Pocahontas’ Presidential Run Should be Over

While driving on a beautiful day in West Virginia, I heard this news reported over my car radio. Democrat presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren said Michael Brown was “murdered” by a “white” policeman in Ferguson Mo. I became filled with anger. I thought, “This wicked woman’s presidential run should be over.” Everyone knows Brown was shot while assaulting a police officer in his patrol car while Brown tried to take the officer’s gun.

This insidiously evil lie by Warren tells voters everything they need to know about her. Obsessed with gaining power, Warren has decided that the lives of brave and honorable police officers and the lives of Americans potentially killed in a race war are acceptable collateral damage to achieve her goal – the White House.

My thoughts raced back to the heartbreaking Facebook post by 13 year old Jaden Ramos. Jaden’s dad was a NYC police officer who was assassinated along with another officer while sitting in their cruiser on special patrol doing crime reduction work.

Jaden and numerous other children of police officers lost their fathers because Democrats and fake news media lied about the Brown shooting in Ferguson and other incidents. Consequently, Black Lives Matter declared it “open season” on killing police and white people. Angry black youths responded with revenge assassinations of police across America.

Jaden posted: “Today I had to say bye to my father. He was their for me everyday of my life, he was the best father I could ask for. It’s horrible that someone gets shot dead just for being a police officer. Everyone says they hate cops but they are the people that they call for help. I will always love you and I will never forget you. RIP Dad.”

For Warren to reignite the “Brown was murdered” lie five years later is beyond the pale. Warren deceptively markets herself as having superior compassion for victims. In reality, Warren is cold and calculating; willing to say anything in her perverse quest for power to control every aspect of our lives. Elizabeth Warren is a despicable human being.

If you watch, people always show you who they really are. Years ago, I attended a meeting in Washington DC. I met a politician who sounded great. After the meeting, away from cameras and microphones, he treated his assistant humiliatingly. My opinion of him suffered.

Just like her fake Indian heritage, Warren has shown us that her self-proclaimed superior compassion is fake also.

Warren’s irresponsible lie about the circumstances of Brown’s death so infuriated me because it sent a clarion call to blacks to kill more cops. I have had my fill of Democrats instigating hate, violence and divisiveness while falsely portraying themselves as paragons of superior compassion. Meanwhile, Democrats’ fake news media buddies demonize decent everyday Americans for opposing socialism and anti-Americanism.

Does character matter when selecting our leaders? Absolutely.

“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when a wicked man rules, the people groan.” Proverbs 29:2.

President George Washington said, “…a good moral character is the first essential in a man…It is therefore highly important that you should endeavor not only to be learned but virtuous.”

Presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and their fellow Democrats instigating the murdering of police by continuing to lie about Michael Brown is the polar opposite of virtuous.

The people “have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge– I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.” John Adams

The qualities of a great man are “vision, integrity, courage, understanding, the power of articulation, and profundity of character.” Dwight Eisenhower

Character is the only secure foundation of the state.” Calvin Coolidge

Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, of character. It is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent.” Theodore Roosevelt

Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.: “I desire so to conduct the affairs of this administration that if at the end, when I come to lay down the reins of power, I have lost every other friend on earth, I shall at least have one friend left, and that friend shall be down inside me.” Abraham Lincoln

Since having to defend President Bill Clinton’s serial adultery and numerous allegations of sexual assault, Democrats and fake news media say expecting character in our leaders is unrealistic.

Elizabeth Warren seated in the big chair in the Oval Office would be the equivalent of wicked Hillary on steroids; severely punishing achievers, disarming law abiding gun-owners, jailing political opponents, dividing Americans into groups that hate each other, persecuting Christians, killing babies after birth, crushing our economy and government tyrannically micromanaging our lives.

As president, Warren’s lack of character would reap horrifying and devastating consequences. Who in their right mind would vote for a presidential candidate who is complicit in the murdering of police? Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren must never be allowed anywhere near becoming leader of the free world.

VIDEO: New expose on the great evil that is Google

Posted by Eeyore

According to the Blacklist doc at 10:30, The Rebel.media is delisted from some google search results, as well as The Gateway Pundit, Infowars and many more.

Google Document Dump

RELATED ARTICLES:

Google “Machine Learning Fairness” Whistleblower Goes Public, says: “burden lifted off of my soul”

UPDATE: Google Engineer Who Went Public Placed on Administrative Leave

Current Sr. Google Engineer Goes Public on Camera: Tech is “dangerous,” “taking sides”

Conservative Teenager Banned from YouTube for Her Respectful Opposition to LGBT Movement

President Trump in one tweet shows why ‘red flag’ laws are so very dangerous

President Trump tweeted the following on August 13th, 2019:

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldn’t be allowed to have any weapon. He’s nuts!

With this one tweet every American can see the great danger of red flag laws.

QUESTION: Did President Trump send out this tweet to kill any chance of a federal red flag law passing?

President Trump may be thinking 20 steps ahead of both the Republicans who support red flag laws and Democrats who support universal background checks. Republicans have no stomach to pass any universal background check laws. Republicans also are not in favor of banning “assault rifles” either.

Has Trump shown Republicans and Democrats alike what they can expect when he’s re-elected? Is the President showing how a red flag law can be used to go after the many “crazies” in the Democratic and even in the RepublicanParty?

Here’s The President’s Strategy

The President of the United States just called an American citizen and journalist “nuts.” Merriam-Webster defines the adjective nuts as follows: 2INSANECRAZY.

No matter what you think about Chris Cuomo’s rant, his use of foul language and loss of control, it doesn’t rise to the level of taking away a fundamental Constitutional right.

Does this tweet rise to the level of taking away Cuomo’s 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms? I, and my guess is that President Trump, think not.

When any President of the United States calls another person “nuts” (crazy) and implies that that person shouldn’t be allowed to “have any weapon” law enforcement takes notice.

We are moving down a very slippery slope indeed. And perhaps President Trump is putting on the brakes?

As I warned before, “Red flag laws will inevitably lead to innocent people caught up in the feeding frenzy to keep guns out of the hands of ‘crazy people’.”

Trump’s tweet makes my point perfectly.

Be warned. Red flag laws and universal background checks are very very dangerous. They can be used to disarm law abiding citizens, political opponents, and even journalists. We will wait and see what happens when Congress reconvenes. Hopefully the panic to do something will have subsided. And the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms will prevail.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hawkins: Universal Background Checks Unenforceable Without Gun Registry

The Argument Beneath the Surface of Gun Control

PODCAST: Dissecting the consequences of the “red flag” laws

RELATED VIDEO: NRA’s Wayne LaPierre Stands Strong for Law-Abiding Citizens.

PODCAST: Voter ID. Rep. Bob Barr: Speech Trump Needs to Make. Red Flag bills.

GUESTS:

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues – including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform — as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. His analysis and commentary have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, Politico, Human Events, National Review Online and Townhall. Along with John Fund, he is the co-author of Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk and Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department

TOPICVoter ID Opponents Lose Again!!

Congressman Bob Barr represented Georgia’s 7th District in the House of Representatives. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and is Chairman of Liberty Guard a non-profit, pro-liberty organization. He also heads the Law Enforcement Education Foundation and a consulting firm, Liberty Strategies.

TOPICThe Follow-up Speech Trump Needs to Make

Rob Natelson has divided his professional life between the private for-profit sector, the private non-profit sector, and state and local government. A former law professor and nationally known constitutional scholar, he is currently a self-employed consultant who serves as senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute in Denver.

TOPICRed Flag bills: Attack on the Bill of Rights!!

Democrats and Hollywood obsessing over Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

The Democratic Party and Hollywood fear that President Trump will get to appoint another Supreme Court justice.

Democrats

Barely a week goes by that an email from the Democratic Majority: HMP or TrainDemocrats.org goes out about Justice Ginsburg.

An August 8, 2019 email titled don’t delete → Ruth Bader Ginsburg update from Democratic Majority: HMP stated:

This email will take a minute or two to finish.

But it’s the most important email in your inbox, and we need you to read it from start to end.

BECAUSE: Trump is plotting to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a right-wing extremist.

SO: We set an [ambitious] new goal to raise $51,185 to elect Democrats who will support Justice Ginsburg.

Rush a 5X-MATCHED gift before Trump can nominate another far-right extremist >>

Similar emails were sent out on August 13th titled TO: Ruth Bader Ginsburg FROM: Democratic Supporters, August 12th titled re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, August 6th titled Ruth Bader Ginsburg fights back against Trump, July 31st titled your 300% match is EXPIRING, July 30th titled Trump REPLACES Ruth Bader Ginsburg?!, July 28th titled re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, July 26th titled Ruth Bader Ginsburg NEEDS you and July 23rd titled You’ve Been Selected ☞ Honor Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Legacy!

What is interesting is that on July 26th, 2019 The Western Journal published the below video about Justice Ginsburg praising Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.

It is clear the Democratic Party fears that Justice Ginsburg will step down, giving President Trump a super majority of originalist judges on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hollywood

Hollywood is following the Democratic Party line. On May 4, 2018 the film RGB was released followed on December 25, 2018 by the film On the Basis of Sex. Both are biopics on Justice Ginsburg.

Add to this two films released in 2019 that have characters who idolize Justice Ginsburg. These films are BOOKSMART and Dora and the Lost City of Gold. Dora? Really?

Watch the official trailer for the teen movie BOOKSMART staring Olivia Wilde, Lisa Kudrow. Note the pictures of Michelle Obama and Justice Ginsburg in the trailer (can you say brainwashing):

Hollywood is in full propaganda mode in support of the Democratic Party’s effort to keep pressure on Justice Ginsburg not to retire.

What is worse is that the Democratic Party is using fear to fund raise off of a woman who just had cancer surgery.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Treated for Pancreatic Cancer 

Federal Lawsuit Filed On Behalf of Marine Dad Banned from School Property After He Objected to Islamic Indoctrination of Daughter

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, yesterday afternoon, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of former Marine, John Kevin Wood, and his wife, Melissa, who refuse to allow their teenage daughter to be subjected to Islamic indoctrination and propaganda in her high school World History class.  The lawsuit was filed against the Charles County Public Schools, the Board of Education, and the Principal and Vice-Principal of La Plata High School located in La Plata, Maryland.

The Woods’ daughter was forced to profess and to write out the Shahada in worksheets and quizzes.  The Shahada is the Islamic Creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”  For non-Muslims, reciting the statement is sufficient to convert one to Islam.  Moreover, the second part of the statement, “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah,” signifies the person has accepted Muhammad as their spiritual leader.  The teenager was also required to memorize and recite the Five Pillars of Islam.

Charles County Public Schools disparaged Christianity by teaching its 11th grade students, including the Woods’ daughter, that: “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”

The Charles County Public Schools also taught the following:

  • “Islam, at heart, is a peaceful
  • “To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”
  • The Koran states, “Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are thereforeobedient.”

Read the two exhibits containing Student worksheets here.

The sugarcoated version of Islam taught at La Plata High School did not mention that the Koran explicitly instructs Muslims “to kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.”  (Sura 9-5)

When John Kevin Wood discovered the Islamic propaganda and indoctrination of his daughter, he was rightfully outraged.  He immediately contacted the school to voice his objections and to obtain an alternative assignment for his daughter.

The Woods, as Christians, believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and our Savior, that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, and that following the teachings of Jesus Christ is the only path to eternal salvation.  The Woods believe that it is a sin to profess commitment in word or writing to any god other than the Christian God.  Thus, they object to their daughter being forced to deny the Christian God and to her high school promoting Islam over other religions.

The school ultimately refused to allow the Woods’ daughter to opt-out of the assignments, forcing her to either violate her faith by pledging to Allah or receive zeros for the assignments.  Together, John Kevin Wood, Melissa Wood, and their daughter chose to remain faithful to God and refused to complete the assignments, even though failing grades would harm her future admission to college and her opportunities to obtain college scholarships.

Adding insult to injury, in an effort to silence all pro-Christian speech in her school, La Plata’s principal, without a hearing or any opportunity to refute the false allegations against him, issued a “No Trespass” notice against John Kevin Wood denying him any access to school grounds.

Wood served 8 years in the Marine Corps.  He was deployed in Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm and lost friends to Islamic extremists.  A few years later, Wood responded as a firefighter to the 9-11 Islamic terrorist attack on the Pentagon.  Wood witnessed firsthand the destruction created in the name of Allah and knows that Islam is not “a religion of peace.”  The school prevented John Kevin Wood from defending his daughter’s Christian beliefs against Islamic indoctrination, even though as a Marine, he stood in harm’s way to defend our nation, and the Charles County Public Schools.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented: “Defendants forced Wood’s daughter to disparage her Christian faith by reciting the Shahada, and acknowledging Mohammed as her spiritual leader. Her World History class spent one day on Christianity and two weeks immersed in Islam. Such discriminatory treatment of Christianity is an unconstitutional promotion of one religion over another.”

Thompson added, “The course also taught false statements such as “Allah is the same God worshiped by Christians, and Islam as a “religion of peace. Parents must be ever vigilant to the Islamic indoctrination of their children under the guise of teaching history and multiculturalism.  This is happening in public schools across the country.  And they must take action to stop it.”

The Woods’ lawsuit seeks a court declaration that Defendants violated their constitutional and statutory rights, a temporary and permanent injunction barring Defendants from endorsing Islam or favoring Islam over Christianity and other religions, and from enforcing the no trespassing order issued against John Kevin Wood.

Read entire Federal Complaint here.

EPSTEIN DEAD: The Media, “Epstein committed Suicide.” Joe Biden, “We choose truth over facts.”

Statement from Attorney General William P. Barr on the Death of Jeffrey Epstein

Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:

“I was appalled to learn that Jeffrey Epstein was found dead early this morning from an apparent suicide while in federal custody. Mr. Epstein’s death raises serious questions that must be answered. In addition to the FBI’s investigation, I have consulted with the Inspector General who is opening an investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Epstein’s death.”


When news broke of American financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Edward Epstein being taken out of Manhattan’s Metropolitan Correctional Center on a stretcher CNN ran this headline “Jeffrey Epstein has died by suicide, sources say.”

How can CNN know this is true? Because they want it to be true. As Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden said at a small campaign rally in Iowa the day before, “We choose truth over facts.”

CNN and many other news outlets were running similar “truth over facts” headlines. The presumption (their chosen truth) is that Epstein committed suicide without any facts to prove it. Sources are not facts, as we have learned from two years of lies about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Facts are facts. Facts lead to the truth.

There are three possibilities in the death of Epstein:

  1. He died of natural causes.
  2. He committed suicide.
  3. He was murdered.

The only way we the people will know the facts is after the results of the FBI investigation and the DOJ IG report are released. These investigations will include the gathering of all evidence (including video of Epstein in his cell), an autopsy to determine the cause of death and a review of everything that happened in the days leading up to Epstein being found dead.

In a column titled “AUDIO: Jeffrey Epstein DEAD FOR HOURS On Suicide Watch With Cameras In Cell Before EMS Arrived” investigative journalist Laura Loomer reported:

Exclusive sources for LauraLoomer.us tell us that at around 6:20 am EST, Manhattan Correctional Center (MCC) requested First Responders for an inmate who was found unresponsive.

Jeffrey Epstein, 66, was found unresponsive this morning in his cell in his bed, and was cold to touch when correctional officers entered to wake him for breakfast. Our sources say that there were no injuries visible and they began chest compressions while EMS were en route.

[ … ]

There are reports from MSM claiming that Epstein hung himself which are categorically FALSE. Epstein’s body was cold to touch which means he had been dead for at least 4 hours, and if he had hung himself, one of the TWO cameras in his cell would have alerted the officers monitoring them. The reports being pushed through MSM are contradictory to that which our exclusive sources and the EMS recording states.

There would not have been a way for Epstein to commit suicide because while on suicide watch, one does not have clothes, bed sheets, or shoelaces. Inmates on suicide watch only have a smock and a hole in the ground for using the restroom. [Emphasis added]

Listen to  the below audio after the 2 min 40 sec mark where dispatchers confirm that Epstein was stiff and cold.

How Epstein died is pure speculation at this point.

The media has done what it always does, report what they want to believe rather than report the facts. Headlines are more important than the facts. Let the facts come out.

As Mark Twain said, “Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.”

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Questions Swirl Around Epstein’s Death

What’s Next for Epstein Investigation

Yes, You Heard That Right. MSNBC Just Tossed Out A Conspiracy Theory About Jeffrey Epstein’s Death 

Bill Clinton Wanted To Appoint A Lawmaker Caught In The Epstein Scandal To The Supreme Court

RELATED VIDEOS:

Significant Questions Following Epstein’s Apparent Suicide

It’s in writing. Pedophilia is a part of the postmodern agenda.

“Protecting” Illegal Aliens Isn’t Neighborly or Virtuous: It’s a Crime

You could hardly have missed it.  It was all over the media in the past few days, and seemingly painted more as a human-interest story than one about people flagrantly violating the law: “Nashville neighbors stop ICE agents from nabbing father and son by linking arms in driveway”“ICE agents back down after neighbors, activists link arms to help father and son avoid feds”“ICE tries to bring man into custody, neighbors form human chain to let them get home”;  etc., etc.

Amazingly, one reporter even stated, as if it were an indisputable fact, that “[b]ecause this was a civil matter … citizens are not committing a crime by interfering.”  That’s simply incorrect as a matter of law, and reckless to even suggest.

So why were none of these “neighbors” arrested for stopping ICE from picking up someone the agency says was a known convicted criminal?  When police come looking for an American citizen who’s committed a crime, do the neighbors normally think they can get in the way without consequences?  Do they think keeping law enforcement from doing their jobs and keeping the community safe is just the neighborly thing to do?

When 10 News Nashville spoke to Lincoln Memorial University law professor William Gill to try to explain to viewers why none of the “human chain” were arrested, he didn’t say ICE couldn’t have arrested them.  Instead he recognized the agency likely could have for “some kind of obstruction charge” but for whatever reason “probably decided they didn’t want to do that.”

But what does the law actually say?  The law sure sounds like this was a crime.  Probably multiple crimes.

Professor Gill’s first instinct was correct in mentioning the federal obstruction of justice laws.  When ICE is actively looking for a particular illegal alien, that often means the alien has already been ordered removed from the country by an immigration judge.  It follows  that someone getting in the way of ICE enforcing that order of removal could be committing “obstruction of proceedings” before a federal agency, namely before the immigration court that issued the order.

But there are also other federal crimes more specific to people getting in the way of immigration enforcement.  In Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1324 is called “Bringing in and harboring certain aliens.”  It’s often referred to as the federal alien “smuggling” statute, but it actually criminalizes many more activities regarding protecting or assisting aliens than just anything that could described as smuggling.

It’s probably more accurate to refer to it as the alien harboring statute.  It might or might not have applied to this particular situation, but easily could in similar circumstances.

Notably, neither the obstruction nor harboring statute requires federal agents to have a criminal warrant for the person they’re looking before someone else deliberately getting in the way can be arrested.  Neither statute draws any distinction between criminal and civil enforcement at all.

This is just one prominent episode in an alarming trend: a lot of people don’t just think illegal aliens can freely break the law, but that everyone else can do it too if it’s to “help” or “protect” illegal aliens.  It’s one more part of what’s been described as “a radical new framework that treats any restrictions on immigration and enforcement of current laws as immoral.”

Even people like the Mayor of Oakland or a state court judge in Massachusetts—public officials sworn to uphold the law—buy into it and act on it.  It’s easy virtue-signaling as long as there are no consequences.

So there need to be consequences.  This dangerous myth needs to be dispelled or more people will interfere with immigration enforcement and it’ll become ever more dangerous for everyone involved.  While ICE exercised their judgment and discretion to act with restraint and not make criminal arrests this time, the only way to make people realize it’s unacceptable to obstruct the enforcement of immigration laws may be for ICE and other federal agencies to start making more arrests in the future when the “neighbors” try to get in the way.

COLUMN BY

DAVID JAROSLAV

Dave joined FAIR in 2017 after more than ten years as an Assistant State Attorney in Broward County, Florida. His prosecutorial experience covered trial litigation at the misdemeanor and felony levels, drug court and mental health court, and two years as an intake attorney in the juvenile division working closely with law enforcement. Before this, he was a legislative analyst/staff attorney with the Judiciary Committee of the Florida House of Representatives, where he assisted state legislators in ensuring the effectiveness and constitutionality of legislation on a wide variety of subject matter. In both capacities, he often dealt with the interaction of state law and immigration. Dave holds BAs in History and International Relations from American University and a JD from Tulane University Law School.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Guidelines Aim to Ensure Immigrants Are Self-Sufficient

Is China Schooling U.S. With Student Visas?

Seeking Asylum in Guatemala is Completely Appropriate

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Red Flag laws are a cover-up for the failures of government to see and act on real red flags

President Trump during his comments on the shootings in Texas and Ohio came out in favor of so called “red flag” laws, also known as “extreme risk protection order law.”

Red flag laws haven’t stopped any person bent on mass murder. The Florida legislature passed a “red flag” law after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. The red flag law was passed by the Republican majority before the Majory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission report into the shooting was completed and issued on what happened leading up to the shooting.

In a January 1st, 2019 column by the Daily Caller titled Florida Newspaper Publishes Exhaustive Parkland Report: Sheriff’s Office ‘Cost Children Their Lives’ Neetu Chandak wrote:

Authorities and school officials either failed to act or were unclear about procedures when confronting the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooter Feb. 14, 911 logs, surveillance videos, and interviews show.

On January 11th, 2019 newly elected Governor Ron DeSantis removed Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel from office.

In a March 1st, 2019 article by NPR titled Parkland Shooting Suspect: A Story Of Red Flags, Ignored Joel Rose and Brakkton Booker reported:

Friends, family and neighbors were worried about Nikolas Cruz. So were social workers, teachers and sheriff’s deputies in two counties.

[ … ]

When Cruz was just 10 years old, his mother called the police to the house. That call in 2008 was the first of dozens of times over the next decade she would summon law enforcement, often for help keeping her sons under control.

[ … ]

By 2013, according to that list, the calls to the deputies began detailing more violence. In November of that year, Lynda said she was thrown against a wall because she took away an Xbox gaming system. In November 2014, deputies report Cruz used a BB gun to shoot a chicken.

By early 2016, deputies were called after a neighbor’s son saw a disturbing Instagram post that seemed to suggest Cruz “planned to shoot up the school.” At the time, deputies concluded that Cruz owned knives and a BB gun. They passed along that information to a school resource officer at Stoneman Douglas, but it is not clear whether any other steps were taken.

It is one of several incidents now under further investigation by the sheriff’s office.

Of the 23 incidents deputies responded to at the Cruz residence, 18 of them involved Nikolas Cruz, according to the sheriff’s office. The office says that “none appeared arrestable under Florida law.”

Read more.

On June 4th, 2019 I reported:

Former Broward Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson is facing 11 criminal charges – including child neglect, culpable negligence and perjury – in connection with his lack of response to the Feb. 14, 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Broward State Attorney Mike Satz announced Tuesday.

Following a 14-month investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, former Broward Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson, 56, was arrested Tuesday on seven counts of child neglect, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury. The investigation examined the actions of law enforcement during and following the Parkland school mass shooting.

On June 6th 2019 Dana Loesch stated, “[Broward County] Sheriff Scott Israel worked hand in hand with [Superintendent of Broward County schools] Robert Runcie to hide criminal actions, misdemeanors, felonious behavior of students like this murderer. They enabled him to avoid having a record established that would have prevented him from legally purchasing a firearm. In my opinion, Sheriff Scott Israel may as well have walked into the gun store and bought it for him.”

There were many red flags involving Nickolas Cruz.

In addition to all of the above Nickolas Cruz was reported to the FBI twice.

The first time was on September 24, 2017 when Ben Bennight saw a comment on YouTube posted by a Nickolas Cruz stating, “Im going to be a professional school shooter.” 

The second report was on January 5, 2018, just over a month before the deadly Parkland shooting, to the FBI was from an anonymous caller from West Virginia who reported, “Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.”

CONCLUSION

Red flag laws are designed to cover up the failures of school district, local, state and federal law enforcement. Red flag laws will inevitably lead to innocent people caught up in the feeding frenzy to keep guns out of the hands of “crazy people.” Do these crazy people include current and former members of the U.S. armed forces who suffer from PTSD? In November 2018 a 61-year-old man is dead after he was shot by an officer trying to enforce Maryland’s new ‘red flag’ law.

Government imposed red flag laws can’t stop a killer from killing.

These 17 states and the District of Columbia have passed red flag laws: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii (effective Jan. 1, 2020), Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada (effective Jan. 1, 2020), New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

As Joseph Stalin said,

“Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.”

At some point red flag laws will be used to kill the idea of the right of the people to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

This is the current end game of many politicians, Republican and Democrat alike.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Guns and the Do-Something Fallacy – WSJ

Raising a Black Flag Against Red Flag Laws

Trump Is Unlikely To Commit Political Suicide by Betraying Us On Guns

Answers to Common Gun-Related Questions After the Shootings in El Paso and Dayton

Mass Shootings Aren’t Becoming More Common–and Evidence Contradicts Stereotypes about the Shooters

7 Reasons to Oppose Red Flag Guns Laws

RELATED VIDEOS:

Can You Guess How Many More Times Knives Are Used for Murder Compared to Rifles? The Answer Is Massive.

Universal Studios is promoting a film about the “elites” hunting down people who disagree with them. The film due out in late September is call “The Hunt.” Watch The Hunt – Official Trailer [HD]. UPDATE: Universal Studios has pulled the film and it’s trailer.

VIDEO: What the FBI Knew about Spygate Conspirator Bruce Ohr

Bruce Ohr was removed from his post of associate deputy attorney general on December 6, 2017, when it was discovered that he was actively conspiring against President Trump with others (including his wife Nellie Ohr) in and out of the Justice Department.

Ohr was corruptly used by the FBI as a conduit to Clinton spy Christopher Steele and the Clinton-DNC spy ring at Fusion, and we now have received 34 pages of “302” report material from the FBI interviews of Ohr – documents that Congress has been seeking but have been unable to get for over a year. (FBI agents use a Form 302 to summarize interviews and record notes taken during an interview.)

We obtained these documents in response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit we filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to an August 6, 2018, FOIA request seeking Form 302s for a number of interviews with Ohr concerning his interactions with former British spy Christopher Steele (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-02107)).

  • On November 22, 2016, Bruce Ohr said that  “reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia were going to the Clinton Campaign, Jon Winer at the U.S. State Department and the FBI.”
In late September 2016, Ohr describes a person (likely Christopher Steele) as “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President.”
“Ohr knew that [Fusion GPS’s] Glen Simpson and others were talking to Victoria Nuland at the U.S. State Department.”
  • Glenn Simpson directed a person whose is redacted to speak to the press. It appears as if the press that person went to was the far left leaning Mother Jones.
On December 5, 2016, Ohr promised to “voluntarily” give his wife Nellie Ohr’s Fusion GPS research to the FBI. He also provided the FBI with a report on Paul Manafort titled, “Manafort Chronology.”
  • On December 12, 2016 Simpson gave Ohr a thumb drive with Fusion GPS research on it. Ohr claims to not know what is on that drive. During the meeting Simpson, based evidently on a meeting with Glenn Simpson, identified Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former personal lawyer as having “many Russian clients.” Simpson also told Ohr that Cohen, “may have” attended a meeting in Prague.
Ohr describes Simpson directing someone to talk to the Mother Jones reporter “as it was Simpson’s Hail Mary attempt.”
  • On December 20, 2016, Ohr provided the FBI with his wife’s Nellie Ohr’s Fusion GPS research, “which contained the totality” of her work “but the Fusion GPS header was stripped.”
  • On January 23, 2017, Ohr tells the FBI that Steele told him that Steele “spoke with a staff member of Senator John McCain’s office sometime prior to October 2016.”
  • The FBI interviews show that Ohr texted and talked to Christopher Steele using the WhatsApp application.
  • On February 2, 2017, the FBI tells Ohr to see if Steele would be “comfortable getting the name of an FBI agent” as a contact. Ohr tells the agents that State Department official Kathleen Kavalec spoke with “Steele several times prior to the U.S. Presidential election and believed Steele’s reporting to have [been] generated mainly from [REDACTED].
  • On February 14, 2017, Ohr tells the FBI that Steele communicated with him via Facetime that Steele was “beginning to worry about his business.” Steele discussed brokering new business with the FBI and told Ohr, “You may see me re-emerge in a couple of weeks.”
  • On May 3, 2017, Steele called Ohr to tell him that he “had been worried about Director Comey’s upcoming testimony to Congress, especially his response to questions that would be raised by (Senator) Grassley.” Although what he was specifically worried about is redacted, Steele was “happy with Director Comey’s response.”
Steele also stated that he was limited in “his ability to testify before Congress” because of disclosure laws in the UK being more narrow than the United States.
  • On May 12, 2017, Steele called Ohr to discuss a letter the Senate Intelligence Committee sent him. According to Ohr, “The letter requested answers to the following questions:

Had Steele provided information to the US Government?

What was the scope of Steele’s investigation?

Did Steele have any additional information to provide? In May, 2017, Ohr was asked by the FBI to ask “Steele if he would be willing to have a conversation with FBI agents in the UK.” Steele responded that he would, but he would need to check with a redacted name.

These new Bruce Ohr FBI 302s show an unprecedented and irregular effort by the FBI, DOJ, and State Department to dig up dirt on President Trump using the conflicted Bruce Ohr, his wife, and the Clinton/DNC spies at Fusion GPS. The FISA courts weren’t informed of this corrupted process when they were asked to approve and reapprove extraordinary spy warrants targeting President Trump.

Here is some more important background on Ohr, Steele and the Spygate affair.

In June, we uncovered documents showing in the removal of Bruce Ohr November 13, 2016, Ohr was given a performance award of $28,000. This was during the time of his deep involvement in the highly controversial Justice Department surveillance of the Trump presidential campaign. The bonus was nearly double the $14,250 performance award he was given on November 29, 2015.

One of our FOIA lawsuits recently produced information from the DOJ showing a conversation between former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Kathleen Kavalec and Bruce Ohr, discussing the targeting of Donald Trump with Steele dossier material. In discussing a meeting with the potential source for a Mother Jones article accusing the Trump campaign of taking money from a Russian-American oil magnate, as well as Christopher Steele’s connection to that source, Kavalec emails Ohr citing the accusatory Mother Jones article. Ohr says, “I really hope we can get something going here.”

We also obtained an email revealing that Nellie Ohr, wife of Bruce Ohr, informed him that she was deleting emails sent from his DOJ email account. The full email exchange is between Bruce Ohr, Lisa Holtyn, Nellie Ohr, and Stefan Bress, a first secretary at the German Embassy, and is part of 339 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Justice.

We also uncovered emails from Ohr showing that he remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant. The records show that Ohr served as a go-between for Steele by passing along information to “his colleagues” on matters relating to Steele’s activities.

Ohr also set up meetings with Steele, regularly talked to him on the telephone and provided him assistance in dealing with situations Steele was confronting with the media.

We are suing the DOJ for communications between two of the pivotal players in the Deep State, anti-Trump collusion – former FBI official Peter Strzok and Ohr (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-01082)). We are challenging the Justice Department’s extraordinary claim that there are no records of communications between Strzok and Ohr in light of the preeminent role both individuals played in the Deep State effort to undermine the Trump campaign and administration. In addition, Ohr himself testified before Congress that he did, in fact, meet and communicate with Strzok.

We also seek records about the agency’s involvement in persuading President Trump to defer his September 2018 decision to declassify DOJ documents related to the Russia investigation (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00507)). Our lawsuit is also seeking Ohr’s records of communications around the time of Trump’s declassification announcement.

And I can tell you that more is coming as a result of our investigations of the biggest corruption scandal in American history….

FBI Leakers Exposed by Judicial Watch

Fourteen FBI employees were referred to the organization’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive or classified information, and we now have the records of those referrals.

This comes on the heels of our uncovering an FBI report revealing that fired FBI Director James Comey kept FBI documents on President Trump at his house. Comey also admitted to leaking those documents.

Although the FBI’s OPR does not have its own website, according to the DOJ’s OPR, leak allegations may come, “from a variety of sources, including U.S. Attorney’s offices and other Department components, courts, Congress, media reports, other federal agencies, state and local government agencies, private citizens, private attorneys, criminal defendants, civil litigants, and self-referrals. OPR also regularly conducts its own searches to identify judicial findings of misconduct against Department attorneys.”

According to the DOJ’s OPR, it “investigates certain misconduct allegations involving federal law enforcement agents when they relate to a Department attorney’s alleged professional misconduct, as well as claims of reprisal against FBI whistleblowers.” “If OPR finds professional misconduct in a particular case, a different office—the Professional Misconduct Review Unit—reviews OPR’s findings and determines the appropriate discipline.” Final recommendations are given to “the appropriate office.”

We obtained the records through a January 2019 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking:

  • All complaints, referrals, or other reports received by the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility related to the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and/or classified information by any employee of the FBI.
  • Any records documenting the closure or other final disposition of any complaint, referral, or other report described in part one of this request.

One referral we obtained appears to refer to former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe was closed on March 20, 2018 and states as a mitigating factor that the “Employee was facing unprecedented challengers and pressures.”

(Name redacted) (DOJ/O&R)  Closed: 3/20/2018  References: 2.5, 2.6, 4.10

SES [Senior Executive Service] employee released the FBI Sensitive information to a reporter and lacked candor not under oath and under oath when questioned about it, in violation of Offense Codes 4.10 (Unauthorized Disclosure – Sensitive Information); 2.5 (Lack of Candor- No Oath); and 2.6 (Lack of Candor – Under Oath).

The proposed decision in this matter was made by the AD, OPR. The final decision was made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions. DOK retains final decision-making authority for certain high-ranking FBI officials.

MITIGATION: Employee as (redacted) years of FBI service and a remarkable performance record. Employee was facing unprecedented challengers and pressures.

AGGRAVATION: Employee held an extremely high position and was expected to comport himself with the utmost integrity. Lack of candor is incompatible with the FBI’s Core Values.

FINAL ACTION(S):  OPR PROPOSED DECISION Proposed DISMISSAL

OPR FINAL DECISION:  DISMISSAL

McCabe was fired from the FBI on March 16, 2018, for leaking to the media and lacking “candor.” Then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a statement said:

After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).

The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.

Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”

The records show that penalties for unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and/or classified information ranged from no action (due to administrative closure) to, as in the case of McCabe, dismissal. Other FBI employees’ offenses reported in the documents list several cases in which the final action was less severe than OPR’s proposal:
  1. An unidentified employee was fired. The case was closed in July 2016.
  2. An unidentified employee was given a one-day suspension without pay. The case was closed in April 2016.
  3. The following year an unidentified employee received a five-day suspension without pay, and the case was closed administratively in April 2017.
  4. An SES agent who “misused an FBI database, and provided sensitive information to a former FBI employee” was reported to have had as mitigation that he felt he “had the support of his Division to use his discretion.” OPR proposed a 15-day suspension, but the final decision was to give a letter of censure. This case was closed in June 2017.
  5. An unidentified employee was fired. The case was closed in May 2018.
  6. An unidentified employee was recommended for dismissal but received a 45-day suspension. The case was closed in October 2017.
  7. An unidentified employee was given a 14-day suspension. The case was closed in March 2016.
  8. An unidentified employee, who was cited for misuse of an FBI database and unauthorized disclosure of classified/law-enforcement sensitive/grand jury information, was given a 12-day suspension. The case was closed in January 2016.
  9. An unidentified employee received a letter of censure. The case was closed in August 2016.
  10. An unidentified employee was given a letter of censure. The case was closed in October 2016.
  11. An unidentified employee was accused of “Investigative deficiency – improper handling of documents or property in the care, custody or control of the government; unauthorized disclosure – classified/law enforcement sensitive/grand jury information” and “failure to report – administrative.” It was proposed that they be given a 30-calendar day suspension without pay; the final decision from OPR was that they were given a 10-calendar day suspension without pay. This case was closed in February 2018.
  12. An unidentified employee was fired. This case was closed in October 2017.
  13. An unidentified employee was given a letter of censure. It was proposed that they be fired, but the final decision was a 60-day suspension without pay. The case was closed in January 2019.

This is just a mess. No wonder the FBI was leaking so profusely. These documents show lenient treatment for evident criminal activity. Only four of the 14 employees found to have made an unauthorized disclosure were fired. And even though Andrew McCabe was fired and referred for a criminal investigation for his leak, he hasn’t been prosecuted.

Judicial Watch Challenges Mayor Buttigieg’s Cover-Up on Illegal Alien ID Cards

Sanctuary policies that protect illegal aliens undermine the rule of law – and they are not just in cities such as San Francisco and New York.

We just filed an Access to Public Records Act (APRA) open records lawsuit against the City of South Bend, Indiana, for records of communications of Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s office related to the creation of a municipal ID card for illegal aliens. The card was created by La Casa de Amistad, a local nonprofit corporation (Judicial Watch v. City of South Bend (No. 71C01-1908-Ml-000389)).

On December 16, 2016, the South Bend Tribune reported that, “A nonprofit Latino advocacy group … unveiled a new identification card it hopes will make life easier for undocumented immigrants who live in [South Bend].” La Casa de Amistad Inc. are the creators of this “SB ID.” Mayor Pete Buttigieg reportedly worked “closely with La Casa de Amistad, South Bend’s main Latino outreach center … and the nonprofit’s executive director, Sam Centellas,” to create a “Community Resident Card … created and distributed by the group — a private organization — not the city.”  “Buttigieg’s part to make it all work was to sign an executive order requiring local services and institutions — like law enforcement, schools, the water utility and libraries — to accept the card as a valid form of identification.”

We sued after the City of South Bend failed to respond as required by law to open records requests on June 22, 2019, seeking emails between Buttigieg, members of his staff and officials of La Casa de Amistad regarding the Community Resident Card program.

Mayor Buttigieg’s city administration in South Bend is in cover-up mode on his work for special ID cards to make it easier for illegal aliens to stay in the United States contrary to law. We made simple open records requests and have faced nothing but games from the Buttigieg administration – which is why we had to sue.

Anti-Trump California Tries to Unconstitutionally Mess with Presidential Election – Judicial Watch Sues

Across the country local politicians, prosecutors and judges are abusing their powers to target President Trump. The latest – no surprise – is the State of California, which unconstitutionally demands to see his tax returns before allowing him to appear on the presidential primary ballot.

We just filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past five years (Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477).

The suit argues that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Our clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.

Under the law, known as the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act, candidates who do not publicly disclose their tax returns are barred from having their names printed on California’s primary ballots. We argue that SB 27 imposes candidate qualifications beyond those allowed by the U.S. Constitution and impermissibly burdens a voters’ expressive constitutional and statutory rights. The lawsuit claims violations of the U.S. Constitution’s Qualifications Clause, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1988.

During the 2017-2018 legislative session, then-Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a previous version of this law, which California’s Legislative Counsel concluded “would be unconstitutional if enacted.” In vetoing the 2017-18 tax return law, Brown noted:

First, it may not be constitutional. Second, it sets a “slippery slope” precedent. Today we require tax returns, but what would be next? Five years of health records? A certified birth certificate? High school report cards? And will these requirements vary depending on which political party is in power? A qualified candidate’s ability to appear on the ballot is fundamental to our democratic system. For that reason, I hesitate to start down a road that well might lead to an ever escalating set of differing state requirements for presidential candidates.

Our complaint further alleges the political nature of the law, which is totally divorced from the states’ legitimate constitutional role in administering and establishing procedures for conducting federal elections:

None of the interests proffered by the California legislature for requiring the disclosure of candidates’ tax returns is related to election procedure or administration. Rather, the stated interests incorporate particular, substantive judgments about what is most important for voters to know when considering a candidate, how voters should go about “estimate[ing] the risk” of a candidate “engaging in corruption,” and what might assist law enforcement in detecting violations of the Emoluments Clause and crimes “such as insider trading.”

Unless SB 27 is enjoined, states will assume the power to create their own qualifications for national candidates seeking to obtain a party’s nomination for president. This could lead to as many as 50 distinct and possibly inconsistent sets of qualifications regarding the only national election in the United States. Using rationales similar to California’s, states might come to demand medical records, mental health records, sealed juvenile records, driving records, results of intelligence, aptitude, or personality tests, college applications, Amazon purchases, Google search histories, browsing histories, or Facebook friends.

In their zeal to attack President Trump, California politicians passed a law that unconstitutionally victimizes California voters. A state can’t amend the U.S. Constitution by adding qualifications to run for president, and the courts can’t stop this abusive law fast enough.

lhan Omar claims hate crimes up 226% after Trump rallies, Barr says no evidence hate crimes increased under Trump

“War is deceit,” said Muhammad (Bukhari 4.52.268).

Anti-Semite Ilhan Omar Says Hate Crimes Increase 226% After Trump Holds a Rally — But AG Bill Barr Says “No Evidence” Hate Crimes Increased Under Trump,” by Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit, August 8, 2019:

Radical anti-Semite and Democrat Ilhan Omar tweeted out on Wednesday that counties that hold Trump rallies see a 226% increase in hate crimes.

She added that assaults increase when cities hold Trump rallies.

Of course, this is a crock.

She took her data from a very controversial report by the far left Washignton [sic] Post.

Although there is proof that Antifa attacks tend to increase whenever Trump supporters gather for events.

And Attorney General Bill Barr told Congress in April that he has seen no evidence that hate crimes are up since 2013 when Obama was president.

Via America’s Newsroom:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bernie Sanders, Julián Castro set to speak at Hamas-linked Islamic Society of North America conference

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Concern About Jewish “White Supremacists” (Part 1)

No, Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Humanitarian Hoax of the 2019-2020 Equality Act: Killing America With Kindness

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

The 116th Congress 2019-2020 Equality Act is a Democrat bill prohibiting discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in multiple areas including public accommodations and facilities, education, federal funding, employment, housing, credit, and the jury system. Sounds great – what’s the problem?

The Equality Act “updates” the definitions of three terms: sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and “expands” the categories of public accommodations. On May 17, 2019 H.R. 5: Equality Act passed the Democrat controlled House with unanimous support from Democrats plus eight Republican votes. Next, it goes to the Republican controlled Senate for consideration. Why the partisan split?

The Equality Act seeks to amend and expand the expressly recognized “non-discrimination” categories in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act was designed to provide equal protection under the law to African Americans and to women in 20th century America making it illegal to discriminate against them based on race, ethnicity, or gender. In 1964 the word “gender” was specifically understood to mean male or female in the biological, chromosomal, colloquial sense of the word. In the 21st century the leftist Democrat party is selling sameness as equality and feelings as facts – they are not the same.

Even the name Equality Act is part of the deception. The name evokes compassion in the casual observer, but there is nothing equal about the Equality Act, it is a colossal humanitarian hoax that redefines maleness and femaleness with the words “gender identity.” This is how it works.

No longer satisfied with laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender, the radical left has taken aim at the biological definition of maleness and femaleness making it a subjective matter of opinion rather than an objective matter of chromosomes. Gender identity is not the same as gender. Why is this important?

Facts are not feelings. Facts support the objective reality that is the foundation of biological science, laws, and ordered liberty. Feelings support the subjective reality of political science, the arts, and psychology. We can have feelings about facts, but feelings cannot change facts in a society of ordered liberty. The danger of confusing objective and subjective reality is discussed at length in “The Humanitarian Hoax of Multiple Realities.”

In science, the sex of an individual is determined by a pair of sex chromosomes found in that individual’s DNA. Females have two of the same chromosomes XX, males are identified by having two different chromosomes XY.

Chromosomal sex determination in mammals is a natural function of human development with a primary and secondary component. Primary development is the determination of gonads internal sex glands that make sex hormones and reproductive cells – testes in the male and ovaries in the female. Secondary sex determination are the external expression of maleness and femaleness outside the gonads. This means a male has a penis, seminal vesicles, and prostate glands. The female has a vagina, cervix, uterus, oviducts, and mammary glands.

For the vast majority of the world’s population including, the United States, sexual development is an uncomplicated natural function of human reproduction. Leftist Democrats are exploiting the minuscule portion of the human population that has chromosomal abnormalities and/or ambiguous secondary sex characteristics for political gain.

The leftist Democrat party is attempting to alter the biological science of objective reality, facts, and chromosomes, and replace it with the subjective world of feelings, shattering the foundation of biological sciences and turning it into political science. This is the core of the humanitarian hoax of the Equality Act because it functionally obliterates the differences between maleness and femaleness making them the same rather than equal.

This is extremely important because sameness has serious consequence in society both legally and socially.

Let’s examine the consequences of the Democrat “update” including “gender identity” as it relates to the provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, particularly Title II, III, IV and V:

Title II – Public accommodations such as lodging, restaurants and theaters, may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, and national origin.

Title III – Explicitly prohibits state and local governments from discrimination based on race, religion, color, or national origin in public facilities.

Title IV – Provides for the federal enforcement of desegregating public schools.

Title V – Empowers the Civil Rights Commission to further investigate and act on allegations of discrimination.

According to Wikipedia, “Gender identity is the personal sense of one’s own gender. Gender identity can correlate with assigned sex at birth or can differ from it. All societies have a set of gender categories that can serve as the basis of the formation of a person’s social identity in relation to other members of society. In most societies, there is a basic division between gender attributes assigned to males and females, a gender binary to which most people adhere and which includes expectations of masculinity and femininity in all aspects of sex and gender: biological sex, gender identity, and gender expression.”

The first and most basic human identity is universally announced around the world at the moment of birth. “It’s a boy!” “It’s a girl!”  What this means is that in most societies around the world people accept the binary definitions of maleness and femaleness based on XX and XY chromosomes and their factual physical expression. The leftist Democrat attempt to redefine maleness and femaleness as non-binary and a matter of personal feelings, is a political power grab by the left selling sameness as equality. Why would they do that?

The leftist Democrat motivation is to collapse America from within and replace our democracy with socialism and our capitalism with communism. The left did not originate dirty political tricks, they have just honed them to an art form. Of the 45 Communist Goals read into the Congressional Record-Appendix, pp. A34-A35 on January 10, 1963 items 17 24, 25, 26, 39, 40, and 41 that seek to collapse accepted norms and the authority of the family are of special interest to this discussion.

If the Equality Act passes, schools will be teaching the leftist non-binary definition of maleness and femaleness to America’s children. The biological differences between boys and girls will be denied and the social norms of privacy obliterated. Titles II, III, IV, and V will force the implementation of joint bathrooms, joint locker rooms, joint showering facilities, joint sports teams, etc etc etc. The deceitful Equality Act targets America’s children with Lenin’s prescient warning, “Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.”

Six decades ago when W. Cleon Skousen published The Naked Communist and the Civil Rights Act was passed, it was unimaginable that leftist radicals would attempt to destabilize and transform society by redefining maleness and femaleness. Skousen, an anti-Communist and former FBI special agent and field director for the American Security Council, served President Ronald Reagan on the Council for National Policy. He maintained that Communism was waging a psychological war designed to soften America and change American thinking in preparation for the final Communist takeover.

From “The Naked Communist,” by W. Cleon Skousen 1958 p.224-227 Waking Lion Press

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N.   as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court

It is chilling how much the 2020 Democrat party platform comports to the Communist goals listed in the 1963 Congressional Record-Appendix. The Democrat party has devolved from the America-first voice of JFK to the screeching sounds of leftist radicals who embrace Communism disguised as equality. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the new face of the New Democrat party, unapologetically seeks to make America Communist. She and her handlers have usurped the authority of former party leaders and are leading the insurrection against the old guard to establish the subversive new Democrat In Name Only (DINO) party.

Communism has always had world domination as its goal. Joseph Stalin explains how socialism is the stepping stone in his famous quote,

“World dictatorship can be established only when victory of socialism has been achieved in certain countries or groups of countries . . . and when these federation of republics have finally grown into a world union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting the whole of mankind under the hegemony of the international proletariat organized as a state.” Stalin elaborates, “Divide the world into regional groups as a transitional stage to world government. Populations will more readily abandon their national loyalty to a vague regional loyalty than they will for a world authority. Later the regions can be brought together all the way into a single world dictatorship.”

Since its inception, Communism has been determined to eliminate all religions and their moral authority. Communism views religions as competing ideologies to the absolute authority of the state. Evangelical leader Franklin Graham reveals how the Equality Act legalizes reverse discrimination against the moral teachings and authority of our American Judeo-Christian tradition. Of special interest to his argument are items 27 and 28 that seek to discredit religion and its moral authority:

“Rather than offering meaningful protections for individuals, the Equality Act would impose sweeping new norms that negatively impact the unborn, health care, charitable services, schools, personal privacy, athletics, free speech, religious liberties, and parental rights,” five chairmen of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) declared in May.

“The Act’s unsound definitions of ‘sex’ and ’gender identity’ would erase women’s distinct, hard-won recognition in federal laws. Its sex-based nondiscrimination terms would end women’s shelters and many single-sex schools. It would close faith-based foster care and adoption agencies that honor children’s rights to a mother and father. The bill would even act as an abortion mandate, the bishops added.”

Beyond its confusing, destabilizing, psychological consequences to children in American schools K-12, the Equality Act would eliminate separate bathrooms, locker rooms, bathing facilities etc for adult men, and women in public spaces nationwide. Our cultural norms and ordered liberty in America have always recognized the biological differences between male and female. Men and women are NOT the same – equal yes, the same NO.

The 2019-2020 Equality Act is part of the sinister attack David Horowitz describes in his new book, Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America.

Horowitz explains how the Culture War against Christianity is a war against America and its founding principles rooted in Judeo-Christian norms and Western civilization. He reveals how after the communist empire fell, progressives did not abandon their fight, they simply re-branded communism as “social justice.”

A 6.10.19 article by Robert Curry titled, “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ Has Got to Go” recalls Jesse Jackson’s 1987 protest march at Stanford University. The protest was against Stanford’s required introductory humanities program “Western Culture” – not enough diversity for the protesters. The aftermath is clear. Radicalized professors abandoned teaching Western civilization in favor of teaching multiculturalism. Protesters led by politicians at Stanford thirty years ago successfully rid the university of a course in Western civilization.

Protesters led by politicians today are targeting Western civilization itself. Skousen’s 45 communist goals are the dark agenda of the current radical leftist Democrat party. If we allow leftist politicians to redefine maleness and femaleness, we will be facilitating their communist goals and promoting the social chaos that seismic social change requires.

The goal of subversion is to shatter the authority of the three pillars of American society – family, god, and government/patriotism – and substitute them with loyalty to the state. The collectivist infrastructure of socialism/communism requires complete centralization of authority so that the exclusive and singular authority is the state. The leftist Democrats imagine that if they succeed, they will be the final authority with complete power for the foreseeable future. Uh-oh!

In a stunning 1984 interview, former Soviet KGB informant and Soviet journalist defector Yuri Bezmenov discusses the Soviet subversion attempts in America after WWII.

Most Americans find it difficult to accept that Soviet attempts to infiltrate and collapse America are ongoing and have found a friend in leftist Democrats. Some of the Democrat collaborators are ideologues, others are corrupt politicians, but all are useful idiots working against the interests of the United States. Useful idiots?

Yes, Bezmenov makes it crystal clear that if the Soviets ever prevail, there will be no place in society for the collaborating leftist useful idiots. They will all be killed. Case closed.

The humanitarian hoax of the leftist Democrat Equality Act attempting to sell sameness as equality must be rejected entirely. If America allows the left to substitute subjective reality for objective reality we will find ourselves living in the communist nightmare that Yuri Bezmenov describes.

I am an American.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism and Marxist socialism.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism, Marxist socialism, and leftist Democrats.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism, Marxist socialism, and leftist Democrats. I support the United States Constitution.
I am an American and I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

I am an American and I entirely reject the humanitarian hoax of the very unequal leftist Equality Act.

Tell your Senators to vote NO on the deceitful H.R. 5: Equality Act while you still can.

RELATED ARTICLE: Polish archbishop vows to resist ‘LGBT ideology’

EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

So Why is No One Taking Notice of Another Texas Killer?

That is what Daniel Horowitz asked at Conservative Review yesterday.

And, I am sure most of you who have been following my posts on alleged serial killer, Billy Chemirmir were thinking the same thing as we are subjected to every day, all day, coverage of the El Paso Walmart shooting.

But, of course, here is why the same attention hasn’t been given to the Kenyan Killer—he killed (mostly) old white ladies and his weapon was a pillow.   That, and the fact that he is an African in the US illegally and if he had been deported when he had his first run-in with the law, 18 grandmothers and one grandfather would not have died such a frightening and horrible death.  (Imagine that face looming over you as a pillow was pressed to your nose!)

When investigations are complete, Chemirmir’s kill list will likely far surpass the number killed in that dreadful murder spree at the El Paso Walmart.

Will Presidential candidates be yapping that something must be done—ban pillows?

Here is what Horowitz said (hat tip: Richard):

This criminal alien is accused of smothering 19 elderly victims to death. He should have been deported long ago

Nobody in the GOP Senate or the White House is taking notice of what might be the worst and most heinous criminal alien crime committed in American history. We must discuss closing the multiple criminal alien loopholes that violate laws duly passed Congress.

At least 19 Texans were allegedly killed by someone who should never have been in the country, who had been in jail for other crimes and should have been deported.

What if I told you that if we merely enforced and tightened existing laws, unvetted foreign nationals like this would never be able to commit subsequent crimes? “Do something!!,” you would say, right?

Well, not a single major elected official is even talking about this case, much less calling for emergency congressional action to deal with the loopholes. And unlike with El Paso, this crime was actually 100 percent avoidable through public policy, and the course of action would not implicate a fundamental right. After all, there is no right to immigrate, as there is a right for Americans to bear arms.

Billy Chemirmir, like many people who gamed out our immigration system, came to the United States on a tourist visa in 2003, only to indefinitely overstay his visa, according to Breitbart.com’s John Binder. That should have rendered him an illegal alien, and had our government fulfilled its promise in 1996 to construct a visa tracking exit-entry system, as later recommended by the 9/11 Commission, he would have been out of the country. Not only was he not deported, he wound up using a loophole to get a green card in 2007 by marrying an American citizen, according to Binder’s sources. He then racked up a significant criminal history, including two DWIs in 2011 and an assault on a girlfriend resulting in bodily injury in 2012.

Yet this criminal from another country, whose presence here was originally illegal and who should have been deported, continued to remain in the country.

That brings us to the present. Chemirmir is now charged with the murder of 12 senior citizens whom he is alleged to have killed by smothering them with pillows over the course of three years – 2016-2018 – long after he should have been deported.

Much more here.

I’m very grateful to Daniel Horowitz for helping to spread the word about a horrific case being purposefully ignored by the media and by elected officials of all stripes!

Justice for the vulnerable!

Help keep the horrible case of the Kenyan Killer alive. Send the Conservative Review story out far and wide.

The Chemirmir case is emblematic of everything wrong with our immigration system, with lax law enforcement, and with media bias.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Voter ID Opponents Lose Again. This Time in North Dakota.

Opponents of election integrity lost the latest in a long string of cases recently when a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated North Dakota’s voter ID requirement and tossed out an injunction that had been issued by a lower court.

In Brakebill v. Jaeger, Judge Steven Colloton, writing for the 2-to-1 majority, concluded that the supposed burden of obtaining an ID by the less than 0.5% of all eligible voters who do not already have one did not justify a statewide injunction that prevented the state from implementing the ID requirement.

North Dakota is the only state in the Union that does not require citizens to register to vote.

You can show up on Election Day and vote in North Dakota—as long you show identification.

The state Legislature passed a series of laws delineating the forms of identification that could be used to vote.

Effective Aug. 1, 2017, North Dakota required either a driver’s license, a nondriver’s identification card issued by the state Department of Motor Vehicles, or an “official form of identification issued by a tribal government to a tribal member residing in the state.”

The law requires the ID to provide the voter’s legal name, current residential address, and date of birth.

However, if a voter’s ID is missing any of those three items, the voter will still be able to cast a ballot if he provides the missing information with a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, or a check or other document issued by a federal, state, or local government agency.

Voters have up to six days after the election to present an acceptable ID or supplemental documents. Despite the fact that the lower court thought this provision would not be understood by the average voter, the appeals court noted that there was “no evidence of voter confusion over this provision.”

Six members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians sued, claiming that the ID requirement restricted the ability of tribal members to register and exercise their right to vote, in violation of the U.S. Constitution, state law, and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The tribal members argued that “Native Americans often live on reservations or in other rural areas where people do not have street addresses; even if they do … those addresses are frequently not included on tribal IDs. Moreover … Native Americans in North Dakota are ‘disproportionately homeless.’”

Although it should be pointed out that all six of these plaintiffs actually have residential addresses.

The majority rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that requiring voters to have a residential street address is discriminatory, citing former Associate Justice John Paul Stevens’ opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008), in which the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID requirement.

A “residential street address furthers North Dakota’s legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence, so unlike a poll tax, it is not invidiously ‘unrelated to voter qualifications.’”

The number of North Dakotans, just like the residents of other states, who already possess a photo ID is overwhelming. The court found that less than 0.5% of eligible voters in the state do not already have an ID or the supplemental documents that can be used to meet the ID requirement.

More importantly, the plaintiffs in the case presented no evidence whatsoever to detail how many of these “voters attempted to obtain a supplemental document and were unsuccessful.”

It was clear to the court that the state ID law did not place “a substantial burden on most North Dakota voters.” Thus, a “statewide injunction” was “unwarranted.”

The clamor around mythical claims of “voter suppression” over legislation like North Dakota’s ID requirement is misguided.

Such laws are designed and intended to shore up current deficiencies in the electoral system.

As pointed out in a recent study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, voter ID laws have no discernible effect on reducing the turnout of voters. Over the period 2008 to 2016, the researchers concluded that voter ID “laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation.”

The purpose of North Dakota’s election laws is rooted in a desire to promote election integrity. Far from being a trivial concern, election fraud has been and continues to be an unfortunate part of American elections, as can be seen in The Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database.

Although election integrity measures such as voter ID requirements are often presented as a partisan issue, they should not be. Everyone has an interest in fair and secure elections.

As noted in a 2005 study by the Commission of Federal Election Reform, headed by former President Jimmy Carter and Secretary of State James Baker:

The electoral system cannot inspire public confidence if no safeguards exist to deter or detect fraud or to confirm the identity of voters. Photo IDs currently are needed to board a plane, enter federal buildings, and cash a check. Voting is equally important.

COMMENTARY BY

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. Twitter: .

Greg Walsh is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.


A Note for our Readers:

Conservative lawmakers MUST be able to point to tremendous policy victories they have been able to achieve by the end of 2019.

To do that, they will need to be focused on a few specific priorities before the end of the year arrives.

Guess who has the ideas for a clear plan policy agenda for conservative leadership? That’s right — The Heritage Foundation.

Click here to learn how you can do your part in achieving policy victories for conservatives everywhere today.

LEARN MORE >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Afghani Citizen and former U.S. Military Interpreter Charged with Alien Smuggling

With all of the emphasis on the lack of security along the U.S./Mexican border, most Americans have forgotten that the immigration system consists of many elements and that failures of the immigration system may profoundly impact nearly every challenge and threat that America and Americans face in this dangerous and challenging era.

To be clear, the Mexican border must be secured against the un-inspected entry of aliens and contraband,  however, this is not an “either/or” problem.  We also must also understand the other ways that multiple failures of the immigration system endanger our safety and well being.

Indeed, the lack of integrity to the entire immigration system is a reflection of the lack of integrity of our politicians.

On August 2, 2019 the Justice Department posted an extremely worrying news release, Afghanistan National and Former U.S. Military Interpreter Charged for Role in Human Smuggling Conspiracy.

Here is an excerpt from the DOJ press release:

Mujeeb Rahman Saify, 32, is an Afghanistan national who received a Special Immigrant Visa and became a U.S. Lawful Permanent Resident in 2009, after serving as an interpreter for the U.S. military in Afghanistan.  Since 2009, Saify has resided in New York and Newark.  Saify was charged in the District of New Jersey with conspiracy to smuggle aliens to the United States, encouraging and inducing alien smuggling, and attempting to bring aliens to the United States.

According to the indictment, between July 2016 through January 2017, Saify conspired with members of an Afghanistan and Pakistan-based smuggling network to smuggle two Afghanistan nationals to the United States.  The Afghanistan nationals did not have prior authorization to enter the United States and one had been denied a U.S. visa.  The indictment alleges that Saify made contact with the aliens and arranged meetings with the co-conspirators to discuss smuggling arrangements.  Further, according to the indictment, Saify received payment, gave instructions to the aliens to facilitate the smuggling venture, and he used email and phone communications to facilitate and coordinate the criminal operation.

Additional information about this case was provided on that same day in the Washington Times article, Afghan Immigrant Indicted For Trying To Smuggle Migrants Through Mexico Into U.S.

Here is a salient excerpt from that Washington Times report:

Authorities have publicly identified two migrants they say Mr. Saify was responsible for smuggling, including Wasiq Ullah Hedayat, the man flagged for security issued when he was encountered at the U.S. border in Texas. Like Mr. SaifyMr. Hedayat was a translator for U.S. troops, but was fired in 2014 and was barred from even entering any U.S. base, according to court documents.

He later applied for a visa to the U.S. but was denied.

One of the migrants had applied to come to the U.S. before but had been denied a visa. It’s not clear if that was Mr. Hedayat or the other smuggled migrant, who was not named.

Prosecutors said Mr. Saify worked for a Pakistan-based smuggling network. He charged Mr. Hedayat$10,000 for his journey, while the other migrant, identified in court documents by initials A.H., paid $6,000.

Mr. Saify arranged for his customers to fly to Brazil, where they then made their way up Latin America to the U.S.-Mexico border, and attempted to enter.

This particular case involves multiple extremely serious issues.

To begin with, Saify is currently a lawful immigrant who was granted his lawful immigrant status because of his work as an interpreter, overseas, for the U.S. military.

That he stands accused of smuggling aliens into the United States calls into question the vetting process that preceded Saify’s employment by our military as an interpreter.  It must be presumed that he had been granted a security clearance.

All of the cases in which he provided his “services” must now be carefully reviewed to make certain that he did not mislead our officials.

Interpreters have access to extremely sensitive national security materials that may well include documents, informants and agents.

Interpreters act as the “eyes, ears and mouths” of the members of the military and intelligence and law enforcement agencies requiring that they interact not only with the government personnel but with informants and those individuals who provide what is referred to as “human intelligence” and also have access to documents that need to be translated and/or used in conjunction with an interview/interrogation.

A malfeasant interpreter may not only become aware of the individuals who provide intelligence, placing those people and their families in mortal danger, but may also not provide accurate translations of the discussion they participate in.  This would enable such a bad actor to lie and thus provide disinformation while learning the information pertaining to national security that our governing is seeking.

This can endanger the lives of informants and cooperators as well as members of our armed forces and or the lives of government agents and law enforcement officers and, long term, may enable terrorists to carry out deadly attacks not only abroad, but inside the United States.

Moving on to the fact that he is accused of smuggling aliens through Brazil is of particular concern.  As I noted in an earlier article, Jihadis And Drug Cartel At Our Border the “Tri-Border region of Brazil (at the junction of the borders of Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay) is known for terror training camps run by Hezbollah and likely al Qaeda and other Middle-Eastern terrorist organizations and was the focus of the paper, Islamist Terrorist Threat in the Tri-Border Region that was published by Jeffrey Fields, Research Associate, Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

While there have been no published information about whether or not the aliens in this case went to those training camps, the fact that they were moved through Brazil is of great concern and should be of great concern to our political leaders.  Let us also not lose sight that these aliens are citizens of “Special Interest Countries,” that is to say, countries associated with terrorism.

What has also been disclosed in news reports about this case is that one of the aliens Saify is alleged to have attempted to smuggle into the United States had also been employed by the U.S. military as an interpreter until his position was terminated and he was barred from entering U.S. military bases when it was discovered that he was purportedly working for a hostile government.

If the allegations prove to be true, it must be presumed that the goals of these aliens included undermining our national security.  This betrayal could not possibly more serious or dangerous.

Finally we need to focus on how, incredibly, Democrat presidential candidates have openly called for the dismantling of ICE and the decriminalization of our immigration laws that would, in effect, eradicate the borders of the United States even as huge quantities of narcotics, members of transnational gangs and international terrorists flow across our borders each and every day.

The late and very effective and resourceful criminal defense attorney, Johnnie Cochran who is probably best remembered for successfully defending O.J. Simpson admonished the jury in that case, “If you cannot trust the messenger, you cannot trust the message.”

Today I would suggest that we should flip that bit of advice sideways and apply it to those politicians who seek to undermine border security and immigration law enforcement- if you cannot trust the message, you cannot trust the messenger!

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.