue with the presidential edict is that it gave bureaucrats the authority to strip a constitutional right without proper due process.
“It is critically important that any restriction on gun possession or ownership on this basis is imposed only after the individual has been afforded due process and given an opportunity to respond to allegations that they are not able to safely possess or own a firearm due to his or her disability,” the National Council on Disability, which opposed the Obama rules, said in a statement.
The GOP-controlled Congress is examining the Obama rules under authority of the Congressional Review Act, which allows for lawmaker repeal of presidential actions initiated in the final six months of an outgoing administration.
As early as next week, lawmakers could strike down the Obama move widely regarded as a massive backdoor gun grab.
The National Rifle Association said Congress’s decision to review the Obama action marks the beginning of a “new era for freedom-loving Americans.”

Detroit's election woes: 782 more votes than voters

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Detroit’s election woes: 782 more votes than voters

John Wisely and JC Reindl, Detroit Free PressPublished 10:28 p.m. ET Dec. 18, 2016 | Updated 11:50 a.m. ET Dec. 19, 2016

Another 382 Detroiters were listed as voting but their ballots never showed up in the count.

Whether the result of machine malfunction, human error or even fraud, the unexplained voting discrepancies in Detroit last month were not sizable enough to affect the outcome in Michigan of the presidential election, according to a new Free Press analysis of voting precinct records.
In 248 precincts, there were a total of 782 more votes tabulated by voting machines than the number of voters listed as picking up ballots in the precincts’ poll books. That makes up just three-tenths of 1% of the total 248,211 votes that were logged in Detroit for the presidential election. That number was far too small to swing the statewide election results, even in this year’s especially tight race that saw a Republican win Michigan for the first time since George Bush in 1988.

Donald Trump carried Michigan by 10,704 votes, or 47.5% to 47.3%, according to the final results submitted to the Michigan Secretary of State. But in Detroit, Democrat Hillary Clinton trounced Trump, winning 95% of the vote to his 3%.
The Free Press analysis found there were 248 precincts in Detroit where voting machines tabulated more Election Day votes than people who were counted as checking in to vote. The affected precincts represent 37% of the city’s 662 precincts.
Most of those overages were by small amounts — on average about 3 votes — with the largest being 12 votes in a single precinct. Those small numbers, which add up to 782 total spread out across more than 200 precincts, tend to point to human or machine malfunction as the culprit, rather than widespread fraud.
In 158 precincts, the number of ballots tabulated by the optical-scanning voting machines was inexplicably less than the number of people who signed in to vote. At least 362 ballots were not counted in those precincts, even though the voters had been listed in poll books.
 
Altogether, the total of over-counted and under-counted ballots was about 1,144. As a result, nearly 60% of Detroit’s precincts weren’t eligible for recount because the number of ballots in the ballot box didn’t match the number of people listed as voting in the poll book.
The Free Press analysis came from handwritten tabulations logged by the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. The numbers are approximated because notes in eight precincts were illegible or unclear. This is the first time that actual figures for over-counted and under-counted votes have been reported
Detroit’s inability to reconcile its ballots with its voter lists was exposed in the recount requested by Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein that was later ordered stopped by the Michigan Supreme Court. The discrepancy became national news, including headlines suggesting voter fraud.
Reasons for the under-counted and over-counted votes are unclear, although in some cases people may have signed in to vote, then left before casting their ballots because of long lines. Machine malfunctions also may have played a role; on Election Day, more than 80 optical vote scanners broke down in Detroit.
Detroit City Clerk Janice Winfrey and Elections Director Daniel Baxter could not be reached for comment Sunday regarding these latest findings.
Winfrey told the Free Press last week that the city’s decade-old voting machines broke down and caused problems throughout Election Day and that the city has struggled for years to recruit younger people to work the polls. Most Detroit poll workers are retirees with an average age of 68 and they typically work 15-18 hours on Election Day for a $150 paycheck.
Winfrey said Detroit will be getting new voting machines in time for the 2017 mayoral and City Council elections.
Under Michigan law, precincts cannot be recounted when the number of voters in the poll book doesn’t match the number of ballots in the ballot box. Almost 60% of Detroit’s precincts were mismatched — either having too many or not enough ballots to match poll books — and ineligible for recount, according to the Wayne County Clerk’s Office.

Michigan presidential election recount

 

Detroit wasn’t the only place in Michigan with recount problems. There was at least one ineligible precinct in each of the 22 counties where the recount had gotten under way before being halted by the court, according to Michigan Secretary of State records.
The state Bureau of Elections plans to conduct audits of about 20 Detroit precincts that couldn’t be recounted. Those ballots are to be brought to Lansing for an audit that should last for at least three weeks, said Chris Thomas, director of elections for the state.
“We don’t have any suspicion of fraud. We generally approach this as human error,” Thomas said last week. “We’re going to take a look at them to make sure there’s not a need for further explanations.”
Bill Ballenger, longtime Michigan political analyst and founder of the Ballenger Report, said Sunday that even though the number of questionable votes in Detroit was apparently too small to affect this election, the discrepancies are still disconcerting because the race was so close and they demonstrate the need for an audit.
“If there’s one thing good that came out of the recount petition by Jill Stein, it’s that it revealed there are some problems,” he said.
Ballenger noted how the outcome of the 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore hinged on just 537 votes in the state of Florida. That is fewer than the number of questionable Detroit votes.
“If this election had turned out to be as close as Florida in 2000, this would be a huge story right now,” he said.
Contact John Wisely: 313-222-6825 or jwisely@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter @jwisely.

Election stats and Free Press findings:

  • There were 782 over-counted votes in 248 Detroit precincts.
  • There were 362 under-counted ballots in 158 Detroit precincts.
  • Nearly 60% of Detroit’s 662 precincts were ineligible for recounting
  • Donald Trump officially beat Hillary Clinton in Michigan by 10,704 votes.
  • Detroit voters overwhelming preferred Clinton to Trump, 95% to his 3%.

Trump Moves to 'Build That Wall' With Mexico, Curb Refugees

By
Steve Balich
-
0

Trump Moves to ‘Build That Wall’ With Mexico, Curb Refugees

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump moved aggressively to tighten the nation’s immigration controls Wednesday, signing executive actions to jumpstart construction of his promised U.S.-Mexico border wall and cut federal grants for immigrant-protecting “sanctuary cities.” As early as Thursday, he is expected to pause the flow of all refugees to the U.S. and indefinitely bar those fleeing war-torn Syria.

“Beginning today the United States of America gets back control of its borders,” Trump declared during a visit to the Department of Homeland Security. “We are going to save lives on both sides of the border.”

The actions, less than a week into Trump’s presidency, fulfilled pledges that animated his candidacy and represented a dramatic redirection of U.S. immigration policy. They were cheered by Republicans allies in Congress, condemned by immigration advocates and the trigger for immediate new tension with the Mexican government.

Trump is expected to wield his executive power again later this week with the directive to dam the refugee flow into the U.S. for at least four months, in addition to the open-ended pause on Syrian arrivals.

The president’s upcoming order is also expected to suspend issuing visas for people from several predominantly Muslim countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — for at least 30 days, according to a draft executive order obtained by The Associated Press.

Trump is unveiling his immigration plans at a time when detentions at the nation’s southern border are down significantly from levels seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The arrest tally last year was the fifth-lowest since 1972. Deportations of people living in the U.S. illegally also increased under President Barack Obama, though Republicans criticized him for setting prosecution guidelines that spared some groups from the threat of deportation, including those brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

As a candidate, Trump tapped into the immigration concerns of some Americans who worry both about a loss of economic opportunities and the threat of criminals and terrorists entering the country. His call for a border wall was among his most popular proposals with supporters, who often broke out in chants of “build that wall” during rallies.

Immigration advocates and others assailed the new president’s actions. Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said the president’s desire to construct a border wall was “driven by racial and ethnic bias that disgraces America’s proud tradition of protecting vulnerable migrants.”

How Trump plans to pay for the wall project is murky. While he has repeatedly promised that Mexico will foot the bill, U.S. taxpayers are expected to cover the initial costs and the new administration has said nothing about how it might compel Mexico to reimburse the money.

In an interview with ABC News earlier Wednesday, Trump said, “There will be a payment; it will be in a form, perhaps a complicated form.”

Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, who has insisted his country will not pay for a wall, has been expected to meet with Trump at the White House next week, although a senior official said Trump’s announcement had led him to reconsider the visit.

Congressional aides say there is about $100 million of unspent appropriations in the Department of Homeland Security account for border security, fencing and infrastructure. That would allow planning efforts to get started, but far more money would have to be appropriated for construction to begin.

Trump has insisted many times the border structure will be a wall. The order he signed referred to “a contiguous, physical wall or other similarly secure, contiguous and impassable physical barrier.”

To build the wall, the president is relying on a 2006 law that authorized several hundred miles of fencing along the 2,000-mile frontier. That bill led to the construction of about 700 miles of various kinds of fencing designed to block both vehicles and pedestrians.

The president’s orders also call for hiring 5,000 additional border patrol agents and 10,000 more immigration officers, though the increases are subject to the approval of congressional funding. He also moved to end what Republicans have labeled a catch-and-release system at the border. Currently, some immigrants caught crossing the border illegally are released and given notices to report back to immigration officials at a later date.

Trump’s crackdown on sanctuary cities — locales that don’t cooperate with immigration authorities — could cost individual jurisdictions millions of dollars. But the administration may face legal challenges, given that some federal courts have found that cities or counties cannot hold immigrants beyond their jail terms or deny them bond based only a request from immigration authorities.

Some of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas — including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago — are considered sanctuary cities.

The president also moved to restart the “Secure Communities” program, which was launched under President George W. Bush and initially touted as a way for immigration authorities to quickly and easily identify people in the country illegally who had been arrested by local authorities.

The program helped the Obama administration deport a record high of more than 409,000 immigrants in 2012. But Obama eventually abandoned the program after immigration advocates and civil libertarians decried it as too often targeting immigrants charged with low-level crimes, including traffic violations.

Among those in the audience for Trump’s remarks at DHS were the families of people killed by people in the U.S. illegally. After reading the names of those killed, Trump said, “Your children will not have lost their lives for no reason.”

Trump’s actions on halting all refugees could be announced as soon as Thursday. Administration officials and others briefed on the plans cautioned that some details of the measures could still be changed, but indicated that Trump planned to follow through on his campaign promises to limit access to the U.S. for people coming from countries with terrorism ties.

___

AP writers Alicia A. Caldwell, Vivian Salama and Andrew Taylor in Washington and E. Eduardo Castillo in Mexico City contributed to this report.



 

Clinton, The Media, Republican Establishment, Globalists, Elites, VS. Trump

By
Steve Balich
-
0

America at a crossroads

Posted on by John MyersViews: 3,045

459 Shares

American flag in New YorkMake America great again was President-elect Donald Trump’s promise and he will start to make good on it when he is sworn in on Friday. Almost 62 million Americans answered Trump’s call for one fundamental reason — they believed that President Barack Obama had undermined America’s traditional values.
There has been an overwhelming blacklash against Trump and his vision for America since the election. There have been vile and personal attacks against Trump and they will not lessen after his inauguration. In fact, they will intensify over time to a point where the United States of America may become ungovernable.
You may recall that during the final presidential debate, after Trump refused to commit to accepting the election results, Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton went off on one of her diatribes:

“That’s horrifying. Let’s be clear about what he is saying and what that means. He is denigrating — he (Trump) is talking down our democracy. And I am appalled that someone who is the nominee of one of our two major parties would take that position.”

As it turned out these were the words of a dyed–in–the–wool hypocrite. For two months Clinton and her allies have argued that Trump’s victory in November was the result of skullduggery and therefore he is an illegitimate president.
One theory is that Clinton lost because FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to Congress about the FBI investigation into her emails 11 days before Election Day, which put the controversy back into the news.
“There are lots of reasons why an election like this is not successful,” Clinton said adding, “Our analysis is that Comey’s letter raising doubts that were groundless, baseless, proven to be, stopped our momentum.”
Let’s take an analytical look at Clinton’s argument. Trump’s relationship with Comey comes from a single meeting where the FBI Director presented a two-paged synopsis of unconfirmed allegations about Russia regarding Trump. Are we to believe from that one meeting Comey was either bribed by Trump or was so mesmerized by him that he would forsake his oath of office “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States?”
If Comey did such a thing he would face felony charges and jail time. He would also go down in the history books next to Benedict Arnold. This is the same man that President George W. Bush thought highly enough of to appoint as deputy attorney general and a man who President Barack Obama appointed as director of the FBI.

Other scapegoats

Clinton’s disregard for preserving state secrets could have led to overseas intelligence agents being abducted, tortured and even murdered. If not criminal, Clinton’s actions were reckless. They included keeping multiple personal email devices against State Department protocol. Then there is her constant stream of lies. At first she admitted to having two cell phones rather than the prescribed one. That number eventually grew to 13 mobile devices.
Other theories include but are not limited to:

  1. Putin personally liked Trump better than Clinton.
  2. Putin believed Trump would be soft on Russia compared to Clinton.
  3. Putin has financial records and video of Trump’s deviant sexual behavior while staying in a Moscow hotel. The argument being that Trump’s business dealings and sexual deviancy would force him to acquiesce to Russian dictates.

Some Democrats in Congress like Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) maintain that Donald Trump is not a “legitimate president,” citing Russian interference in last year’s election.
Despite all that money spent and all the praise from the press, the fact is Clinton was a terrible candidate, devoid of any of the charisma her husband and former President Bill Clinton had and lacking in a message other than her presidency was going to continue the status quo of the Obama administration. That was a big misjudgment in what Americans wanted. Election exit polls showed that as many as two-thirds of all voters wanted change.
I was angry at Clinton when she said at a campaign fundraiser in New York City last September that:

You know, to just be grossly generalistic [SIC], you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.

If you have been reading me over the past year and a half you know I never did give Trump a ringing endorsement. There is a lot about him that runs against my libertarian values. But it seems to me Clinton’s conviction that there is a lot of white trash out there which undoubtedly includes me. Clinton thinks those that choose decency over diversity and don’t accept the notion of white privilege are unenlightened.
What do Trump supporters want? I believe it is decency over diversity; debate without debacle and politeness rather than political correctness. Most people don’t want to be lectured, especially by someone who gets rich for talking in front of a camera. I proudly count myself as one of Clinton’s deplorables rather than a progressive clone in the Democratic Party.
I consider myself to be smarter and better read than average. I have a good education from a university that didn’t have a liberal bias or institute political correctness when I attended in the 1970s. As a result, I am an independent thinker as I believe most of the Personal Liberty® readers are, based on reading your comments over the past eight years.
I don’t believe that we need a lecture from the media either.
Consider Jim Rutenberg, a political correspondent for The New York Times. He writes regularly against Trump. Last summer he wrote an article that should have gotten him fired. In it he urged the news media to abandon all pretense of objectivity in covering Donald Trump and rather write for the express purpose of defeating him:

If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?
Because if you believe all of those things, you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career. If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that…

Rutenberg believes the media and not Americans are the best judge of Trump. He credits journalists as having some kind of special knowledge that mere mortals don’t have — that a Trump presidency is very dangerous.
What has followed has hardly been a surprise. In November, New York Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. came right out and admitted the newspaper’s bias against Trump.
How does anyone know what is in another man’s heart? Trump has done nothing in his life to deserve the derision against him. Real evidence doesn’t seem important to The New York Times. They have insight into the future that must be listened to even if it is libelous to Trump, runs counter to decency and represents a much bigger threat to American democracy than Trump.
The Times also dishonors the Founding Fathers with the assumption that the checks and balances built into the Constitution are so flimsy that on a whim a U.S. President can install him or herself as a dictator.
The Times has the hubris to claim that only their publisher, editors and reporters can see evil in Trump — as well as his cabinet picks which include generals in the military and captains of industry — that remains hidden from the Americans who voted for him.
I find it interesting that the news media are so convinced that Trump is evil because of some of the moronic comments he has made over the past year. Trump has often said something stupid or inappropriate. That doesn’t mean he is evil or tyrannical.
The progressive media are pouring gasoline onto hot embers. If all hell breaks loose it won’t be Donald Trump that brings it about, but his enemies that care not about what is good for America but rather their own socialist agenda.
Yours in good times and bad,
— John Myers

What was the women's march on Washington really about?

By
Steve Balich
-
0

By Steve Balich 1/25/2017
I Have received some comments about a post I put on the Will County News attacking the words Dan Proft used saying in satire Grumpy old women, referring to the women’s march on Washington. Maybe he should not have used those words in our political correct world, but he did and I found the article from Up Stream Ideas interesting. I want to be clear I do support equal rights and protections for everyone. “All men are created equal” Men refers to all Humans!
The emails I received were extremely vulgar for the most part. Yes, I believe in equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution for everyone. We should all have equal rights and protections. The march seemed to me a political statement by those who hate Trump, those who want taxpayers to pay for their lifestyle, and those that embrace every tenant of the Democrat Party. I some women comment that they felt out of place at the march because the agenda was pro: abortion, Black lives matter, LGBTQ, un-documented immigrant, refugee, Planned Parenthood, Climate Change, etc. and mostly anti-Trump.
Some Values & Principals of the March    Excerpts  from Women’s March on Washington Guiding vision and definition of principals https://static1.squarespace.com/static/584086c7be6594762f5ec56e/t/587ffb31d2b857e5d49dcd4f/1484782386354/WMW+Guiding+Vision+%26+Definition+of+Principles.pdf

  1. Women have the right to live full healthy lives, free from all forms of violence against our bodies. ( what about honor killings of Sharia Law, rights of women in other countries)
  2. No woman or mother should have to fear that her loved ones will be harmed by those sworn to protect. ( this implies police do a bad job. Police  now should be very careful doing their job since they are considered acting improperly in confrontational situations)
  3. They do not accept any federal, state or local rollbacks, cut, or restrictions on access to healthcare, birth control, HIV/AIDS care and prevention or sexuality education. ( Taxpayer should pay for their life Choices)
  4. They believe that LGBTQIA rights are human rights. This includes access to non-judgemental, comprehensive healthcare with no exceptions or limitations; access to name and gender changes on identity documents; access to benefits for education, employment, housing, and an end to police and State violence. ( this speaks for itself)
  5. Basic workplace protections: paid family leave, affordable healthcare, childcare, sick days, fair pay, vacation time, Un documented and migrant workers must be included in our labor protections, stand with the sex workers rights movement. (no comment)
  6. The U.S. should implement the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples.
  7. Believe in immigrant and refugee rights regardless of status or country of origin, migration is a human right and no human being is illegal. ( That means no borders, no vetting, let everyone be a citizen)
  8. Our climate must be protected

 
Children were present in the crowd observing vulgar language, signs, actions, and p—-hats.
“Madona” said she would like to blow up the White House at an event. I don’t take what she said literally or should I.
“Hanoi Jane” after she denounced American soldiers as “war criminals” in the Vietnam war led the LA. march
Angela Davis long time activist  Black Panther “Over the next months and years, we will be called upon to intensify our demands for social justice, to become more militant in our defense of vulnerable populations.”
Wikipedia says “The Women’s March was a worldwide protest on January 21, 2017, in support of women’s rights and other causes including immigration reform, health care reform, protection of the natural environment, LGBTQ rights, racial justice, freedom of religion, and workers’ rights. The rallies were aimed at Donald Trump, the recently inaugurated President of the United States.”
So the anti-Trump, anti -conservative agenda from this march should be hailed as great because the media and leftist progressive global establishment says so. Compare 3 unkind words said in satire to the actual event. Saying something others don’t agree with should be protected.
Included in being equally able to voice an opinion is allowing other opinions.
 
 

1...504505506...663Page 505 of 663

RECENT POSTS

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

© The Will County News