Thursday, November 17, 2016

Keith Ellison a ‘Very Aggressive Hard Leftist Enabler’ of Muslim Brotherhood

Breitbart ^ | John Hayward 

"The appeal of Keith Ellison is that he is a young, very aggressive hard leftist – actually my friend Trevor Loudon in his film The Enemies Within has pointed out, a guy with actual communist ties; that’s how hard Left.”
“But he’s also a Muslim who has been hanging with, embracing, supporting, and otherwise carrying on with the Muslim Brotherhood in America,” Gaffney continues. “And that would apparently be something that qualifies him to be a leader of the Democratic Party these days. You see a lot of it in the last campaign. I can’t make the case that that’s good for Democrats. I can’t make the case that it’s good for America.”
Returning to Ellison, Gaffney noted that “most recently, he has been the chair of the Progressive Caucus, which is, of course, the euphemism that is now used by the Democrats to describe the hard Left within their circles.”
“I mean, it’s the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party, or maybe the Hillary Clinton-Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party,” he explained. “But beyond that, and I sort of touched on some of the key points, Keith Ellison is a Muslim, and there’s nothing wrong with being a Muslim. There’s a lot wrong with being a Muslim Brother or an enabler or supporter or fundraiser or otherwise facilitator of the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood in our country.
“That’s the kind of thing that, when you see a Keith Ellison promoting groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, promoting the Islamic Society of North America, promoting the Muslim Students’ Association, and on and on – all groups with an absolutely indisputable pedigree of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – it’s appalling,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Tom Hanks On Election Results: "We Are Going TO Be All Right." (A must read)

Fox News ^ | Fox News / Tom Hanks 

The night was supposed to be all about him, but he made it about us.
Tom Hanks used the occasion of his tribute from the Museum of Modern Art’s film department on Tuesday night to deliver a Tom Hanks-ian monologue addressing the despair many in the entertainment industry feel about Donald Trump’s election as president.
“We are going to be all right," Hanks said. “In my own lifetime our streets were in chaos, our generations were fighting each other tooth and nail, and every dinner table ended up being as close to a fist fight as human families will allow."
“We have been in a place where we have looked at our leaders and wondered what the hell they were thinking of. We’ve had moments with the administrations and politicians and senators and governors in which we have we’ve asked ourselves ‘Are they lying to us or do they really believe in this?’ That’s all right.
“We have this magnificent thing that is in place. It’s a magnificent document and it starts off with these phrases that if you’re smart enough you’ve memorized in school or you just read enough so that you know it by heart, ‘We the people/in order to form a more perfect union/established to ensure domestic tranquility/to provide for the common defense/promote the general welfare,’ and you go on and on. That document is going to protect us over and over again whether or not our neighbors preserve, protect, and defend it themselves.
"We will turn our nation and we will turn the future and we will turn all the work that we have in before us into some grand thing of beauty,” Hanks said, to a standing ovation.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

How the Clinton Foundation brought down Hillary’s campaign

NY Post ^ | November 17, 2016 | Matt Rhoades 

The Clinton family foundation turned out to be a liability for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. But it wasn’t foreordained. Here’s how it happened.
After serving as Mitt Romney’s campaign manager in 2012, I formed an outside political group called America Rising tasked with doing opposition research on Clinton. She left the State Department in 2013 with sky-high favorable ratings, but we knew that popularity (which might soon doom any 2016 GOP nominee) was the result of a general lack of scrutiny in the previous four years.
When we first started talking to reporters about the Clintons’ vulnerabilities, to their credit, they were almost always interested in the Clinton Foundation. Already, there were suspicions about the foundation unethically blurring the lines and bending the rules. The organization represented the intersection of politics and money, the favorite topic of any good political reporter.
In August 2013, the New York Post broke a story showing the Clinton Foundation had spent $50 million on private travel. Former President Bill Clinton had apparently become addicted to private jets. The general election was still more than three years away, and already the Clinton Foundation was transforming from a well-meaning charity to a private slush fund enriching the Clintons, making a mockery of Hillary’s claim the next year that her family was “dead broke.”
Uncovering this information was a challenge. Despite its lofty campaign promises about transparency, the Obama administration refused to cooperate with many of America Rising’s Freedom of Information Act requests.
Enter the conservative advocacy group Citizens United, whose president, Dave Bossie, went on to serve as President-elect Donald Trump’s deputy campaign manager. When our public-record requests for Clinton’s State Department correspondence were denied, Bossie took legal action, arguing that the public had a right to see this information.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

White House: We Don’t Have The Authority To Pardon DREAMers ^ | 11/17/16 | Adrian Carrasquillo 

White House officials moved Thursday afternoon to stop the nascent effort by Democrats and immigration activists asking President Obama to pardon so-called DREAMers, releasing a statement to BuzzFeed News that the president does not have the power to do so.
“The president takes the executive clemency power seriously. As a general matter, we do not comment on the likelihood of whether a specific pardon may be granted, should one be requested,” a White House official said. “We note that the clemency power could not give legal status to any undocumented individual. As we have repeatedly said for years, only Congress can create legal status for undocumented individuals.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

A Populist Election and Its Aftermath (Outstanding!)

Crisis Magazine ^ | November 17, 2016 | FR. GEORGE W. RUTLER 

Considering how many crucial matters were at stake during the recent election, including the right to life and religious freedom, and confronting the preponderant bias in the media and opinion polls, it did not seem melodramatic to hope for a providential Hand to guide things. Without mistaking optimism for hope, and cautioned by the disappointment that can issue from placing trust in princes or any child of man, there could be much thanksgiving on Thanksgiving Day.
An advantage of living in the center of the universe is that one need not travel, since one is already there. Here on 34th Street in Manhattan, the Jacob Javits Convention Center where the Democratic Party met on election night is a five minute walk west of my rectory, and the Hotel New Yorker where Mrs. Clinton gave her delayed concession speech is five minutes to the east. On the pavement outside my door, party workers had stenciled images of Mrs. Clinton. The paint must have been thin, for one rain shower washed most of them away. When Mr. Podesta finally appeared in the convention hall to disperse the crowds, he seemed browbeaten as well he might, for witnesses said that upon being told that she had lost, Mrs. Clinton had to be restrained at the sight of Mr. Podesta’s face.
Some who trusted pundits were shocked that their perception of the American populace was an illusion. Their rampant rage would have been tamer if they had not been assured, to the very day of voting, that the losers were winners. The reaction confirmed T.S. Eliot in “The Four Quartets”: “Humankind cannot bear very much reality.” Engraved in journalistic memory are the words of The New York Times film critic Pauline Kael after the 1972 election: “I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theatre I can feel them.” She was telling the truth, for she indeed lived in a social cocoon impervious to the rebukes of reason, and she was less sympathetic than the benevolent Louis XVI not understanding why the head of the Princess de Lamballe was being carried on a pike past his window. Her number has been multiplied, and the response of thousands accustomed to life in a “rather special world” was to riot when the actual votes shattered their fantasy, although some Hollywood celebrities modified their previous vows to move to Canada (it is always Canada and never Cuba or North Korea) and one changed her mind about moving to another planet, proving the adage: “You can’t go home again.” More than a few pacifists turned their palm branches into truncheons. In places such as Maine and California, most of the arrested rioters were not registered voters and anonymous patrons paid many by the hour to chant “Love Not Hate” while beating up youths as well as adults.
Fearing further decreases in its shrinking revenues, The New York Times made a pallid apology for misreading the demographics of our culture, coming as close as it could to admitting that it had been quite wrong, by confessing that it had not been quite right. Judging by its front page the next day, that act of contrition lasted twenty-four hours. The New York Daily News, which once was the mostly read newspaper in the nation and now is virtually bankrupt, showed no contrition after months of tabloid screeds climaxing on the day after the election with a headline calling the White House a “House of Horrors.” Free of the early deadlines required by the old styled linotype machines, no newspaper committed a “Dewey Defeats Truman” sort of faux pas. But instead of “Clinton Defeats Trump,” Newsweek magazine had to recall its “Madam President” souvenir edition showing Mrs. Clinton the way she used to smile.
The rout was the political equivalent of the battles of torrid Cermi, frigid Trenton, and stormy Midway, and it should have alerted churchmen. While Catholic voters seemed to have reacted to some condescending and inaccurate expressions about Catholicism during the campaign, the disparity between votes cast for each party, larger than in 2012, still was only 7 percent. Considering the large number of nominal Catholics for whom doctrine is an encumbrance that is no longer bothersome, the vaunted Catholic population of the United States less the number of actually faithful Catholics, is a Potemkin village. The precepts of several bishops on responsible voting had been edifying, but a remarkable number seemed to temper their instinctive loquacity with studied reserve. The election was a populist revolt and, while the popular election of bishops probably would be no improvement over the present system, the Church must address the simmering dissatisfaction of the faithful with the clerical establishment, which is as intense as the public vote against the Washington establishment. Mediocre bureaucrats easily talk about the People of God but they disdain a populism that would consult the people seriously, just as liberal humanitarians think that humans lower the tone of humanity.
Other casualties of the new populism are the “Never Trump” commentators among professional conservatives, comfortable in their settled standards and sure convictions. In their endowed professorial chairs, think tanks, and journals which none but each other read, they clutched their pearls while lamenting the untutored rhetoric of the “gauche, vulgar, shockingly ignorant, oafish and immoral” Trump, as though the White House has long been a Temple of Vestals. They now offer advice to the president-elect, as fair weather friends underestimating the storm, hoping that general amnesia will wipe away their lack of prescience.
After the election, histrionics have abounded in academia. College campuses have long been breeding grounds for self-absorption and corruption of sense, or what John Henry Newman described in his “Tamworth Reading Room” letters as “a mawkish, frivolous and fastidious sentimentalism.” A new name for these callow narcissists is “Snowflakes.” This brings to mind the apologia of Mae West: “I used to be Snow White, but I drifted.” Professors who never attained moral maturity themselves, reacted by providing “safe spaces” for students traumatized by reality. In universities across the land, by a sodality of silliness in the academic establishment, these “safe spaces” were supplied with soft cushions, hot chocolate, coloring books, and attendant psychologists. More than one university in the Ivy League provided aromatherapy along with friendly kittens and puppies for weeping students to cuddle. A college chaplaincy invited students to pray some prescribed litanies that offered God advice in an advisory capacity.
The average age of a Continental soldier in the American Revolution was one year less than that of a college freshman today. Alexander Hamilton was a fighting lieutenant-colonel when 21, not to mention Joan of Arc who led an army into battle and saved France when she was about as old as an American college sophomore. In our Civil War, eight Union generals and seven Confederate generals were under the age of 25. The age of most U.S. and RAF fighter pilots in World War II was about that of those on college junior varsity teams. Catholics who hoped in this election for another Lepanto miracle will remember that back in 1571, Don Juan of Austria saved Western civilization as commanding admiral when he was 24. None of these figures, in the various struggles against the world and the flesh and devil, retreated to safe spaces weeping in the arms of grief therapists. Yet pollsters ritually cite the attitudes of “college educated voters” as though colleges still educate and those who have not spent time in college lack an equivalent or even superior kind of learning shaped by experience.
What will the frightened half-adults do when they leave their safe spaces and enter a society where there is no one to offer them hot chocolate during their tantrums? Christ formed his disciples in a more practical way: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matt.10:16). We are here today because those disciples did as they were told, and were not shrewd as doves and innocent as snakes. It is not racist, or any other unchristian form of phobia, to recall that the Apostles are Dead White Guys. If that was a liability, they managed well. Their Master, who wills that none be lost and that all be saved, was a Dead White Guy for just three days. That haunts those huddled in safe spaces and hallows all who court danger to follow him.

Trump surrogate on registry for Muslim immigrants: We did it in World War II with the Japanese

Hotair ^ | 11/17/2016 | AllahPundit 

The strangest thing about this is that Carl Higbie mentions a key distinction between the two proposals early on in the clip below, before he brings up the Japanese example. The registry involves immigrants, and immigrants don’t get all of the same constitutional protections that citizens do. (Another key distinction: It’s, er, a registry, not an internment camp.) The Japanese interned during World War II were citizens; Trump’s registry would apply to non-citizens entering the United States from terror hot spots abroad. Why Higbie’s reaching for the former to explain the latter, especially when Team Trump has been at pains for months to turn their “Muslim ban” into a less identity-specific “close vetting for anyone from an extremist country” plan, is odd. Maybe he just goofed while scrambling for historical precedents to offer Kelly.
In any case, no, Trump’s registry wouldn’t be unconstitutional. The Bush administration implemented a variation of it, in fact.
That program, labeled the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, required those entering the U.S. from a list of certain countries — all but one predominantly Muslim — to register when they arrived in the U.S., undergo more thorough interrogation and be fingerprinted. The system, referred to by the acronym NSEERS, was criticized by civil rights groups for targeting a religious group and was phased out in 2011 because it was found to be redundant with other immigration systems…
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, said Wednesday that “a president’s power is at its apex at the nation’s borders” and that the Supreme Court has “consistently reaffirmed the power of the president to control the entry and exit from the country as a matter of national security.” Such precedent, he said would give Trump’s administration a decided advantage in any litigation.
Immigration law would afford the government special advantages, Temple University international law professor Peter Spiro said, because it exists in a “parallel universe” where many of the constitutional protections afforded in other legal situations do not apply. He said “discrimination on the basis of nationality is something that, again, one finds all over the immigration law, and in a nonimmigration context would almost certainly not withstand the equal-protection challenges.”
Spiro thinks bringing back NSEERS is a stupid idea, but not every stupid idea is unconstitutional. (“It’s immigration security theater. It’s like the wall: It’s pretty clear that it just has no effect, but it’s a way of keeping the restrictions constituencies … happy.”) Vox, of all places, has a useful short history of NSEERS noting that that program has already withstood constitutional challenges, partly because it was careful not to make religion the key criterion for scrutiny. It’s okay to scrutinize visitors from certain nations that all (or almost all) happen to be majority Muslim. It might not be okay to scrutinize visitors because they themselves are Muslim. Team Trump will surely observe the formal distinction in writing the policy, especially if Kris Kobach ends up being the main author. Then again, Kobach and the Trumpers might not need to write anything. As Vox notes, NSEERS is still on the books but was suspended when the Obama White House eliminated all of the previously targeted countries from the program’s list of nations deserving special scrutiny. Presumably Trump could reactivate it by simply re-adding some nations and signing an executive order.
An interesting question is whether every majority Muslim country will end up on Trump’s version of the list or if it’ll be truly limited to terror hot spots. Do we need to track visitors from the UAE, for instance? And what about the jihadist problem in Europe? Do French and Belgian nationals require special scrutiny? Is there a constitutional way to write the law so that only Muslim visitors from those countries are required to register when they visit? This is why some people are nervous about Higbie reaching for the Japanese example. Bringing back NSEERS might be constitutional but expanding the program to other classes of people might not be, and we already know from his “Muslim ban” proposal last year that Trump seems pretty comfortable with expansion. A would-be strong-man president won’t get the benefit of the doubt on stuff like this. Hopefully Higbie bears that in mind the next time he’s reaching for analogies.


Krauthammer: Trump Can, Should Stop Funds to Sanctuary Cities

Newsmax ^ | 17 Nov 2016 | Joe Crowe 

President-elect Donald Trump can and should withhold federal funds from U.S. cities that say they will guard illegal immigrants from deportation, political columnist Charles Krauthammer said Wednesday on Fox News' "Special Report."
"It's something that should not be allowed," Krauthammer said. "Democrats have tolerated it. I think Trump would be within his rights to withhold funds, and he should, and the Democrats are making a big bet, and a mistaken one, if they decide that they are going to defy the federal government and what seems to be common sense: control your borders."
Sanctuary cities — those that shield illegal immigrants — "were a scandal before Trump," the columnist added, connecting the issue to civil rights struggles in the 1960s.
"The people who did this in the past were the racists in the South who defied federal authority on civil rights," Krauthammer said. "So now it's in the name of something that appears to be humanitarian."
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who declared the Illinois city a sanctuary city, said he did not believe Trump would cut funding, according to The Chicago Tribune.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama to anti-Trump protesters: Don't be silent ^ | 11/17/16 | Brent Griffiths 

President Barack Obama has little sympathy for President-elect Donald Trump when it comes to the protests against him, and he offered up some advice for his successor: Get used to it.
“I’ve been the subject of protests during the course of my eight years,” Obama said at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday. “And I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests. So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent.”
Trump and his allies have lashed out at the protesters that have surged across the nation, accusing them of being paid demonstrators ginned up by the media.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Clinton Campaign Was Undone By Its Own Neglect And A Touch Of Arrogance, Staffers Say ^ | 11/16/16 | Sam Stein 

WASHINGTON ― In the closing weeks of the presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton’s staff in key Midwest states sent out alarms to their headquarters in Brooklyn. They were facing a problematic shortage of paid canvassers to help turn out the vote.
For months, the Clinton campaign had banked on a wide army of volunteer organizers to help corral independents and Democratic leaners and re-energize a base not particularly enthused about the election. But they were volunteers. And as anecdotal data came back to offices in key battlegrounds, concern mounted that leadership had skimped on a critical campaign function.
“It was arrogance, arrogance that they were going to win. That this was all wrapped up,” a senior battleground state operative told The Huffington Post.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Trump Mandate: Save the US Navy ^ | November 17, 2016 | Robert Charles 

There is an element of politics embedded in policy, no getting around it. That is, at least since Andrew Jackson, how democracy works. Presidents have a constitutional right to appoint their choices to top posts – subject to Senate confirmation. More often than not, those choices come from the president’s own party. However, this does not mean that top policy makers, from an Attorney General to a Secretary of the Navy, are then duly entitled to politicize their jobs. Unfortunately, the Secretary of the Navy seems to have missed that point.
High level appointees are not expected or allowed to blatantly politicize, that is, bend to their personal or party will – or otherwise reinterpret – established laws, prevailing regulations, or longstanding practices of those institutions entrusted to their care. Put differently, executive appointees swear an oath to the US Constitution, not to any politician or political party.
They are not invited into the wheelhouse of leadership to run the ship aground, or take it off course. They are not owners, but stewards of the future. In a sense, they are like doctors, expected to do no harm, and should held to account if they act outside their oath. It is inappropriate for a Secretary of the Navy to use his position to tip constitutional duties toward party, political agenda, or personal whim. That is not his job, not what he was confirmed for, and not what those being led deserve.
Yet … by appearance, since becoming Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus has done precisely this. In aggregate, his decisions have been willfully and transparently political. They have undermined years of Navy tradition, policy, practice, and history – in some cases, hundreds of years. The result has been a hemorrhaging of trust in leadership, a sense of disconnection between civilian leaders and uniformed personnel, and a body blow to morale. The whole approach raises questions of motivation, judgement and perspective, if not about how he interprets the oath.
Let’s get specific. Consider facts that baffle and infuriate, dismay and discourage duty-bound personnel. Ask, as you read these facts, if they do not fly in the face of sound, inspiring leadership. Taken together, they should send a clear signal to President-elect Donald Trump about the kind of leaders that belong at the Pentagon, and leading the US Navy. Morale, based on listening and leading, matters. People always matter more than gold stars for political correctness or party. Morale is especially important in the Navy, where risks are inherently real and our national security depends on those who serve.
Here is the main point: Whatever President-elect Trump does from now forward, he must assure institutions as important as the Navy are not politicized, do not promote indefensible political preferences, prejudices, favorites, progressivism, or personal objectives. He must assure that these institutions are not used as laboratories for social experimentation. Our national security is too precious. And the stack has gotten tall. Since becoming Secretary of the Navy, Mabus has undertaken acts that no prior Secretary of the Navy ever counseled, and no future Secretary ever should. Here are a few.
Political ship naming. Throwing away ship-naming convention, this Secretary named a U.S. warship after Democrat Congressman John Murtha, an appropriator who gave money to the Pentagon, was an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the FBI’s “Abscam” investigation, and on whom public corruption questions still circulate. The move was flagrantly political. It was compounded by naming another ship after Mexican-American political activist, Cesar Chavez, who disdained the Navy. Then a combat ship for former Democrat Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford, icon of gun control. This year, ships for Democrat Congressman John Lewis, and Democrat gay rights activist Harvey Milk. This Secretary chose party over Navy.
Social engineering. Taking from George Orwell, he unilaterally ended the longstanding suffix “-man” on all Navy ratings, some dating to the American Revolution, and led a public relations policy focused on “gender-neutralizing.” Public discussion shifted from big issues – readiness, procurement reform, timely ship delivery, ship capability, cyber-security and re-grounding Navy morale – to fringe fancies, such as “transgender” training and bathrooms, sex changes and overruling US Marine Corps advice for headlines.
Whatever the merits of generating controversial press, and they seem few, the adverse impact on Navy warfighting, from reach and readiness to resolve and respect, is inordinately high. The trade-off is dangerous. Using the United States Navy as a megaphone for political correctness contravenes expectations of those who signed up, and politicizes the service.
Green versus red. Making a mockery of Theodore Roosevelt’s “Great White Fleet,” which sailed the globe to reassure allies, this Secretary launched the “Great Green Fleet” in 2012, mandating 50 percent reliance on “alternative energy” by 2020. While progress toward renewables may have value, making the Navy vicar for another international public relations effort tied to “climate change” is wrong-headed. The US Navy is a fighting force, not a floating billboard for political causes. TR sent the “Great White Fleet” for deterrence, not to sell soap.
Second, operational efficiency – getting to places on time, with maximum maneuverability, long legs and right firepower – should be paramount. Third, distractions have costs; if being green takes priority over readiness, reach, and warfighting, we may find the cost is red – and not acceptable.
Maternity leave uber alles. In June of 2015, female sailors were entitled to six weeks of paid maternity leave. Today, they are entitled to twice that. Between those two dates, the Secretary of the Navy unilaterally upped maternity leave from six to 18 weeks, tripling expectations of Navy families to 4.5 months, eventually producing reversal by the Secretary of Defense. What is the issue? Judgment, raising and dashing expectations, balancing equities with foresight, readiness and warfighting, unit cohesion and unbroken career advancement versus a “feel good” proclamation “to make the Navy more like Google.” Family bonds are vital, but sailors did not sign up for “Google.” They signed up to be a fighting force for America. A Secretary owes his people respect, not promises he cannot keep.
Perhaps all this is not surprising. The Secretary served from 1970 to 1972, a time of national distress and low morale, probably also in the Navy. The ship to which he was attached reportedly spent much time in dry dock. The President who appointed him promoted these same ideas. But circles close; what goes around comes around. Tradition matters, along with the US Constitution and duties assumed by those who take the oath.
While change is not inherently bad, it can be misplaced. When a service leader takes decisions that are highly political, unjustified by history or constitutional oath, which smack of partisanship and disdain tradition, which show indifference to the People he serves; when the effect of those decisions is to undermine cohesion, respect for leadership, expectations of sailors, and to dishonor the past, something has gone badly wrong.
The mandate now, for President-elect Trump, is to look that problem straight on – and put it right. The United States Navy has been through too much, represents too much sacrifice and honor, embodies too much commitment to good and non-partisan America, to allow partisanship and political correctness to infect this high calling – or the people, at heart, who are the U.S. Navy.

No, President Obama CANNOT appoint Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court if the Senate does nothing!

The Coach's Team ^ | 11/17/16 | Jonathan H. Adler 

The following article was posted on the Washington Post website, reprinted from the Volokh Conspiracy site on April 11th of this year. With the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia came the unnecessary fear that Barack Obama could make a unilateral appointment to the Court—a recess appointment for example. Jonathan Adler explains just how wrong that concern happens to be. Even Mr. Obama’s propensity for ignoring the Constitution—its requirements and limits on his power—will not allow him to summarily place the 5th Marxist on the Court.
For those unfamiliar with Mr. Adler and the Volokh site, please make it a habit to read both as often as possible. They are among the best for news and information concerning court decisions, new and existing law, etc. Also, any summary, analysis or interpretation presented by Mr. Adler will be without peer.
by Jonathan H. Adler
Over the weekend, Gregory Diskant suggested in a Post op-ed that President Obama could unilaterally appoint Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court if the Senate fails to act on his nomination. My co-blogger Ilya Somin has explained why Diskant is mistaken. I would add a few points to Ilya’s critique.
First, the idea that the Senate has an affirmative duty to act in order to reject or “veto” a nomination does not square with the original understanding of the Appointments Clause. As Adam White has explained, the original understanding of the Founders considered, and ultimately rejected, a proposal to require the Senate to affirmatively reject a nomination in order to prevent a confirmation. Moreover, as Chief Justice Marshall noted in Marbury v. Madison, nomination and appointment are separate actions. Under the text of the Appointments Clause, the former is the president’s alone, while the latter is conditioned on Senate action.
Second, consistent practice establishes...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Bored Yet? Trump Already Winning for America

Lifezette ^ | 11/15/2016 | Edmund Kozak 

If the next four years are anything like the last several days, patriotic Americans may indeed find themselves positively exhausted by victory.
Seven days of President-Elect Trump, seven victories for the United States
The very day after Trump’s win, stocks were up and the week closed with the Dow Jones seeing its best performing week since 2011.
By Friday, it had become clear that, thanks to Trump's win, the Trans-Pacific Partnership was effectively dead in the waters of the Washington swamp.
Another bad trade deal that looks as if it will be consigned to the ash heap of history is the TTIP, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a proposed free trade agreement between the U.S. and the European Union.
Canada indicated it is willing to renegotiate NAFTA following Trump's stunning victory, while Mexico said it was open to discussions on the treaty.
Putin called to stress "the need to work together in the struggle against the No. 1 common enemy — international terrorism and extremism."
NYU professor Michael Rectenwald was put on leave for criticizing the emotionally unstable, totalitarian safe-space culture suffocating students on campuses across the country. The day after Trump's win, it was reported that not only was Rectenwald keeping his job — but he was also getting a promotion to full professorship with an 18-percent raise.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Drill, Baby Drill! American Made Energy Makes America Great Again!

Facebook ^ | November 16, 2016 | Sarah Palin 

Permian, ANWR, Prudhoe, Bakkan…. and so much more. NOW is the time to shut off the Saudi oil cartel flow valve and develop our own God-given natural resources. The only excuse not to become energy independent is a political excuse.

The inherent link between energy and security, and energy and prosperity, is real and recognized by every American except sketchy politicians and deceived faux environmentalists. We have the resources, we have the technology, we have the manpower. America has the highest environmental and worker safety standards in the world… it’s time to say, "Screw Arab oil. We’re making America great again!" We’ve always led in oil, gas and mineral development innovation. Let’s tap it.

Politics have kept us beholden to countries that do not like us and use energy as a weapon. It’s a farce when Pres. Obama and other progressives claim we’re not reliant on those resources anymore. And a sicker farce is the claim we must go to war over oil.

Shut off foreign rulers’ flow that has kept their peasants poor and terrorizingly desperate, and watch the world become a safer place.

And here at home, shovel out the BS "Peak Oil" claim that demands we abandon conventional energy sources in favor of unrealistic, uneconomic, unreliable, lobbyist- driven green energy boondoggles. Drill now while we shore up realistic renewables for a legitimate "all of the above" future energy plan.

Be ready for faux environmentalists – with their disdain for American jobs dressed in Carhartts and steel toed boots – to target this massive Texas find, despite all commonsense and responsible reason to explore and produce.

It’s time to unleash the private sector on new refineries, rigs, pipelines, infrastructure, service provisions, etc… all basic needs for more responsible domestic extraction, and all leading to the USA boom our working class deserves.

– Sarah Palin

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the shale formation in West Texas holds 20 billion barrels of oil valued at $900 billion.


A ‘Good Samaritan’ saw a deputy being attacked by a Florida man so he fatally shot the assailant

Washington Post ^ | Nov. 16, 2016 | Samantha Schmidt 

When the man saw a patrol car parked on the exit ramp of a Florida interstate, he witnessed a scene too troubling to ignore: a sheriff deputy being slammed to the ground and beaten by a man in plain clothes.
The passerby, whom the Lee County Sheriff’s Office is now calling a “Good Samaritan,” rushed to the two men, telling the attacker he would shoot him if he refused to stop beating the deputy.

The attacker, later identified as 53-year-old Edward Strother, continued to pin down the deputy and attack him, and the deputy struggled to keep his weapon away from him. When the attacker failed to comply to his warning, the passerby shot him three times, killing him, the News-Press reported.

The deputy, a 12-year veteran named Dean Bardes, was treated for his injuries and later released from the hospital.

Mike Scott, the Lee County sheriff, commended and thanked the man “who engaged the crazed assailant and stopped the imminent threat of great bodily harm or death to our deputy,” NBC-2 reported. He did not identify the man, however.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Krauthammer’s Take: Democrats Defying Trump on Sanctuary Cities Is A ‘Mistaken Bet’

National Review ^ | November 16, 2016 | NR Staff 

Charles Krauthammer identified the issue of sanctuary cities as a scandal, even before Donald Trump took issue with them, and he said that Democrats would be foolish to defy federal authority to defend them: Sanctuary cities were a scandal before Trump. It’s in defiance of federal authority. Federal authority is legitimate. The people who did this in the past were the racists in the south who defied federal authority on civil rights, so now it’s in the name of something that appears to be humanitarian. It’s something that should not be allowed.

The Democrats have tolerated it, and I think Trump would be within his rights to withhold funds, and he should. And the Democrats are making a big bet, and a mistaken one, if they decide they’re going to defy the federal government and what seems to be common sense: Control your borders.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Liberal Meltdown Marches on into Oblivion

US Defense Watch ^ | November 16, 2016 | Ray Starmann 

It’s Day Eight of the liberal meltdown in response to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States.

Across the nation, from San Francisco, to Austin, to Orlando and New York, thousands of college snowflakes, freeze dried hippies, illegal aliens and professional, Soros funded anarchists are marching, melting down, marauding and causing general mayhem because one man has been elected President.

On the nation’s campuses, liberal college cupcakes are coping with the trauma of a future Trump Presidency by holding cry ins and hiding out in safe spaces with Play Doh, while moronic administrators, aid and abetted by Marxist professors provide therapy dogs and safety pins to a generation of young adults who are incapable of coping with anything. For young people raised on the ideology of everyone gets a trophy, the election of Trump over Hillary is as traumatic an event as the death of a parent, or the impact of a giant asteroid. Generation Snowflake is a walking, talking 19th Nervous Breakdown.
From Miami to Maryland, high school students walk out of school and join protest marches. In some cases, the students are being led by activist teachers. In others, the students simply have taken matters in to their own hands. It is truly a case of the inmates running the asylum.
In Hollywood, celebrities like Chelsea Handler and Miley Cyprus break down in tears when speaking about the Fall of the House of Clinton. Others continue to vow to leave the country, rather than live in a nation run by a man who only desires to return prosperity to his countrymen.
On Twitter, leftist loonies describe their desire to assassinate the President Elect. Obviously, they are too drunk on liberal Kool Aid, or simply ignorant of the fact that threatening the President Elect is a federal crime taken very seriously by the Secret Service.
According to 18 U.S.C. § 871 : US Code – Section 871
Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President- elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
And, according to 18 U.S.C. § 879 : US Code – Section 879:
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully threatens to kill, kidnap, or inflict bodily harm upon – (1) a former President or a member of the immediate family of a former President; (2) a member of the immediate family of the President, the President-elect, the Vice President, or the Vice President-elect; (3) a major candidate for the office of President or Vice President, or a member of the immediate family of such candidate; or (4) a person protected by the Secret Service under section 3056(a)(6); shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Several days ago, ‘Don’, a trader from the bank, BNP Paribas, told the world on Twitter that Melania Trump should be raped and beheaded.
No problem, Don, the Secret Service is on your case too buddy. Expect a knock on the door soon.
Isn’t it ironic how the left, which always claims to be so tolerant and loving, is the embodiment of hate and violence? Their motto should really be Hate Trumps Love. They claim to be for peace and granola, but they’re really for anarchy and Molotov cocktails. They call Trump supporters racists, then detail how they’re going to destroy the white guy and his so called privilege.
Not to be outdone by the cries for shooting Trump, beheading Melania and the general street violence and wackiness, is the so called Boxer Bill, introduced by California’s veteran Senator and card carrying Communist, Barbara Boxer.
The Democrats are fuming that Trump won the electoral vote, which decides the Presidency, but lost the popular vote. Now they want to put a knife into the heart of the Constitution by doing away with the Electoral College and the Republic. Under Boxer’s Bill, future elections will be decided by the popular vote only. Obviously, this concept greatly favors the Democrats, by focusing the election on metropolitan areas stuffed with illegals, organic Kombucha liberals and soccer moms who sway to the left.
Under Boxer’s Bill, rural America, fly over America, bitter clinger America will be extinct and useless in the American electoral process. This is exactly what the Democrats have been plotting since 1965 when Teddy Kennedy’s immigration bill opened the door to Third World immigrants who would become the Democrats’ newest voting bloc.
Even crazier than the Boxer Bill, which doesn’t have a chance in hell of passing, is the defiance by at least two dozen US mayors, who claim they will ignore President Trump’s future call to deport millions of illegal alien criminals living the Life of Riley in Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Seattle and San Francisco to name a few.
In essence, mayors like Bill de Blasio and Rahm Emanuel are saying that they would rather harbor murderers, rapists and thieves than turn them over to federal authorities. In the name of diversity and sustaining their voting blocs, the Democrats are willing to put their fellow citizens in danger.
In essence, the mayors of America’s cities are happy to violate the law and be accomplices to millions of Americans who are here ILLEGALLY.
What part of ILLEGAL don’t they understand?
At the end of the day, the liberal meltdown is about one thing; control. Liberals love control. They want to control every facet of our lives through regulation and government bureaucracy on steroids. That’s why they love big government. That’s why they want to turn the USA into Sweden.
Well, it ain’t gonna happen…
With the election of Trump, they have lost control and what really sizzles them is that rural America has the power to change the future of this country. They claim that Trump won because America is racist and filled with the new buzzword of the week, ‘white nationalists.’ In actuality, Trump won because a majority of Americans are hurting financially and liberal policies were doing everything for the global elite and nothing for ordinary Americans. It has nothing to do with bigotry and everything to do with economics.
But, don’t tell liberals that. It’s all about racism or sexism or whatever ism they can concoct in a Berkeley coffee house while they’re maxing out a medical marijuana prescription.
In many ways, the issues that triggered the Civil War were never settled in this country. And, I’m not talking about slavery, which to liberals was the sole reason for the war, but in reality, only part of the motivation for it. It was about big government vs. small government. It was about erudite Northeastern liberals trying to tell others how to live their lives.
Sound familiar?
Look for the liberal meltdown to march on until they all go home with participation trophies for everyone.
In the meantime, President Elect Trump will be planning on how to make America great again.

USGS Announces Its Largest Oil And Gas Discovery Ever In The States

NPR ^ | 11/16/2016 | Rebecca Hersher 

The U.S. Geological Survey says it has found the largest continuous oil and gas deposit ever discovered in the United States. On Tuesday, the USGS announced that a swath of West Texas known as the Wolfcamp shale contains 20 billion barrels of oil and 16 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

That is nearly three times more petroleum than the agency found in North Dakota's Bakken shale in 2013. As NPR's Jeff Brady reported, the amount of oil in the Wolfcamp shale formation is nearly three times the amount of petroleum products used by the entire country in a year.

The New Middle Texas Town's Fortunes Rise And Fall With Pump Jacks And Oil Prices The USGS says all 20 billion barrels of oil are "technically recoverable," meaning the oil could be brought to the surface "using currently available technology and industry practices." "The Texas discovery is in a place that has been drilled before by conventional methods," Jeff reported for NPR's Newscast Unit. "But now that oil companies use horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing — or fracking — they can access reserves that previously were out of reach." "Changes in technology and industry practices can have significant effects on what resources are technically recoverable, and that's why we continue to perform resource assessments throughout the United States and the world," said Walter Guidroz, a program coordinator for the USGS Energy Resources Program, in the USGS statement. "Even in areas that have produced billions of barrels of oil, there is still the potential to find billions more," he said. The complete oil and gas assessment is publicly available here. A map shows the six separately assessed regions, designated according to depth by the petroleum industry, that make up the Wolfcamp shale.

LITERALLY SHAKING ^ | November 16, 2016 | Ann Coulter 

Until the nationwide protests of the last few days, I had no idea how bad the problem was, but our nation is drowning in drama queenery.

The immediate reaction of most celebrities to Trump's victory was: "THE WORLD IS WAITING FOR MY TAKE ON THE ELECTION!”
Aaron Sorkin and David Remnick, in matching pink housecoats and fuzzy slippers, wrote hysterical jeremiads about the cataclysm of Trump's election.
Sorkin was especially irked that Trump was supported by white men who don't appreciate rap music. As proof that the end was near, he triumphantly reported: "The Dow futures dropped 700 points overnight." After a brief drop, the Dow surged to historic highs, recording its biggest weekly gain in five years.
But I can't wait to read the letters these guys wrote to their children about Bill Clinton! Don't leave us hanging guys -- post those, too, please.
In Hiplandia, "I couldn't stop crying!" and "I vomited!" are dispositive proof that Trump is a bad man -- not that these people are mentally unbalanced. Their own paranoia is cited to show how evil their enemies are.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Outside California, Clinton Is A Big-Time Popular Vote Loser

Investor's Business Daily ^ | 11/17/2016 | John Merline 

Donald Trump's opponents are having something of a field day with news that Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote currently tops 1 million.
As US News put it, "Trump's legitimacy has been called into question by his adversaries because he didn't win the popular vote, adding to the desire among his critics to defy him from the start of his administration."
The Nation alerted its readers that "Republican nominee will become president with less popular support than a number of major-party candidates who lost races for the presidency." [snip]
But a closer look at the election returns show that Hillary's lead in the popular vote is entirely due to her oversized margin of victory in uber-liberal California.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The 'Cry In' of 2016-disturbing glance at the post-election hysteria on college campuses

Frontpagemagazine ^ | November 17, 2016 | Jack Kerwick 

Since Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton on November 8, college campuses across the nation expanded their “safe spaces” for students and faculty whose world had been turned upside down by this historic election.
In at least three respects, the Great Meltdown of 2016 is a truly tragic commentary on the state of higher education today:
First, it reveals the dominance of a single left-leaning ideology at an institution that is supposed to be a free marketplace of ideas.  It goes without saying, after all, that no safe spaces would’ve been created or would have needed to have been created had the election gone the other way.
Second, the hyper-emotionality accentuates the intellectual flaccidness that prevails at the one place that is supposed to exist for the sake of instilling into the next generation intellectual virtue, men and women with strength and toughness of mind.
Third, the Great Meltdown betrays the stunning arrogance on the part of just those people—professors—whose calling to a life in education requires the cultivation of humility.  Given that students were just as unprepared as were their teachers for even the possibility that their candidate could lose proves that neither have they been acquiring the virtue of humility while in college.    
The College Fix, a campus watchdog publication run by students, is a national treasure. Here are some of the happenings in the academic world from last week that it reports:
At Converse College, an all-female institution, students organized “silent protests,” walked the campus in tears, and posted pictures of themselves crying on Snapchat.  At least one professor held off on giving a midterm exam, and another told her students that the day after Election Day was the worst day in American history second only to September 11, 2001.
The President of the college, Krista Newkirk, issued an email to the campus community in which she expressed her sadness that “once again our young girls and women have failed to see the shattering of that glass ceiling and the first female president of the United States” (How much would you be willing to bet that no such email was sent when Barack Obama prevented Hillary Clinton her chance of shattering that glass ceiling in 2008?)
A student who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals told The College Fix that she was ejected from a class for expressing her disgust at the comparison that some of her peers and her instructor were drawing between 9/11 and November 9.
Over in “the quad” at Cornell University, students held a “Cry In” the day after Election Day.  “I’m quite terrified, honestly,” remarked one student.  Trump’s win reflects people’s “willing[ness] to put people down based on their identity just so that they would feel vindicated that they would be getting rid of ‘Crooked Hillary.’”
The “Cry In” consisted of about 20 students who sat in a circle on the ground writing on the sidewalk with crayons and chalk.  Some professors stood around them.  One observer noted that it looked and felt something like a funeral.
An older woman who, according to the reporter for The College Fix, appeared to have been a professor said that “the results are heartbreaking and such a slap in the face to so many of the populations that make up America.”
What is most difficult for this writer to report upon, though, are the incidences of hate that are being visited upon Trump supporting students at colleges around the country.  At Mount Holyoke College, for instance, Kassy Dillon, the president of the College Republicans, was badgered as she drove around campus.  People were “coming up to my car,” she explained, “to yell ‘f*ck you for supporting Trump.”
She adds: “It’s more dangerous now than ever to be a conservative on a college campus.”
Ana Martinez, a student at California State University Los Angeles, is a member of the Young Americans for Freedom.  When it was becoming clear that Trump was going to be victorious, haters bombarded her on social media with messages like: “Is it fun being racist now?”  “When Trump is raping you, are you still going to want him for president?” “He is going to deport your… ass right back to El Salvador.”
(So that other embattled student Trump supporters may take heart, it is worth noting what Ms. Martinez, an immigrant, herself said about the bile being spewed at her: “Coming from an oppressive government even more corrupt than the U.S., to see that the American people chose the people and freedom and beat the biased media, career politicians and the corrupt establish[ment] makes me even more proud to be an American.”
She concluded: “What a time to be alive.”)
At the University of Tennessee, a female student proceeded to punch on a Trump student.  Another student kicked a service dog whose owner had a Trump pin on her bag.
At Emory University, a group of angry students surrounded the College Republicans at their regularly scheduled tabling event and knocked a cell phone out of someone’s hand.
There’s also a racial dimension to the reaction to Trump’s victory that is critical. Sometimes, it is made all too explicit.   It was made explicit at North Carolina Chapel Hill.  One hundred students walked out of class to “protest” the election results.  A black student said that he skipped his classes on November 9 because he “could not be in really white spaces.”
Chalk writings on the ground read: “A vote 4 Trump was a vote 4 death,” “fuck str8 white privilege,” “whie [sic] supremacy lives,” “Donald Trump is a racist,” and “impeach Trump.”
One student called for destruction—“it literally all has to go, it has to burn, it has to crash, it has to die.”  Another said that “this” is “white America’s problem.” White America “created this problem.  You embraced it at Thanksgiving and Christmas and now we’re—people like me, people of color, women—if you are anything that’s not a white man you are feeling the pain because of this decision now.”
The Black Student Movement planned to have a “people of color only lunch” and the college established a “healing space” for saddened students.
While this essay focuses on students’ and professors’ reactions to Trump’s routing of Clinton, parents and taxpayers should not be misled into thinking recent events on college campuses are unique or novel. They are anything but that. Rather, the hyper-emotionality, anti-intellectualism, abrasiveness, divisive racial rhetoric, and, yes, even violence that has occurred far too frequently courtesy of the “progressive” left have long preceded Trump.

Sarah Palin's America Is Now Here

Dat Tech Guy Blog ^ | November 17, 2016 | Da Tech Guy Blog 

"Polls are only good for strippers and cross-country skiers" -Sarah Palin, two days before the 2016 election!

There is one aspect of the Donald Trump victory that is not getting much press. the fact that it is yet another huge win for Sarah Palin over the media and culture.
In 2010 I wrote about how Sarah Palin (Along with Rush Limbaugh) was the big winner in the first big red wave:
CBS news pointed out Sarah Palin endorsed 43 house candidates of which 30 won while winning 7 of 12 Senate endorsed candidates. Senator Jim Demitt said “she’s done a lot of good for the Republican Party, and for our country.”
And Rush Limbaugh, having none of the spin of the majority of the Mainstream media on the 4th said: “If anybody is an obvious winner here, aside, of course, from me, it would be Palin.”
So to conservatives who are basking in the joy of a historic question I say to you : “Never forget that it is to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin that you really owe these victories.”
Later I wrote about Sarah Palin as a political venture capitalist
Sarah Palin is the perfect political capitalist, she has taken her political capital, invested it in the candidates of her choice and come out with even more. No amount of political snark or clever Conan skits will change that.
Palin had become a punchline for the MSM who ignored the fact that her diving into the culture via all kinds of TV projects was a case of fighting for her values on the MSM’s turf, the media culture. She created a whole new narrative that the wonks didn’t see coming.
Furthermore in Trump she recognized that Trump was a person who knew how to play the media game & her endorsement of Trump while spoofed at SNL
bailed him out (to my disappointment at the time) at a time when Cruz had flanked him on the right.
Ted Cruz had run circles around him on the Birther Issue but had very effectively turned what was a winning debate moment for Trump, (NY Values) into a negative.
Cruz had managed to do what Perry, Bush, Paul and Graham could not, counter Trump effectively. It was so bad that Trump found himself booed by activists which is not something he is used to.
Talk radio hosts had either advised him against his attacks on Cruz or directly hit him for these attacks. It was a moment of crisis, one of the first moments of crisis for the campaign.
Then comes the Sarah Palin endorsement and the narrative changes...
Now the topic becomes how Trump got this key endorsement over Cruz.
As late as nine days ago we saw stories poking her like this one from the Detroit Free Press: Sarah Palin stumps for Trump in Detroit for few supporters, hecklers
About a dozen supporters came to the bar for the stop, but several people walking by started pounding on the window when they noticed her. One said “I have no respect for you.” And someone sprayed some sort of substance into the bar from outside that had many in the tavern momentarily coughing.
That person is now likely hiding in a safe space after Trump took Michigan.
What does all this mean, just this:
Sarah Palin picked up the mantle of conservatism after the election of Barack Obama when everyone else was ready to give up. She helped deliver two big red waves and now 8 years after the news media, the media culture and the establishment GOP began laughing at her nonstop without grasping what she has been doing we have Donald Trump, who she endorsed in the White House, with a Republican house and a Republican senate and the prospect of her being the next Secretary of the Interior.
None of which the now celebrating GOP members got from the establishment.
So let me close by reminding my fellow conservatives who are still enjoying the media’s distress and the sight of special snowflakes showing how valueless their $50,000 a year educations are as they melt to pieces over the thought of our newfound power, of something they might have forgotten.
Never forget that it is to Sarah Palin that we owe these victories.

Drown Out the Lying MSM

American Thinker ^ | November 17, 2016 | Seth Keshel 

Imagine you have a neighboring family who initiates a relationship by bringing you freshly baked cookies. You go on to have 4th of July barbecues at their home, and your families become close. Over time, you begin to trust one another for favors, such as letting the dogs out, watching the kids, or picking up the mail while you are away. Then, out of nowhere, your friends begin having personal troubles and descend into alcoholism, financial turmoil, and audible domestic disputes. Your daughter comes home early from playing at this family’s home because she saw the husband come unglued at his wife and daughter. Your son tells you that his friend, this family’s son, is covered in bruises and won’t explain where they came from.

What do you do? While hoping for the best and praying for reconciliation, the wise man would distance his family from this unstable one if unable to intervene successfully.

Such is the conservative’s relationship to the American mainstream media. Older readers may remember an era when the media generally reported facts and left spin to the mind of the viewer, or at least wasn’t so crookedly biased. In accurately predicting President-Elect Trump’s victorious path through Michigan and Pennsylvania, I indicated that the media was distorting polling numbers deliberately to keep Trump supporters from bothering to vote. While Trump won an electoral landslide, only a relatively small chunk of votes made the difference in those two states and in Florida. Yes, the lying, propagandizing jackals in media nearly won the election for Clinton. They decided to hang together up until the bitter end, and are now predictably circling the wagons trying to figure out what went wrong. Everyone knew there was a secret Trump vote, and they still lied.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Take'n out the trash!


Can you believe?


Who's your daddy?


Get ready!




Keep It?








Hand it over!


Hillary Choked!


A Gated Community!


Mourning in America


Learn from history?




How sweet it is!


Can you hear me now?






The Way!


Just go away!


The moral of the story


Good Riddance