ENLIST Act Would Undermine Military, Facilitate Insider Attacks

Although it has received scant, if any, attention in the mainstream media, Congress is now taking up a bill, H.R. 60, the ENLIST Act (Encourage New Legalized Immigrants to Start Training). It would potentially provide hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, essentially “Dreamers,” who were granted temporary lawful status under the DACA program (Deferred Action, Childhood Arrival), with the opportunity to be fast-tracked to lawful immigrant status in exchange for enrolling and serving our military.

Thus far more than 200 members from both parties have co-sponsored this dangerous bill.

At first glance the concept of providing lawful immigrant status to illegal aliens who serve in the U.S. military may appeal to many Americans. Military service is properly seen as a most noble way of demonstrating patriotism for America and Americans.

However, upon closer scrutiny the alarming pitfalls to this approach become readily apparent.

Let us also be clear that there have been illegal aliens who joined our armed forces and served with distinction, and some of them paid the “ultimate price” in demonstrating loyalty to America. I do not want in any way to besmirch their reputations or sacrifices. I am however profoundly troubled that H.R. 60 could create a national security/public safety disaster.

This program could be subverted by international terrorists and transnational criminals who seek to obtain military tactics and weapons training to commit crimes and/or carry out terror attacks on-and-off military bases — “insider attacks.”

Criminals and terrorists could also seek to recruit adherents among those with whom they serve in the military.

We must begin with a clear understanding of how serious violations of America’s borders and immigration laws are. When aliens evade the inspections process conducted at ports of entry they are not entering “undocumented” as is claimed by advocates for immigration anarchy. They enter the United States without inspection. The inspections process conducted at ports of entry by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Inspectors is intended to prevent the entry of criminals, spies, terrorists, human rights violators, and fugitives from justice (categories of aliens under the aegis of federal law, contained within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182).

Aliens who run our borders do so because they know that they would be excluded from the United States because they fall into one or more categories of aliens who, under the INA are excludible from the United States.

Additionally, no record of entry is created when an alien enters the United States without inspection. Therefore there is no reliable way to know when, where, or how they entered the United States.

Although the Obama administration and those who have supported the DACA program claim that it is simply an application of prosecutorial discretion, in reality it should be considered a case of “prosecutorial deception” because there is nothing in our immigration laws that permit a massive program that is diametrically opposed to the letter and the spirit of our immigration laws.

At the time that Mr. Obama implemented this program he claimed that it would only provide benefits to those who entered the United States before they were 16 years of age. In reality, aliens as old as 31 years of age could participate in the program if they claim that they entered the United States prior to their 16th birthdays.

With no capacity to interview the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who applied for participation in this program, let alone conduct field investigations, this program invites fraud. Immigration fraud, it must be noted, was identified by the 9/11 Commission as the key entry and embedding tactic of terrorists.

Let’s first consider the issue of transnational gang members joining our military.

On October 21, 2011, ABC News reported, “FBI Finds Gangs Expanding, Even to U.S. Military.” It stated that although FBI and members of law enforcement don’t have estimates on the number of gang members in the military, there is evidence of gangs operating in 100 jurisdictions in the U.S. and abroad, with members of more than 50 different gangs throughout the military.

The 2015 National Gang Report prepared by the National Gang Intelligence Center included this cautionary statement on page 33:

Military-trained gang members pose a serious threat to law enforcement and to the public. They learn combat tactics in the military, then return home to utilize these new skills against rival gangs or law enforcement. Military training of individual gang members could ultimately result in more sophisticated and deadly gangs, as well as deadly assaults on law enforcement officers.

MS-13 and other such gangs have grown rapidly, metastasizing across the United States since the massive influx of “Unaccompanied Minors” during the latter half of the Obama administration’s second term.

On June 20, 2017, the House Homeland Security Committee, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, conducted a hearing on the topic, “Combating Gang Violence On Long Island: Shutting Down The MS-13 Pipeline.”

That “pipeline” crosses the U.S.-Mexican border.

On June 21, 2017, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on “The MS-13 Problem: Investigating Gang Membership, its Nexus to Illegal Immigration, and Federal Efforts to End the Threat.”

Now let’s turn to the threats posed by terrorists who could gain entry onto military bases.

On June 8, 2017, the Department of Justice issued a press release, “Two Men Arrested for Terrorist Activities on Behalf of Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization.”

Both of these terror suspects/sleeper agents were naturalized citizens. They easily gamed the immigration system and the naturalization process to acquire United States citizenship. One of the defendants is further being charged with committing naturalization fraud in support of terrorism, a 25 year felony under federal law. Both are also charged with, among other crimes, traveling overseas to obtain military training and with conducting surveillance in the United States as well as in other countries, of U.S. and Israeli military facilities and personnel.

Imagine if they could have gained access to our military bases in the United States and acquired the best military training in the world on those bases.

The overt acts that they allegedly committed in support of Hezbollah are enumerated in the federal complaints concerning Samer el Debek, a.k.a. Samer Eldebek and Ali Mohamad Kourani, a.k.a. Jacob Lewis, a.k.a. Daniel.

On April 22, 2017, The New York Times reported, “‘A Shortage of Coffins’ After Taliban Slaughter Unarmed Soldiers.”

On June 17, 2017, the Military Times reported, “Another insider attack in Afghanistan leaves 7 Americans wounded.”

On June 17, 2017, CBS reported, “At least 7 U.S. soldiers wounded after Afghan soldier opens fire.” That article ended with this sentence: “Last week, three U.S. soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier in eastern Nangarhar province. In that case Mujahid claimed that the shooter was a Taliban loyalist who infiltrated the army specifically to seek out opportunities to attack foreign soldiers.”

The June 17, 2017, New York Times article, “7 U.S. Soldiers Wounded in Insider Attack in Afghanistan” included these two paragraphs:

In two episodes in March, a total of 11 American soldiers were wounded by Afghan soldiers in green-on-blue attacks in Helmand Province, in southern Afghanistan, according to Afghan officials. Nonetheless, the incidence of such attacks has decreased greatly as American and other foreign forces have declined from a peak of 150,000 soldiers to about 14,000 now. In 2012, one-fourth of all coalition killings were carried out by Afghan insiders, according to American military officials.

The 209th Corps has been particularly troubled this year, and in April was the scene of the Afghan military’s biggest single loss of life in the past 16 years, when Taliban infiltrators entered Camp Shaheen and killed more than 160 soldiers, many of them unarmed.

Albert Einstein famously remarked that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You don’t have to possess Professor Einstein’s intellect to see that the concerns I have voiced today are based on multiple similar instances which ultimately resulted in tragedies.

Furthermore, suicide is most certainly not an act of “compassion.”

It is imperative that you contact your elected representatives and tell them to oppose this extremely dangerous legislation.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on NewsMax.com.

President Trump Proposes Solar Panels on Top of Border Wall — Greenpeace and Sierra Club outraged!

President Donald Trump tells supporters in Cedar Rapids, Iowa that he is considering mounting photovoltaic panels atop his proposed Mexican border wall would allow the project to pay for itself.

President Trump stated, “We’re thinking of something that’s unique, we’re talking about the southern border, lots of sun, lots of heat. We’re thinking about building the wall as a solar wall, so it creates energy and pays for itself. And this way, Mexico will have to pay much less money.”

If approved this would be the largest alternative energy project in the world. But wait…

You would think that organizations who favor alternative power sources such as solar panels and wind power would be pleased with this unique and innovative idea. You would think that they would encourage companies to bid on the Department of Homeland Security contract to build the wall and give those living along both sides of the wall access to renewable energy. Well you would be wrong.

Proposed section of green border wall with solar panels submitted by Thomas Gleason, a Las Vegas construction materials supplier.

In The Daily Signal article titled How Environmental Groups Are Responding to Trump’s ‘Solar Wall’ Pitch Fred Lucas reports:

President Donald Trump’s idea of putting solar panels on his long-promised border wall hasn’t gained a lot of support among top environmental lobbying groups—even though the organizations have long backed solar power as a key renewable energy.

“The problem with talking about solar panels on Trump’s border wall is that it’s science fiction,” Travis Nichols, a spokesman for Greenpeace, a liberal environmentalist group, told The Daily Signal. “Just like clean coal does not exist and will never exist, Trump’s wall with solar panels won’t exist, so it’s irrelevant to discuss climate issues.”

A spokesman with the Sierra Club referred to a tweet storm by the Sierra Club executive director, Michael Brune, reacting to Trump’s proposal for solar panels on the border wall.

Read more.

If solar panels on the border wall is “science fiction” then isn’t the same true for all uses of solar panels?

Here’s a discussion on President Trump’s new green border wall with solar panels designed by Thomas Gleason. He is a construction materials supplier up in North Las Vegas. He says he has submitted a bid for President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall with Mexico.:

President Trump is a builder and entrepreneur. He also keeps his promises. Building the wall is one of those promises. Time for environmentalists and Democrats to jump at this chance to build some big and bold. As President Trump has said, “If your going to think might as well think big.”

It appears those opposing this unique opportunity are small thinkers, or maybe politically motivated?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Lawmakers Cite Evidence Russia ‘Colluded’ With U.S. Green Groups to Block Fracking

Homeland Security Will Start Building Border Wall Prototypes This Summer

GOP Senator Proposes Transferring Sanctuary Cities’ Federal Funds to Border Wall Budget

VIDEO: American charged with ‘smuggling hate speech’ into Canada

I was arrested in Canada for “smuggling hate speech” on his iPad. Here is my video report on what actually happened.

Wild Bill’s ANTI HATE Hate Speech Arrested by Canada Border Police. This is the speech I was to give in Canada. The cops read the script and ARRESTED ME FOR HATE SPEECH……..watch and decide if this is hate speech.

EDITORS NOTE: Readers may support Bill by going to www.OutLawsChapel.com.

Ignorance is Bliss: Not always so!

“Nations seek to gain time through appeasement before the Islamic tide washes over them: But that is folly.”

We have witnessed over and over again Arab and Muslim war crimes on a never ending spiral of horror inflicted upon non-Muslims worldwide and particularly upon Israel’s civilian population. No doubt, future salvos of missiles will rein down upon Israeli villages, towns and cities, fired by Iran’s proxy Hamas, the brutal occupiers of Gaza, and by its Hezbollah proxy which infests Lebanon. As before, the world will yawn.

And daily crimes committed by the Arabs, calling themselves Palestinians, who stab, bomb and mow down Israeli civilians will invariably go unmentioned in the world’s media. A most egregious example of the media’s double standard was the recent terror attack in Jerusalem, Israel, by three Palestinians, which resulted in the grisly stabbing to death of a young 23 year old Israeli policewoman and the wounding of three civilians.

The BBC’s grotesque headline ran, “three Palestinians killed after deadly stabbing in Jerusalem.” The BBC report only mentioned the deaths of the three Palestinian murderers and failed to note that they were terrorist who murdered a young border policewoman.

But then, remarkably, the same media will doubtless awaken when the Jews have the unmitigated gall, temerity and chutzpah to defend themselves against unbearable Muslim violence and provocation, as they were forced to do during the last Gaza War.

It will be then, as always, that an outpouring of brutish and irrational hatred towards the Jewish state will explode in much of the morally bankrupt mainstream media, and among the thousands of hate filled Muslims who will take to the streets of European capitals with their duped young European followers in violent displays of mindless enmity.

The world had also yawned before and during the dark years of World War 2 when Jews were disappearing all over Europe. It was a time of towering intolerance and we have now retreated to those terrible years yet again.

It was then that Hitler targeted the Jews, always the victims of prior and ancient religious calumnies. Far too many of the peoples of Europe aided and abetted the German Nazis’ systematic slaughter of the stateless and hapless Jewish communities. But long dark centuries preceded Nazism as Jews throughout Europe were martyred in their millions at the hands of both the Church and the temporal powers. Indeed if you need to know the name of the largest Jewish cemetery in the world: It is Europe.

But once the Nazi hordes were driven back and defeated the cry became, “Never Again.” But it is happening again. The same world, albeit now with the children and grandchildren of that mostly compliant generation that allowed the Nazi horror to grow and metastasize, are again turning against the Jews and against the reconstituted biblical and ancestral Jewish homeland: Israel.

But this time the intolerance that is leading them into a new dark age is that which Winston Churchill called a 7th century ideology wrapped in a religion: Islam.

Here are the words of Churchill, one of the world’s greatest patriots who helped save the world from the Nazi juggernaut of death:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!“

Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

“A degraded sensualism deprives this [Muslim] life of grace and refinement; the next of dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men … all [Muslims] know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

“Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

“Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”- (Winston Churchill on Islam in his book, The River War)

In the first volume of my trilogy, Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state, I ended the concluding page as follows:

“I for one realize that Islam will never accept a non-Islamic state in lands once conquered in the name of Allah. Therefore I no longer include in my articles or essays the phrase, the Arab-Israel conflict or the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Instead, I call it the Israel-Islam conflict. Alas, that is what it is, what it always has been, and what it always will be.”

In Volume Two, I concluded with these words:

“The appeasement of the Arab and Muslim world will bring the exact opposite of what the appeasers seek.”

Winston Churchill wrote the following:

“Appeasement is like feeding a crocodile in the hope he will eat you last.”

I went on to add:

“The crocodile has no feelings of sympathy, nor does the Muslim Arab whose culture considers concessions a form of weakness and will offer no reciprocal concessions but cruelly demand more and more. It reminds me of the ancient saying from the Jewish Ethics of the Fathers: ‘Whoever is merciful to the cruel, ends by being cruel to the merciful.’”

The third volume of Politicide includes example after example of just such appeasement by growing numbers of individuals in the West towards the voracious Muslim appetite for world conquest, for a Caliphate and for triumphant Islam. Those individuals include politicians, tenured professors, journalists, entertainers, ad nauseam.

Nations seek to gain time – before the Islamic tide washes over them – through appeasement. They do so by ever growing hostility and intolerance towards the embattled Jewish state and towards those who warn against placating jihadi terror in the hope of assuaging the Islamic appetite. But it is all folly.

Western European nations are now submerged in an ever growing, Sharia compliant, Islamic monster that is within the gates. In a generation or two, France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Germany, the Scandinavian countries and Britain may no longer retain a Judaeo-Christian culture or civilization except in small pockets, always besieged by a Muslim majority they so foolishly allowed to grow and strengthen within their borders.

The world is changing and Israel, the one Jewish state, now finds itself after years of foolish concessions to an implacable Muslim and Arab foe, left with so little land, and with a Palestinian Authority occupying territory in the very heartland of the Jewish people’s patrimony – Judea and Samaria – called by its Jordanian Arab name: the ‘West Bank’.

And then there is Gaza: A finger of land pointing into Israel’s heart like some cancerous tumor. This territory is occupied by Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood branch of the so-called Palestinian Arabs.
As Adrian Morgan, a past editor of Family Security Matters, in his foreword to the third volume pointed out, this Islamic organization is motivated by an abiding hatred of Jews and not only wishes to exterminate the Jewish state and all its citizens, but seeks to destroy Jews throughout the world.
And now, after Israel in 2005 drove out its own citizens from their villages and farms in Gaza, 10,000 Jewish refugees from Gaza live within Israel, their lives embittered by such a breathtakingly stupid Israeli concession.

Since Israel withdrew from Gaza in the hope that the Arabs would live peaceably with them and share in the benefits for all that comes from a true and lasting peace, Israeli villages and towns in southern and central Israel endure a barrage of deadly missiles.

So many Israeli concessions forced upon weak Israeli leaders by friends and foes alike have endangered Israel’s existence more than the combined military and terroristic Arab aggression against her since her reconstitution as a Jewish nation in 1948.

As you will read in the many chapters of Volume Three, and in the two previous volumes of Politicide, Israeli concessions have never been met by Arab and Muslim concessions: Never.

The outrageous euphemisms employed to mask Israeli capitulation are well known. “Land for Peace” is the term used to sanitize Israeli national suicide. Land, precious land, with spiritual, historical, and strategic value to Israel, has been given away to persuade the Muslim Arab enemy to join in the benefits of peaceful coexistence.

But it is a disastrous charade played upon the Jewish state for, in return for painful Israeli concessions of territory, the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, never, ever offer peace but endless intolerance, terror and greater and greater demands.

Another suicidal euphemism to mask Israel’s gradual destruction is, “The Two-State-Solution.” This abomination has permitted a delusional belief that two states can live side by side in peace with each other. One state is Israel, a democratic nation. The other state would be “Palestine,” – an artificial creation that has never existed as a sovereign nation in all of history – that would live and breathe relentless and genocidal aggression towards its neighbor, Israel.

For such a state to exist that patently and demonstrably has no desire – because of its adherence to its Islamic faith – to ever give up its ambition to destroy the Jewish state, will be the ultimate fatal error of any Israeli government.

It is national suicide and the very euphemism, “Two-State-Solution,” echoes in its hideous similarity that other euphemism employed by Nazi Germany as it systematically exterminated 6,000,000 Jews: “The Final Solution.”

Let me quote from words I wrote in one of the chapters in Politicide; words which, I believe, must be stated over and over again.

“Even though the native and indigenous peoples of Israel are the Jews, and even though the Land of Israel was given to the Jewish people in an eternal covenant with God, it does not matter to Islam’s adherents, for wherever the Muslim foot has once trod triumphal, that territory is forever regarded as Islamic. It becomes the Dar al-Islam (the House of Islam).

“If such territory is lost to Muslims, it enters the Dar al-Harb (the House of War). Allah has been diminished and the land must be retaken however long it takes. Peace, then, is merely a mirage in the desert sands.

“Too many world leaders fail to understand the Muslim mindset. Israeli leaders, who of all people should know better, still fall into the fatal trap of believing that the Western model of lasting peace between nation-states can equally apply in the Middle East between Muslim and non-Muslim nations. It is a fatal fallacy.”

Thus we reach the year 2017. It is a year in which anti-Semitism is on the rise by quantum leaps and the international guilt that permeated nation states after the Holocaust is fast withering away. The spectacle of the individual Jew as a victim is now increasingly replaced by the Jewish state; itself now cast in the role of the persecuted Jew.

The baffling alliance of the Left with Islam is a phenomenon stalking the world. Its target is the Jewish state even though the Left is protected and free to exercise its political will within the Israeli democracy.

But it remains forbidden to challenge all powerful Islam within the fifty seven Muslim nations and, because of the insanity of political correctness, it is now practically forbidden throughout so many western countries.

Phyllis Chesler, the feminist writer, saw as far back as 2003, what horrors were emerging in the West. Writing in her book, “The New Anti-Semitism: The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It,” she penned the following:

“When feminists, gay rights groups, and civil rights activists choose to support Islamic countries where women are subject to honor murders and vile genital mutilation, where homosexuals are imprisoned and sometimes executed, and – in the case of Sudan today and Saudi Arabia before 1962 – slavery is practiced, something irrational is at work. Only anti-Semitism can explain this weird Marxist-Islamic alliance.”

Indeed, the Left and Islam in their unholy alliance target the Jewish state with growing venom.

That Islam will turn with increased intolerance upon the leftists is guaranteed, yet it will let the Left work its evil upon Israel before – like Churchill’s crocodile – it devours its erstwhile partner.

In the Passover story, which is enshrined in the Haggadah, the book retelling the events of the Exodus and of the order of the Seder meal, there is a profound and millennial old passage:

“Not one man alone has risen up against us to destroy us, but in every generation there have risen up against us those who sought to destroy us; but the Holy One, blessed be He, delivers us from their hands.” And so it was and still is.

Hopefully you, dear reader, will become one of those who choose to defend and support Israel’s struggle to survive and benefit all mankind in an ever darkening world so full of intolerance.

In such a time as this, ignorance is not bliss.

The Left has one more argument: Kill them!

The Left, and its Muslim allies, have never been open to rational discussion or debate. And now they’re growing increasingly thuggish and violent.

“Ann Coulter: The Left Has One More Argument: Kill Them!,” by Ann Coulter, Breitbart, June 21, 2017:

After a Bernie Sanders supporter tried to commit mass murder last week – the second homicidal Bernie supporter so far this year — the media blamed President Trump for lowering the bar on heated political rhetoric by calling his campaign opponents cruel names like “Crooked Hillary” and “Lyin’ Ted.”

As soon as any conservative responds to Trump’s belittling names for his rivals by erupting in a murderous rage, that will be a fantastically good point. But until then, it’s idiotic. Unlike liberals, conservatives aren’t easily incited to violence by words.

What we’re seeing is the following: Prominent liberals repeatedly tell us, with deadly seriousness, that Trump and his supporters are: “Hitler,” “fascists,” “bigots,” “haters,” “racists,” “terrorists,” “criminals,” and “white supremacists,” which is then followed by liberals physically attacking conservatives.

To talk about “both sides” being guilty of provocative rhetoric is like talking about “both genders” being guilty of rape.

Nearly every op-ed writer at The New York Times has compared Trump to Hitler. (The conservative on the op-ed page merely called him a “proto-fascist.”) If Trump is Hitler and his supporters Nazis, then the rational course of action for any civilized person is to kill them.

That’s not just a theory, it’s the result.

A few months ago, 38-year-old Justin Barkley shot and killed a UPS driver in a Walmart parking lot in Ithaca, New York, then ran over his body, because he thought he was killing Donald Trump. During his arraignment, Barkley told the judge: “I shot and killed Donald Trump purposely, intentionally, and very proudly.”

In the past year, there have been at least a hundred physical attacks on Trump supporters or presumed Trump supporters. The mainstream media have ignored them all.

Schoolchildren across the country are being hospitalized from beatings for the crime of liking Trump. In Pasco, Oregon, a 29-year-old Trump supporter was stabbed in the throat by a Hispanic man, Alvaro Campos-Hernandez, after a political argument.

Last month, the anti-jihad scholar Robert Spencer was poisoned in Iceland by a Social Justice Warrior pretending to be a fan, sending Spencer to the hospital.

It’s become so normal for leftist thugs to assault anyone who likes Trump that, in Meriden, Connecticut, Wilson Echevarria and Anthony Hobdy leapt out of their car and started punching and hitting a man holding a Trump sign, rolling him into traffic right in front of a policeman.

If any one of these bloody attacks had been committed by a Trump supporter against a Muslim, a gay, a Mexican, a woman, or a Democrat, the media would have had to drop its Russia conspiracy theory to give us 24-7 coverage of the epidemic of right-wing violence.

The liberal response to this ceaseless mayhem toward conservatives is to produce a single nut, who fired a gun in the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington, D.C., last December (hurting no one) to “rescue children,” after reading on obscure right-wing blogs that the restaurant hid a Democratic pedophilia ring. (They’ve also hyped a long list of “hate crimes” that were utter hoaxes.)

Congratulations, liberals! You got one. And some tiny number of girls raped men last year. QED: Both sexes have a rape problem.

Liberal aggression has ratcheted up dramatically since the dawn of Trump, as has the dehumanizing rhetoric, but epic violence from the left is nothing new.

We don’t have to go back more than century to note that every presidential assassin and attempted presidential assassin who had a political motive was a leftist, a socialist, a communist, or a member of a hippie commune. (Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosz, Giuseppe Zangara, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, and Sara Jane Moore.)…

Liberals know damn well that their audience includes a not-insignificant portion of foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, prepared, at the slightest provocation, to smash windows, burn down neighborhoods, physically attack, and even murder conservatives. But instead of toning down the rhetoric, the respectable left keeps throwing matches on the bone-dry tinder, and then indignantly asks, “Are you saying conservatives don’t do it, too?”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hypocrisy: Maajid Nawaz suing SPLC for naming him “anti-Muslim extremist”

Germany: Newspaper editor calls Muslims who went on anti-terror march “Uncle Toms”

VIDEO: Is There a Health Care Crisis?

In the next week or so, the U.S. Senate may vote on a health care bill that would repeal and replace some parts of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

This 1993 lecture in Houston, Texas by FEE president Lawrence Reed (then president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Michigan) is full of important fundamentals about both health care and government. In the quarter century since then, the bottom line remains unchanged: more government can hardly be the solution to problems that too much of it gave us in the first place:

RELATED ARTICLE: Twenty Myths about Single-Payer Health Insurance

Government Does Not Belong in Our Showers by Daniel J. Mitchell

When I write about regulation, I usually focus on big-picture issues involving economic costs, living standards, and competitiveness.

Those are very important concerns, but the average person in American probably gets more irked by rules that impact the quality of life.

That’s a grim list, but it’s time to augment it.

Showering with Disapproval

Jeffrey Tucker of the Foundation for Economic Education explains that the government also has made showering a less pleasant experience. He starts by expressing envy about Brazilian showers.

…was shocked with delight at the shower in Brazil. …step into the shower and you have a glorious capitalist experience. Hot water, really hot, pours down on you like a mighty and unending waterfall… At least the socialists in Brazil knew better than to destroy such an essential of civilized life.

I know what he’s talking about.

I’m in a hotel (not in Brazil), and my shower this morning was a tedious experience because the water flow was so anemic.

Why would a hotel not want customers to have an enjoyable and quick shower?

The answer is government.

…here we’ve forgotten. We have long lived with regulated showers, plugged up with a stopper imposed by government controls imposed in 1992. There was no public announcement. It just happened gradually. After a few years, you couldn’t buy a decent shower head. They called it a flow restrictor and said it would increase efficiency. By efficiency, the government means “doesn’t work as well as it used to.” …You can see the evidence of the bureaucrat in your shower if you pull off the showerhead and look inside. It has all this complicated stuff inside, whereas it should just be an open hole, you know, so the water could get through. The flow stopper is mandated by the federal government.

The problem isn’t just the water coming out of the showerhead. It’s the water coming into your home.

It’s not just about the showerhead. The water pressure in our homes and apartments has been gradually getting worse for two decades, thanks to EPA mandates on state and local governments. This has meant that even with a good showerhead, the shower is not as good as it might be. It also means that less water is running through our pipes, causing lines to clog and homes to stink just slightly like the sewer. This problem is much more difficult to fix, especially because plumbers are forbidden by law from hacking your water pressure.

Bureaucratic Design

So why are politicians and bureaucrats imposing these rules?

Ostensibly for purposes of conservation.

…what about the need to conserve water? Well, the Department of the Interior says that domestic water use, which includes even the water you use on your lawn and flower beds, constitutes a mere 2% of the total, so this unrelenting misery spread by government regulations makes hardly a dent in the whole. In any case, what is the point of some vague sense of “conserving” when the whole purpose of modern appliances and indoor plumbing is to improve our lives and sanitation? (Free societies have a method for knowing how much of something to use or not use; it is called the signaling system of prices.)

Jeffrey is right. If there really is a water shortage (as there sometimes is in parts of the country and world), then prices are the best way of encouraging conservation.

Now let’s dig in the archives of the Wall Street Journal for a 2010 column on the showerhead issue.

Apparently bureaucrats are irked that builders and consumers used multiple showerheads to boost the quality of their daily showers.

Regulators are going after some of the luxury shower fixtures that took off in the housing boom. Many have multiple nozzles, cost thousands of dollars and emit as many as 12 gallons of water a minute. In May, the DOE stunned the plumbing-products industry when it said it would adopt a strict definition of the term “showerhead”…

A 1992 federal law says a showerhead can deliver no more than 2.5 gallons per minute at a flowing water pressure of 80 pounds per square inch. For years, the term “showerhead” in federal regulations was understood by many manufacturers to mean a device that directs water onto a bather. Each nozzle in a shower was considered separate and in compliance if it delivered no more than the 2.5-gallon maximum.

But in May, the DOE said a “showerhead” may incorporate “one or more sprays, nozzles or openings.” Under the new interpretation, all nozzles would count as a single showerhead and be deemed noncompliant if, taken together, they exceed the 2.5 gallons-a-minute maximum.

You’ve Got to Be Kidding

And here’s something that’s both amusing and depressing.

The regulations are so crazy that an entrepreneur didn’t think they were real.

Altmans Products, a U.S. unit of Grupo Helvex of Mexico City, says it got a letter from the DOE in January and has stopped selling several popular models, including the Shower Rose, which delivers 12 gallons of water a minute. Pedro Mier, the firm’s vice president, says his customers “just like to feel they’re getting a lot of water.” Until getting the DOE letter, his firm didn’t know U.S. law limited showerhead water usage, Mr. Mier says. “At first, I thought it was a scam.”

Unsurprisingly, California is “leading” the way. Here are some passages from an article in the L.A. Times from almost two years ago.

The flow of water from showerheads and bathroom faucets in California will be sharply reduced under strict new limits approved Wednesday by the state Energy Commission. Current rules, established in 1994 at the federal level, allow a maximum flow of 2.5 gallons per minute from a shower head. Effective next July, the limit will fall to 2.0 gallons per minute and will be reduced again in July 2018, to 1.8 gallons, giving California the toughest standard of any U.S. state.

Though “toughest standard” is the wrong way to describe what’s happening. It’s actually the “worst shower” of any state.

P.S. I forget the quality of shower I experienced in South Korea, but I was very impressed (see postscript) by the toilet.

Reprinted from International Liberty.

Canada arrests American Christian for having ‘hate speech’ on his iPad

The United West’s good friend Bill Finlay, a.k.a. Wild Bill for America, was stopped at the Calgary, AB Canada airport before he got to an event where he was invited to speak.

RELATED VIDEO: “One Love” Rally in Calgary and Wild Bill for America arrested:

Canadian authorities did release him and subsequently deported him, without his laptop.

They intend to search it to find a crime. Canada Wake Up Bill is NOT the enemy! Islam is! Canada, start prosecuting “hate” speech spewed by Islam and it’s followers! Hate speech against non-believers! Hate speech that specifically demands violence against non-believers! Again, Canada Wake Up

Here are a few of the details of that action:

American Speaker Arrested in Canada for Smuggling “Hate Speech” on His iPad

Wild Bill for America, also known as William Finlay, a popular author and speaker, was arrested today, June 24, 2017, at a Canadian airport…

RELATED VIDEO: Why don’t feminists fight for Muslim Women?

VIDEO: Why ‘The Perfect Man’ billboard was brilliant

Here is an interstate billboard in Indiana that describes “The Perfect Man”. Each statement on the billboard is factual according to the biography & traditions of the “Perfect Man”.

The billboard attacked Islam at its weakest point – the prophet of Allah.  Don’t argue about the Koran, instead use Mohammed.  The Koran is confusing and dualistic, but Mohammed is simple to understand.

My latest video discusses the topic of Islam and inbreeding.

Inbreeding is a crime against future humanity. Inbreeding is both Sunna of Mohammed & in the Koran. Unfortunately, according to Sharia (divine Islamic law) inbreeding is permitted.

Subscribe to my Youtube Channel PoliticalIslam, and access over 150 of my videos. 

News Update

I support this effort. Join with others & take the pledge to read the Koran.

The only way to know for sure what’s true about Islam is to read the Koran yourself.

To understand the Koran requires the historical context of Mohammed’s life. Both An Abridged Koran & A Simple Koran have done this and arranged events in chronological order to provide clarity and meaning for the reader. These books are available below.

Supreme Court decision on ‘travel ban’ and refugee ceiling reduction eminent

According to AP at ABC News, here, they have likely already decided and an announcement will come next week.

There are two major issues at stake (maybe more than two, but two for me!).  The first is whether the President has the authority to ban, for a limited time, all entry to the US from six (mostly Muslim countries that are hotbeds of terrorism) in order to keep us safe while they review the entry screening process.  Again, this involves all those of all religions and ethnic groups entering the US through any means from those six countries.

The second issue, and the one more interesting to me, is the one addressed by the Hawaii court (9th Circuit), but NOT by the Maryland court (4th Circuit), and that is whether the President has the legal right to come in at any number below the refugee admissions CEILING set last fall (in this case set by Obama), or more specifically has a legal right to announce a mid-year lowering of the admission ceiling for all refugees, of all religions, from all countries! And, does he have the legal authority to put in place a 120-day moratorium (again all countries, all religions) while the federal government reviews the screening process for refugees.

Presidents always come in under the CEILING, some by very significant numbers, and no one has legally challenged previous presidents on that issue.  There may have been some squawking by federal refugee contractors***, who receive a large portion of their budget based on a per head payment, when Bush came in way low in the wake of 9/11, but I don’t think he was taken to court over it.

See what I said here about how Obama failed to reach some of his ceilings:

In FY2011, they were 23,576 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama?

In FY2012, they were 17,762 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama for leaving thousands “stranded in war-torn countries”?

I have my fingers crossed that Justice Department lawyers knew enough to separate the two issues (the overall travel ban from the CEILING issue) which should never have been addressed in the same Executive Order in the first place.

Here is what ABC is reporting:

The Supreme Court has almost certainly decided what to do about President Donald Trump’s travel ban affecting citizens of six mostly Muslim countries.

The country is waiting for the court to make its decision public about the biggest legal controversy in the first five months of Trump’s presidency. The issue has been tied up in the courts since Trump’s original order in January sparked widespread protests just days after he took office.

The justices met Thursday morning for their last regularly scheduled private conference in June and probably took a vote about whether to let the Trump administration immediately enforce the ban and hear the administration’s appeal of lower court rulings blocking the ban.

The court’s decision could come any time and is expected no later than late next week…..

[….]

The case is at the Supreme Court because two federal appellate courts have ruled against the Trump travel policy, which would impose a 90-day pause in travel from citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the ban was “rooted in religious animus” toward Muslims and pointed to Trump’s campaign promise to impose a ban on Muslims entering the country as well as tweets and remarks he has made since becoming president.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the travel policy does not comply with federal immigration law, including a prohibition on nationality-based discrimination.

That court also put a hold on separate aspects of the policy that would keep all refugees out of the United States for 120 days and cut by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000, the cap on refugees in the current government spending year that ends Sept. 30.

More here.

If the court rules against Trump on this last point, I see the contractors getting what they always wanted—the President’s determination set in September in advance of the fiscal year would become a TARGET that must be reached, and not simply a CEILING not to be exceeded.  (The Refugee Act of 1980 does have a mechanism for increasing the ceiling during the course of the year that requires consultation with Congress, but is silent if the President comes in low.)

For a laugh, as the contractors argue in the Supreme Court that the President (in this case, Donald Trump) doesn’t have the right to set the ceiling, they say this (see here) about a bill in Congress that would eliminate some Presidential power to set the ceiling:

“….it would remove presidential authority to set the number of refugees who may enter the country per year.”

Make up your minds—does the President have the power or not? Truth be told, this is about Donald Trump and not if the president was Mark Zuckerberg!

***Federal refugee resettlement contractors are paid by you, on a per head basis, to place refugees in your towns:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

So did President Trump get blindsided by Dept. of State announcement last month?

LA Times headline is deceptive (yes, can you believe it!)

Zuckerberg in Minnesota….running for Prez in 2020?

How Trump Could Change the Country’s Direction With These Court Vacancies

INTERSECTIONALITY: Leftist Politics Designed to Fail

America is a divided nation and supports two distinct narratives – the narrative of survivors and the narrative of victims.

The survivor mentality created America and is defined by its core values of independence, equality, and freedom. It is supported by institutions promoting growth, independence, sovereignty, and the common denominator of American nationalism. The survivor narrative is the narrative of President Donald Trump.

The victim mentality was created to deconstruct America and is defined by its core values of dependence, inequality, and escape from freedom. It is supported by institutions promoting regression, dependence, internationalism, and the common denominator of globalism. The victim mentality is the narrative of the Left and Liberalism – America’s newest religion. Nationalists and Globalists have irreconcilable differences because their fundamental premises are diametrically opposed to one another. Americans must choose between them.

Liberalism disingenuously presents itself as tolerant because it crosses all racial, ethnic, gender, religious, and socio-economic boundaries. But Liberalism only tolerates those who look differently – Liberalism is completely intolerant of anyone who thinks differently. Liberalism, like any orthodoxy, is tyrannical in its demand for conformity. Its adherents pursue Liberalism’s tenets of political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism with religious zeal and narrow-mindedness.

Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to debate or discuss opposing ideas – Liberalism demands censorship and safe spaces instead. Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to withstand rational scrutiny – Liberalism provides the echo chamber of fake news instead. Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to have civilized discourse or follow the rule of law – Liberalism foments anarchy instead. Liberalism’s sinister goal is the destruction of American democracy and its transformation into Socialism. Socialism is the hope and change that radical socialist Barack Obama promoted when he was elected. Most Americans had no idea what hope and change meant to the man who was the most anti-American lawless president in United States history.

So, what did Barack Obama need to fulfill his dream of destroying American democracy? He needed the politics of intersectionality. He needed Hillary Clinton’s “unaware and compliant public.” He needed the empty promises of sloganism.

Intersectionality, the preferred designation of the Left, is simply a descriptor for self-defined group victimhood based on feelings not facts. If you feel life is not fair – you are a victim. If you feel you have been marginalized in any way – you are a victim. If you feel your maleness or femaleness is threatened in any way – you are a victim. If someone says something you don’t like – you are a victim. This is a child’s view of the world.

Victimhood by definition lacks power – identifying oneself as a powerless entity is a self-sabotaging catastrophic strategy that only leads to more powerlessness – childish whining about victimhood perpetuates the status of childish powerlessness.

Self-actualization and a survivor attitude are the strategies for growth and empowerment. Achievement is the mother of self-esteem – actual achievement in objective reality not the sloganism or fiction that “trying is the same as achieving” promoted in the subjective reality of intersectionality.

The escape from victimhood and powerlessness comes from individual achievement – it does not derive from demanding that the environment change to meet the ever increasing inappropriate demands of chronological adults behaving like children. Lowering standards is not equivalent to achievement – it is just lowering standards.

Intersectionality demands are the demands of children that the environment change to meet their needs. It is the wrong answer to the right problem. Achievement is what propels a child toward adulthood. Consider the child who first feeds himself with his fingers and feels empowered – then he wants to feed himself with a fork – then he wants to drink from a cup. Success encourages success and failure encourages failure.

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can feed herself with her fingers and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always feed you.”

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can feed herself with a fork and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always feed you with a fork.”

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can drink from a cup and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always hold your cup for you.”

The enabling mother is co-dependent and destructive. She presents herself as the child’s advocate but really she is keeping the child dependent on herself for her own selfish needs. She is a destroyer. So it is with governments. Governments that incentivize their citizens to remain dependent do so for their own benefit – the votes that will keep them in power. The victimhood and dependence that intersectionality incentivizes is extremely destructive. Just as the enabling mother cripples her child so does the enabling government cripple its citizens.

Intersectionality results in perpetual childhood, dependence, powerlessness, and angry feelings of victimhood over lack of accomplishment and jealousy for those who have actually achieved. Intersectionality that promotes victimhood and socialism’s cradle-to-grave dependence on the government is as crippling to society as the co-dependent mother is to her child. A survivor mentality results in adulthood, independence, empowerment, self-respect, and the self-esteem that achievement produces. A survivor mentality is what made America great and the most powerful nation in the world.

Intersectionality and the culture of victimhood is the flawed strategy of dependence, collectivism, and death because when Mama dies there is no one there to feed the baby. As Margaret Thatcher so succinctly remarked “Socialism cannot work because eventually you run out of other people’s money.” A productive society requires its children to become productive adults. A society of children will necessarily extinguish itself.

Socialism, the goal of intersectionality, is a political system designed to fail.

Social policy based on the self-defined group victimhood of intersectionality cannot succeed in the real world because the cycle of life requires achievement – eventually the child must grow up and learn to eat and drink on his/her own. The noisy cry-bullies on campuses who graduate with useless degrees in fields of “feelings” not facts will find themselves unemployable. What can they do? They have learned nothing useful for work in the real world and their attitudes make them unemployable. The universities may tolerate their tantrums while their mommies and daddies or the government is paying their tuition but employers are not going to pay for the privilege of their childish outbursts.

Restraint, discipline, and self-control are hallmarks of adulthood – the cry-bullies and anarchists that graduate college have nothing to offer in the workplace but infantile tantrums when they do not get their way or are expected to work and produce something. Effort and achievement are not the same in the workplace. If colleges and universities are supposed to be preparing young people for life as adults they have failed their mission – unless of course their 21st century mission under Liberalism is to deliberately graduate unproductive dependent angry individuals who are “unaware and compliant” – exactly what Hillary Clinton described.

Unaware and compliant are the hallmarks of childhood. Why do the Democrats want a population of dependent children who are easily manipulated and controlled? Because the Democrats know that socialism requires a completely dependent population. As long as the Democrats have the population “hooked” on government handouts they will remain dependent, unaware, compliant, and voting Democratic.

Governments that incentivize the growth and independence of their citizens are builders. They incentivize jobs, self-respect, and the self-esteem that gainful employment supplies. President Donald Trump is a builder – his narrative is that of the survivor and his message is to be an empowered adult. Ex-president Obama continues to be a destroyer – his “resistance” narrative is that of the victim and his message is to be a dependent child.

The questions that Americans must answer are these, “Do I want to live as a dependent powerless child under socialism or as an empowered adult in a democracy?” “Do I want to be a victim or a survivor?” The answers to these two questions will determine the course of America.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Some People Love to Call Names

Circuit Court Win for Religious Freedom on Gay Marriage

RELATED VIDEO: Victimization Mentality of the Left

LAWFARE: Hindering President Trump from investigating Obama

The defeated Democrats are colluding with the mainstream media to create an echo chamber of false accusations, fake news, and demands for groundless investigations and frivolous lawsuits to impede President Trump and sabotage his administration by preoccupying them in court. The Trump administration is under siege.

The Democratic Party is not your mother’s Democratic Party. Today the party is composed of radical left-wing liberals and anarchists fully committed to destroying American democracy and replacing it with socialism. The Democrats today have no interest in making America strong and great again – they have the opposite agenda and intend to pursue Obama’s goal of weakening America toward socialism in preparation for Obama’s globalist ambition of one-world government.

The “resistance” movement lead by lawless Obama is designed to topple constitutionally elected President Donald Trump and create social chaos.

There are two tiers to the Democrats’ attack strategy. The blatant goal of toppling President Donald Trump disguises the primary objective of preventing Trump’s Department of Justice from investigating the criminal activities of the Obama administration. Investigations of Obama, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Lois Lerner, John Brennan, James Comey and the corrupt Clinton Foundation would be devastating to the Democratic Party.

America is no stranger to war – we are just not used to Americans waging war against a sitting president. It is an extremely un-American and treasonous strategy the Democrats have embraced. Instead of complying with the rules of law and fielding a stronger candidate for the 2020 elections they have adopted the tactics of revolution and anarchy – it is appalling. The Democratic party is fomenting anarchy and attempting to delegitimize, destabilize, and topple the government of our constitutionally elected President Donald Trump.

The current strategy of the defeated Democrats still crying and trying to destroy American democracy is lawfareLawfare is a form of asymmetric warfare consisting of using the legal system against an enemy. Lawfare is designed to damage or delegitimize the enemy, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory by casting the pall of criminality and suspicion over them. The theory of lawfare against President Trump is that if the President and his administration are spending their time and resources defending themselves in court he will not be able to govern effectively, keep his promises to strengthen and make America great again, or investigate the criminal activities of Obama and his gang. The Democrats hope disappointment in President Trump will reward the Democrats with a gain of enough seats in the midterm election to impeach President Trump.

Even if the Democrats are unsuccessful in their goal to reverse the balance of power in the midterm elections, their objective is to make it impossible for President Trump to govern effectively and investigate criminality in Obama’s term. Lawfare is the preferred method being used by the Democrats to protect their lord and master Barack Hussein Obama – the greatest threat to American sovereignty and democracy since 1776.

First on the current list of lawfare activists is deceitful James Comey who deliberately leaked a memorandum of a conversation with President Trump saying he thought it might prompt the appointment of a special counsel to discover the truth about Russian interference in the 2016 election. Comey leaked the memo through Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman who took it to the NYT. Comey deviously made his case for a special counsel by manipulating the colluding media. Later Comey contradicted himself and exposed his actual motive saying he hoped for a special counsel to corroborate his claims that President Trump had asked for his loyalty. Comey implicated himself and revealed his deceit – he was not looking to find the truth about Russia he was looking to bring down President Trump.

Comey was disingenuously presented to the American people by the colluding mainstream media as being bipartisan. In fact, Comey was the FBI director who replaced Mueller under Obama’s lawless presidency and with Lynch’s Justice Department refused to prosecute criminal acts of the Obama Administration. Obama was the King of of Lawlessness in America for eight years and Comey, Clinton, Holder, Lynch, Lerner, Brennan, and Rice were his vassals. This is a short list of unprosecuted crimes that Comey ignored or supported provided by The Millennium Report.

  • The infamous Iran deal
  • Hillary Clinton Benghazi gun running
  • Ambassador Steven’s death
  • Eric Holder’s Fast and Furious gun running
  • Hillary’s private server espionage and treason
  • Bush and Clinton bank bailouts
  • Bombing seven sovereign nations without congressional approval
  • Obama’s IBM Eclipse Foundation’s social networking patent theft
  • James Clapper’s illegal NSA/CIA/FBI surveillance and his perjury before Congress
  • Obama’s energy company subsidies
  • Obama’s misuse of banker fines to support liberal activist groups
  • Obama’s theft of Fannie May and Freddie Mack
  • Obama’s IRS targeting of conservatives
  • Obama and Clinton’s confiscations from the Bureau of Land Management
  • Planned Parenthood eugenics and baby parts trafficking
  • Gold, silver, and LIBOR rate rigging
  • Ignoring “missing person” reports and supporting human trafficking
  • Clinton Foundation theft of $2 billion under the guise of a Presidential Library fund
  • Hillary taking money from foreign nations while Secretary of State
  • Maintaining open borders and Sanctuary Cities
  • Refugee trafficking and fraud
  • Allowing overstayed visas of more than one million people
  • Non-enforcement of existing immigration laws

James Comey has been the fixer for the Clinton crime family for decades beginning in the 1990’s with Whitewater and most famously making the strong case for prosecuting Hillary Clinton for her illegal unsecured private basement server and then stunningly recommending against prosecution. What the public did not realize is that prosecuting Clinton could expose Comey himself which is why he is actually part of the Clinton email cover-up.

Next on the lawfare list is Robert Mueller, James Comey’s mentor and predecessor. Instead of investigating the blatant crimes of Obama and his administration for which there is ample evidence, Robert Mueller is now empowered as special prosecutor to investigate the imaginary crimes of President Trump with a twin purpose. Mueller will keep President Trump bogged down for two years under a false veil of suspicion until the midterm elections in service of the defeated Democrats hoping to regain seats, and more importantly Mueller’s deceitful investigation will hinder any investigation into the Obama administration by President Trump’s Justice Department.

It is incomprehensible why the Trump administration would ever have considered Clinton loyalist James Comey for FBI director or his equally biased mentor Robert Mueller for special prosecutor. Both are proven Obama/Clinton loyalists willing to sabotage President Trump’s presidency.

Third on the lawfare list are Governors Brown, Cuomo, and Inslee. These men are not stupid – they know that what they are doing is not legal and they cannot possibly win – but they do not care. Their bluster narrative is pure political theater intended to tie Trump up in court – more lawfare. Governors do not have the Constitutional authority to make agreements with foreign countries. They cannot usurp the power of the presidency. This treasonous ploy of theirs is just another ignominious example of the Democratic Party’s tactic of lawfare against President Trump.

The Climate Alliance of California, New York, Washington, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii, Virginia and Rhode Island has publicly declared on the New York State government website its intention to treasonously “convene U.S. states committed to upholding the Paris Climate Agreement.” Governor Jerry Brown pompously described President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Accord saying, “This is an insane move by this president – deviant behavior from the highest office in the land.”

Really? Insane? Deviant?

Let’s talk about the meaning of insanity and deviant behavior because words matter.

Insanity is defined as unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases one from criminal or civil responsibility. President Donald Trump was perfectly clear when he explained in a cogent argument that the Paris Accord was extremely harmful to America. So, by definition President Trump’s withdrawal from Obama’s unlawful ant-American agreement was not insane.

The Governors Three by contrast all seem to have serious identity issues – they are out of touch with reality and do not seem to know who they are. They appear confused and  without the soundness of mind to correctly identify themselves as governors and not the president of the United States. Perhaps they missed or slept through the civics class that taught that governors have zero authority to enter agreements or treaties with foreign nations and, in fact, such agreements are a criminal offense in strict violation of the Logan Act. The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.

Deviant is defined as departing from usual or accepted standards. If anyone’s behavior was deviant it was Obama’s when he made the unsanctioned Paris Agreement because he failed to protect the economic interests of the United States. The agreement itself was contemptuous of Congress and the democratic process. It was an example of Obama’s executive overreach and deeply divisive governance.

President Donald Trump recognized the non-binding Paris Agreement made by Obama without Congressional approval to be harmful to the United States. So, by definition President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the agreement followed the accepted standard of an American president protecting America and American interests.

All three governors are public officers sworn to protect America and uphold the Constitution – by entering into agreements they are not authorized to make, particularly agreements that fail to protect American interest, they are derelict in their duties and have, like Obama, deviated from accepted norms. This left-wing liberal threesome are colluding with the international community to de-industrialize America by damaging our mining industries and redistributing our wealth to non-industrialized nations.

It appears that if anyone is insane or deviant the award goes to Democratic Governors Brown, Cuomo, and Inslee.

Perhaps California Governor Brown, New York Governor Cuomo, and Washington Governor Inslee will use an insanity defense to absolve themselves of treason charges for their U.S. Climate Alliance attempts to uphold the anti-American Paris Climate Agreement that President Donald Trump decisively rejected.

Carolyn Glick summarized the path forward for President Trump succinctly saying, “It is time for Trump to delegate the dirty work of attacking his opponents to his attorneys, advisers and supporters. He must devote his public appearances entirely to advancing his own presidential agenda. By firing Mueller, appointing a special counsel to investigate the Obama administration, removing Obama’s political appointees from government and replacing them with his own hires, and concentrating on implementing his agenda, Trump will end the siege on his presidency. He will defeat the self-proclaimed ‘resistance’ whose purpose is to defeat him politically through administrative and bureaucratic abuses.”

It is also time for President Trump to renew an American tradition of speaking (not tweeting) directly to the American people in weekly televised broadcasts from the Oval Office that inform Americans about the efforts and accomplishments of his administration and their progress in making America great again. President Trump was elected by the people for the people and he must speak directly to the people because the mainstream media is colluding with the defeated Democrats to destroy him. President Trump can resist the resistance movement and expose the fabricated lawfare being waged against him by ignoring the media and speaking directly to the American public.

What Alcoholics, Democrats and the Catholic Hierarchy Have in Common

The ability to accept reality is fading in the U.S. Freedom is failing as minorities insist on their rights like eating a piece of pie from the middle.  “A house divided against itself cannot stand”, Abraham Lincoln.

As a young medical intern 50 years ago, I had a patient in the emergency room who had succumbed to the stresses of running a half-way house for alcoholics. As he mended, I went to an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting with him and appreciated two pamphlets I was given: “Alcoholism is a Merry-Go-Round Named Denial,” and “How to Help an Alcoholic Who Insists He Doesn’t Need Any Help.”

The alcoholic denies he has a problem with alcohol. It’s the fault of the kids, the wife, or the boss. There’s an inability to deal with reality without a drink and it affects everyone in his world.

The political views of some leaders, especially Democrats, are intolerance of reality.

They lost the election but there’s an inability to wait for another opportunity while working together to solve mutual problems. Washington, D.C. has been called the alcoholic capitol of the U.S. and politicians seem bent on rule or hostility, egged on by mainstream media that are willing to crumble the cookie by fighting over it. In a WND.com article titled 1 Nation, No More? Joseph Farah warns media’s propaganda war could ‘explode into a shooting war’. Farah writes:

The U.S. motto, “e pluribus unum,” no longer applies.

We don’t live up to the phrase “out of many, one.” We don’t even try.

It’s passé. The opposite is where we’re heading – “out of one, many.” We have lost our commonality. We have shattered the bonds that once held us together – namely the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the values that inspired them.

Everyone is beginning to notice it. The evidence is in the explosive, vitriolic political rhetoric of the day.

According to a new CBS News poll, three-quarters of Americans feel the current tone of politics and debate is encouraging violence among some people. Violence, not dissent. Violence, not just passion. Violence, not constructive change.

Read more.

The media portray the Catholic leadership as divided over the Pope Francis’ liberal ways, but if this nation needs UN peace-keepers, the Pope will be the power behind the throne to favor the end of U.S. sovereignty.

What we are seeing is the creation of problems and a crisis for which they have the answers.

Truth be told, the Bible offers insight to a coming New World Order. In the books of Daniel and the Revelation, we find world governments depicted as fierce beasts of prey in Daniel 7 where Rome was represented by the 4th beast and the papacy by the little horn that grew out of it. This was supported by Protestant reformers who all saw the abuse of papal power (and why early Americans fled the Old World) as fitting Daniel’s description.

Revelation 13 picks up where Daniel 7 left off. Even though it was written centuries before the Holy Roman Empire, the beast in verse 1 is an amalgamation of Daniel’s beasts that the papacy survived. Then the US (2nd beast, verse 11, causes the world to make an image—a look-alike to the Old World Order. New World Order is what’s coming, also seen by the papacy riding that beast in Revelation 17 where all the clues can only fit one church, also called the Mother of Harlots (false churches that no longer protest her).

Here’s a prophetic view of reality,

“When the time comes and men realize that the social edifice must be rebuilt according to eternal standards, be it tomorrow, or be it centuries from now, the Catholics will arrange things to suit said standards.”

“Undeterred by [others]…They will make obligatory the religious observance of Sunday on behalf of the whole of society and for its own good, revoking the permit for freethinkers and Jews to celebrate incognito, Monday or Saturday on their own account. Those whom this may annoy, will have to put up with the annoyance. Respect will not be refused to the Creator nor repose denied to the creature simply for the sake of humoring certain maniacs, whose frenetic condition causes them stupidly and insolently to block the will of a whole people.” (The Liberal Illusion, Louis Veuillot, published by the National Catholic Welfare Conference, Washington, D.C.).

Never mind that ‘Sunday’ (their creation, also day of pagan sun worship) isn’t commanded in the Bible and “the first day” (reference to what we know as Sunday) is only found once in the book of Acts while “Sabbath” is found nine times—three times as “every Sabbath”–the custom of the apostles. They saw no change in the day of worship. Not Sunday, but baptism by immersion is the Bible symbol to honor the resurrection as we rise to walk in a new, Christian life—not by sprinkling an infant that has no understanding.

This isn’t against sincere Catholics, but against a system that fails to teach the Bible as the basis of life and salvation, Matthew 4:4; 23:9.

RELATED VIDEO: Pope Francis recently met with the delegation of the Communion of Reformed Churches which unites 225 Protestant churches and 100 countries representing at least 80 million Christians. The purpose of this meeting was to promote Christian unity and advance the Ecumenical Movement. Should Protestant churches be seeking unity with the Roman Catholic Church and participate in the Ecumenical Movement?

RELATED VIDEO: Make the Church Great Again.

Steadfast Czechs Fight on Against EU Gun Control

The European Union’s new restrictions on firearms ownership were finalized on May 24, when the misguided changes to the European Firearms Directive were published in the political bloc’s Official Journal. Despite this setback, the Czech Republic has made clear that the country will continue its fight for European firearms freedom.

To quickly recap, following the November 13, 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, the EU expedited plans to curtail gun ownership across the political union. Of most concern to European gun owners was a new restriction on the ownership of certain types of semi-automatic firearms. However, the legislation also included more stringent requirements for member state-issued firearms licenses, and measures that implicated gun owner privacy. After significant negotiations between the European Parliament and European Council to reform the European Commission’s flawed draft, the final contours of the legislation were agreed to last December. Since the announcement of the European Commission’s draft proposal, the Czech Republic has been among the harshest critics of the gun control legislation. 

On June 14, Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka announced the country’s intention to challenge the new restrictions in the European Court of Justice. Reporting on the development, Agence France-Presse quoted Czech Interior Minister Milan Chovanec, who stated, “We cannot allow the EU to interfere in the position of member states and their citizens under the guise of fighting terrorism” adding, “I’m not happy about the complaint but we have no other option.”

The move came after deliberation by the Czech government, during which some Czech politicians were reluctant to challenge the new controls. However, throughout the process, Chovanec was adamant about the need to confront the new restrictions. On June 8, the Czech News Agency reported that the Interior Minister viewed the EU’s arguments about thwarting terrorism a “mere pretext” to impose the new controls. Expressing his severe disdain for the EU’s gun controls, Chovanec noted “In my opinion, the directive should not be implemented even if it meant that Europe will sanction the country.”

The Czech Republic has a strong tradition of civilian gun ownership and firearms manufacturing, and in recent years has made significant efforts to protect their proud heritage. In addition to confronting the changes to the European Firearms Directive directly, some Czech politicians have supported a change to the Czech constitution that would guarantee the right to keep and bear arms. Further, in July 2016, Czech President Milos Zeman expressed his support for an armed citizenry to confront terrorist threats.

The Czechs have until August 17 to file their formal complaint against the new European Firearms Directive with the European Court of Justice. NRA-ILA will continue to follow the Czechs in their crucial struggle for freedom and apprise U.S. gun owners of any new developments.

7th-year Republican Florida representative claims freshman status to evade 8-year term limit

The ugly hubris that accompanies entrenched power has been noted since human beings started taking notes. Here’s another card for the file:

FL Rep. James “J.W.” Grant (R – District 64)

In Tampa, 7th-year legislator Rep. James Grant is facing his last term in office under Florida’s 8-year term limits law. How is he choosing to finish out his public service?  By filing for re-election and throwing his hat in the ring for Speaker of the House.

No, I am not kidding.

In a case reminiscent of the veteran Palm Beach Gardens City Council member who resigned a few months early in order to restart his term limits clock, Rep. Grant is claiming that because of irregularities which led to a re-vote in his election in 2014, somehow he went back in time and became a freshman legislator.

That is particularly convenient as a meeting of all Republican freshmen is scheduled for Friday, June 30, in Orlando to choose a new speaker of the House for 2022-24. It is a secret meeting but the word is that 7th-year legislator Grant, class of 2010, will be there to cast a vote for himself.

If Rep. Grant wins, he will be dragging his party through the muck, as surely both controversy and litigation will dog their would-be leader from next Friday until he leaves office.  It will also be a slap in the face for voters who approved the 8-year term limits law by 77% back in 1992. Polls show there has been no diminution of support for the law since then.

In Palm Beach Gardens, the local political and media establishment initially circled the wagons around one of their own, offering circuitous technicalities to justify keeping power.  We are seeing this phenomenon to some degree with Rep. Grant as well, as a handful of his party colleagues and even some Tampa media are arguing for giving their golden boy a pass.

But courts are better at resisting group-think and political pressure.  In the Palm Beach Gardens case, the Fourth District Court of Appeals threw that politician out of office in June of last year.  There is no reason to expect the courts will afford Rep. Grant any special dispensation. In fact, U.S. Term limits does not know of any case in any state — ever — where a long-time state legislator busted a voter-approved term limit using this technicality.

(For nit-pickers, this is not a case of a freshman legislator being elected to a partial term via special election.  In such a case, Florida’s law does not count the partial term against the legislator’s term limit. The case here is that the re-election of a veteran, incumbent legislator was flubbed and a second vote was held a few months later. The election SNAFU hardly obviates his past consecutive years of service.)

But the sad truth is that justice will only prevail if voters raise their voices (and maybe eventually money for court fees) to object.  Rep. Grant is betting we won’t.

Let’s prove him wrong by using THIS LINK to inform our own state reps what is going on.

TAKE ACTION: Click on the image to send a message to stop this scam.