Are the Democrats coming to their senses? While the party leadership does not seem to be doing so rank and file member may just be signaling their disgust. Here's what one life long Democrat said during a recent town hall on CBS: "Regardless of who was behind it, they confirmed that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment are liars and that they had this thumb on the scale for Hillary Clinton – well, what are they basically saying? If we hadn’t been caught lying, we’d be running the country right now.” http://www.usapoliticstoday.com/epic-backfire-democrats-said-cbs-town-hall-just-sentenced-dnc-death/
Failing cities which do not abide by the law and bash the police to boot do not deserve a bail-out from the FBI. City citizens these leaders are suppose to serve suffer the consequences. That is not right. Nor in most cases it is the fault of the police. It is the city leaders who make the laws and direct/control the actions of city police. Quote: "Federal help to these dangerous cities is a stopgap measure. The FBI has its own investigative duties, and local communities should be righting their own law enforcement ships. They need to invest in enough cops – and invest in their training, leaders, equipment, tools and tactics. Cities are failing because their leaders have failed to do this. Combatting surging violent crime in Baltimore and Chicago and New Orleans is not about “Officer Friendly” community engagement. Limited federal resources aren’t designed for that. This is about real law enforcement that gets violent criminals off the streets, limits the next wave of victims and turns desperate communities back to the good people who live in them. President Trump and his attorney general understand that." Not all but a large percentage of the cities with the worse crime rates have made policing next to impossible with ridiculous pampering of criminal behavior. Their problem is therefore their fault. And, most if not all the large cities are long time bastions of failed/failing Democrat leadership.
You will note that this is the same liberal crowd that riots and protests any speech by a conservative. But they feel free to issue unspecified threats if a pro-sharia law advocate is interfered with. These are the self appointed "tolerant" ones. By their own behavior tolerance is obviously not part of their character. http://www.libertyheadlines.com/dems-silent-dnc-vice-chair-defends-pro-sharia-organizer/? If Democrats do not denounce this hypocrisy, you will know where their heads and hearts are. And be assured that will mean they are not with most American citizens.
Comedian Jimmy Kimmel recently went public with details of his newborn son's health problems. It was heart wrenching to be sure but took on a political slant. He used it to plead for keeping Obamacare in place. He used emotion not facts to make his case and if he was knowingly deceptive he pulled a typical liberal/progressive stunt. This piece breaks down the facts that in no case does his tragic situation support keeping a horrible Obamacare program in place for average Americans. Here are five facts that prove Kimmel's appeal has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with or in any way justify keeping Obamacare should remain in place. http://www.dailywire.com/news/15993/5-things-you-need-know-about-hospital-where-jimmy-aaron-bandler? If he knowingly used his situation to try to convince people that Obamacare is providing the medical care his son needs he is worse than a liar.
Democrats beware. This item reveals just what your party leadership thinks of you. Quote: "The Democratic National Committee is currently defending the tactics it used last year to rig the presidential primary against Sen. Bernie Sanders in a class-action lawsuit, brazenly telling voters in a court of law that the party is not obligated to run a fair and impartial primary election. Outraged by how the DNC unfairly boosted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and cleared the way for her primary victory, supporters of Sanders and Democratic donors sued the DNC in June 2016 alleging it defrauded its constituents." http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/dnc-we-rigged-primaries-so-what/
In today's upside down world, who can one trust? This item explores that question. Quote: "The looming threat of World War III, a potential extermination event for the human species, is made more likely because the world’s public can’t count on supposedly objective experts to ascertain and evaluate facts. Instead, careerism is the order of the day among journalists, intelligence analysts and international monitors – meaning that almost no one who might normally be relied on to tell the truth can be trusted. The dangerous reality is that this careerism, which often is expressed by a smug certainty about whatever the prevailing groupthink is, pervades not just the political world, where lies seem to be the common currency, but also the worlds of journalism, intelligence and international oversight, including United Nations agencies that are often granted greater credibility because they are perceived as less beholden to specific governments but in reality have become deeply corrupted, too. In other words, many professionals who are counted on for digging out the facts and speaking truth to power have sold themselves to those same powerful interests in order to keep high-paying jobs and to not get tossed out onto the street. Many of these self-aggrandizing professionals – caught up in the many accouterments of success – don’t even seem to recognize how far they’ve drifted from principled professionalism." And, "But the mainstream media stars didn’t like it when Trump began throwing the “fake news” slur back at them. Thus, the First Amendment lapel pins and the standing ovation for Jeff Mason’s repudiation of the “fake news” label. Yet, as the glitzy White House Correspondents Dinner demonstrated, mainstream journalists get the goodies of prestige and money while the real truth-tellers are almost always outspent, outgunned and cast out of the mainstream. Indeed, this dwindling band of honest people who are both knowledgeable and in position to expose unpleasant truths is often under mainstream attack, sometimes for unrelated personal failings and other times just for rubbing the powers-that-be the wrong way." http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/05/01/existential-question-who-trust.html
Courts subordinate to the Supreme Court have no authority to rule on federal although they have been doing so for some time and have gotten away with it. But should they? This piece explains. Quote: "A district judge has as much power to “strike down” a national policy or statute and have it take effect outside his district as much as Congress has the power to adjudicate an individual bankruptcy case. That is to say, they have no such power at all." And, "Additionally, Trump has shown some signs of warming to elements of judicial reform. He said earlier this week that he’d support the effort to divide up the Ninth Circuit. However, this act alone, while limiting the scope of jurisdiction to California, could still undermine his national policy. Even a Ninth Circuit limited to California could still place a nationwide injunction on his immigration policies. This is why Congress must also clarify through the Rules Enabling Act that lower courts have no power to issue injunctions outside their respective jurisdictions. This would be applied evenly to all administrations and regarding all types of policies. Will this create a patchwork of precedent? Sure. But I’d rather live under a divided patchwork." https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/constitutional-fact-district-judges-cant-strike-trumps-orders
Lest we forget this is a reminder that investigations into Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation are ongoing. http://mailchi.mp/nationalrepublicantrust/you-made-a-big-difference-767153?e=f39097a4e4 Even now more evidence of wrong doing is emerging. http://www.libertyheadlines.com/unclassified-emails-discovered-hillarys-unsecure-system/? There seems to be no end to the lies she has told.
Given the people who are praising the latest government funding bill it must be really bad. Any time these politicians praise spending more than we take in it is sure to be a bad deal for tax payers. Their lies are intolerable. "You can tell whether a spending agreement is good or bad based on who is smiling: the swamp dwellers, or those who want to drain the swamp. This budget made the swamp dwellers very happy. Shortly after announcing a $1.1 trillion — with a "t" — spending deal to fund the federal government's domestic and military programs for the next five months, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it a "very good deal for the American people." http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/with-this-budget-deal-the-swamp-wins/ Seems to me that both the Republicans and Trump caved. I am not happy.