Monday, November 21, 2016

The Liberals were right after all

by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC
The Liberals were right after all

  • They told us if Trump were elected there would be violence in the streets.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us it was they, not Trump supporters, who would unleash violence.

  • They said if he were elected, there would be nasty, virulent, vile, profanity-laced backlash against women.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us the target of these attacks would be one woman - Melania - solely due to her last name.

  • They claimed illegal immigrants would be running scared.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us they'd be running from vehicles who couldn't stop in time for their highway blockades.

  • The claimed gays would be receiving nasty threats.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us these would be faked, tawanabrawleyesque threats.

  • They said if he were elected, Trump supporters would be involved in gang violence.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us that it would be Trump supporters or perceived Trump supporters pulled from their cars and beaten by gangs.

  • They said if he were elected, women would be in danger with respect to reproductive rights.
  • They were right.
  • They just didn't tell us it was unborn female babies endangered by this post-election, ghoulish "Abort Your Baby Now Before It's Too Late!" campaign.

So hey, let's give them credit for being right, ey?

Homeland Security Shuts Down Aerial Surveillance On Mexican Border

Common Sense Evaluation ^ 

In what appears to be an effort to allow unchecked border crossing in the final two month of his presidency, Obama’s DHS has shut down the a critical Border aerial surveillance program despite the fact that the program was fully funded for Fiscal Year 2017 by Congress.

(Excerpt) Read more at commonsenseevaluation.com ...

In the end, double-dealing Obama outed himself!

Canada Free Press ^ | 11/21/16 | Judi McLeod 

Obama cannot see that he can’t be president just by pretending that he still is one!

More commanding on the stage than any Broadway Hamilton actor, Barry Soetoro Obama’s Third and Final Act is mesmerizing to behold, its curtain calls ongoing right up to Inauguration Day, 2017.

That’s because in Act III, Obama, an Artful Dodger-like mysterious moving target for eight long years, is FINALLY outing himself.

Thanks to the election of Donald J. Trump, there are no longer any secrets about who Obama really is and from whence he came.

Jeff Sessions Will Prosecute ‘Sanctuary Cities’ If Confirmed!

washingtontimes.com ^ | 21 Nov 2016 

Sen. Jeff Sessions is on record saying so-called “sanctuary cities” that protect illegal immigrants should be prosecuted. He himself may get that chance next year.

From his first day in office, Mr. Sessions will have the power to strip some federal funding from sanctuary cities, thanks to rulings this year by the Justice Department’s inspector general, who said federal law requires localities to cooperate with immigration agents — and who provided an initial list of a handful of the worst offenders.

“The sanctuary cities thing is huge. I think most jurisdictions are going to fold like a cheap suit,” said Rosemary Jenks, government relations manager at NumbersUSA, which lobbies for stricter immigration laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtontimes.com ...

Proof Of George Soros Nazi Past Finally Comes To Light With Discovery Of Forgotten Interview

Now the end begins ^ | 11-15-16 | Geoffrey Grider 

George Soros has repeatedly called 1944 "The Best Year of his Life." 70% of Mr. Soros's fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year, yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect.
When Hitler’s henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary, to oversee the murder of that country’s Jews, George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population.
George Soros and other rich liberals who spent tens of millions of dollars trying to elect Hillary Clinton are gathering in Washington for a three-day, closed door meeting to retool the big-money left to fight back against Donald Trump. Since Soros name is very much in the headlines in 2016, let’s take a look at an interview he gave in 1998 about his Nazi past.
Social unrest groups like Media Matters have taken to the Internet in an attempt to “debunk the claims” and “correct the smears” about rumors of the Nazi past of their patron, George Soros. They say it is just malicious gossip and lies people make up about Soros because they don’t like him. Snopes.com chimes in as well in defense of Soros. But what about the “rumors”? Could they be true, are they true?
As you will see and hear, not only are the rumors true, a long forgotten interview George Soros did on 60 Minutes has him gleefully confessing to his crime.
György Schwartz, better known to the world as George Soros, was born August 12, 1930 in Hungary. Soros’ father, Tivadar, was a fervent practitioner of the Esperanto language invented in 1887, and designed to be the first global language, free of any national identity. The Schwartz’s, who were non-practicing Jews, changed the family name to Soros, in order to facilitate assimilation into the Gentile population, as the Nazis spread into Hungary during the 1930s
When Hitler’s henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary, to oversee the murder of that country’s Jews, George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population. Soros went with him on his rounds.
George Soros has repeatedly called 1944 “The Best Year of his Life.” 70% of Mr. Soros’s fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year, yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect. During an interview with “Sixty Minute’s” Steve Kroft, Soros was asked about his “best year.”
George Soros Interview Where He Admitted He Was A Nazi Collaborator:
He was only to happy to admit his collaboration with the Nazis,in fact, he called those days the “best time of my life”. Click to watch, in context, that startling confession.
KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.
SOROS: Yes. Yes.
KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from your fellow Jews, friends and neighbors.
SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
KROFT: I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many, years. Was it difficult?
SOROS: No, not at all. Not at all, I rather enjoyed it.
KROFT: No feelings of guilt?
SOROS: No, only feelings of absolute power.

Evidence of Tarrant County Voter Fraud Released

Direct Action Reveals: 

November 14, 2016
By 

voterfraud-w-1-750x445

At least two races were won through voter fraud in one of Texas’ largest – and most Republican – counties. This was among the findings announced by the organization responsible for exposing what is allegedly the largest voter fraud operation in Texas history.

In a presentation to a local 912 group in Fort Worth, Aaron Harris of Direct Action Texas presented documents from his formal voter-fraud complaint filed with the Secretary of State. The secretary of state has referred to the voter fraud evidence as “voluminous.”

Harris says his complaint contained over 1,500 pages of documents. And while the complete document is not yet public, Harris made one thing clear—political operatives inside Tarrant County have illegally forged thousands of signatures on ballot-by-mail applications and carrier envelopes over the last four years.

Harris says he is confident at least two local officials are in office as a result of the voter fraud he has uncovered – State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr. (D–Fort Worth) and Fort Worth Mayor Pro Tem, Sal Espino.

Espino won his race by a twenty-six vote margin in an election in which Harris says 450 votes were fraudulently harvested in that district alone. Romero won his seat by a 110 vote margin in a race that was similarly impacted by voter fraud.

Harris says the harvesting operatives usually push a slate of candidates to affect multiple races each cycle. The voters are either influenced, or have their votes stolen by the harvester.

The operatives work “turfs” – neighborhoods where they’ve built strong relationships and trust with voters. Familiarity with the voters helps the operative more effectively carry out their scheme, Harris said. Many of the voters are elderly, speak English as a second language, and live in predominantly low-income communities.

Harris’ presentation showed ballot-by-mail applications with identical handwriting, and voters’ signatures that do not appear to match that of the carrier envelope containing the ballot. This suggests a harvesting operative – with or without the voter’s knowledge – submitted the application. Harris says thousands were likely mailed without voter’s permission.

screen-shot-2016-10-17-at-3-49-27-pm

The forms are submitted strategically, so the harvesters know when the ballot will arrive in the mail. Harris tracked the non-random pattern of applications and saw how harvesters would literally sweep through neighborhoods over time.

Even worse, Harris alleges the harvesters regularly use the same applications over multiple election cycles. They simply fax in copies of old forms. There’s also evidence that digital signatures are being used on carrier envelopes – in place of the voter’s written signature – allowing the harvesters to directly cast a ballot on behalf of the voter.

screen-shot-2016-10-17-at-3-50-02-pm

The fraud is so blatant that even an untrained observer would call into question the legitimacy of the signatures. Many of the documents should have been red-flagged by Tarrant County election officials or the ballot board, a volunteer group that is charged with ensuring the ballot signatures match the signatures on the carrier envelopes.

Harris says there are three primary problems that enable this fraud – the election code is weak, the ballot-by-mail process has insufficient safeguards, and “no one” is watching.

He’s right about a lack of oversight. Texas Scorecard was the first publication to cover troubling admissions made by Tarrant County Election’s administrator, Frank Phillips.

Phillips stated during a public meeting that – due to the large volume of ballot-by-mail applications submitted every election – there is no way his office can properly ensure that suspicious forms are flagged or that the law is followed.

For example, a person is only legally allowed to sign as a witness on one person’s ballot by mail application. Phillips has said his office has no process in place to ensure that a person is not signing as a witness on multiple ballots.

Furthermore, Phillips said his office is “not the police,” and is not responsible for reporting suspicious activity to a higher authority unless it’s “overt and obvious.”He said that’s the job of the Attorney General. Shockingly, he claims his office simply “processes” the forms as quickly as they are received without inspecting them for their validity.

The evidence of voter fraud uncovered by Harris and Direct Action Texas is deeply troubling. Texans must demand that our lawmakers reform the ballot-by-mail process in order to secure our elections. And those who have engaged in voter fraud must be held accountable.

You can see the full presentation on the Empower Texans Facebook page.

Ross Kecseg
EmpowerTexans.com
10.17.16

Oh-oh! Donations plunge to Clinton Foundation as Hillary speech money dries up!

American Thinker ^ | 11/20/2016 | Thomas Lifson 


Even before her defeat for the presidency, Hillary Clinton’s departure from the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation crippled its fundraising for that “good work” we have repeatedly been assured the foundation does.  Like hiring members of the Clinton machine to plot...Chelsea’s rise as a candidate for Congress.

Khaleda Raman reports for the U.K. Daily Mail:

Donations to the Clinton Foundation plummeted amid Hillary Clinton's failed presidential run, it has been revealed.

The non-profit organization's latest tax filings show contributions fell 37 per cent to $108million - down from $172million in 2014, according to the New York Post.

Donations fell as the former Secretary of State left the group in April last year shortly after announcing her run for the White House.

Her departure also meant that revenue brought in from paid speeches plunged from $3.6million in 2014 to just $357,500.

Why, it’s almost enough to make you believe that Hillary’s speeches weren’t about wonderfully entertaining and enlightening presentations at all, but rather about bribing a future president.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

ARREST RAHM EMANUEL

Frontpagemag.com ^ | 11-21-2016 | Matthew Vadum 

It is time to start locking up local officials like Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel for interfering with the enforcement of federal immigration law.
Those who, like Emanuel, enable lawless so-called sanctuary cities deserve to be behind bars.
Radical left-wingers don't believe America should have borders at all. During the recently concluded election campaign, Democrat Hillary Clinton even endorsed the idea that foreigners have a right to move to the United States.
After Republican Donald Trump said in September, "No one has the right to immigrate to the United States," Clinton's Ohio campaign put up a tweet featuring Trump's statement followed by "We disagree."
Later that day the main Clinton campaign account retweeted the "We disagree" tweet.
Emanuel agrees with that sentiment. He is a strident supporter of the sanctuary city movement that gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans. Cheered on by the Left, sanctuary cities hinder immigration enforcement and shield illegal aliens from federal officials as a matter of policy.
There are hundreds of sanctuary jurisdictions - including a few states - across the country that hinder the federal government's immigration law enforcement efforts. Some left-wingers use the dreadful euphemism "civil liberties safe zones" to describe them. The phrase blurs the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by implying illegal aliens somehow possess a civil right to be present in the U.S.
The nation got to this point after decades of concerted collusion by radical George Soros-funded groups like the ACLU to get localities to pledge to frustrate or violate laws that protect U.S. national security. Leftist agitation has so intimidated Americans that many refuse to say the phrase illegal alien, preferring to go with undocumented immigrant or other politically correct terms less likely to generate offense.
A spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) explained how sanctuary cities hurt America.
"Sanctuary policies undermine federal law," he said.

While sanctuary policies vary in language, it is important to note that the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that state laws and policies are preempted when they conflict with federal law, as well as when they stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. Congress has set priorities through the INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] to determine who may enter and remain in the United States. Sanctuary laws, ordinances, and policies shield aliens from the administration of federal law, thereby frustrating the execution of immigration law as Congress intended.
He continued:

Additionally, federal law at 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and 8 U.S.C. § 1644 prohibits policies that impede cooperation between federal, state, and local officials when it comes to the sending, requesting, maintaining, or exchanging of information regarding immigration status with ICE. Under those provisions, any federal, state, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from the federal government, information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.
Which brings us to Mayor Emanuel who last week defied President-elect Donald Trump by reaffirming his support for sanctuary cities that thumb their noses at the U.S. government by shielding illegal aliens.
"To all those who are, after Tuesday's election, very nervous and filled with anxiety ... you are safe in Chicago, you are secure in Chicago and you are supported in Chicago," Emanuel said at a press conference.
"Chicago has in the past been a sanctuary city," he said. "It always will be a sanctuary city."
Emanuel's in-your-face statement came after President-elect Trump told "60 Minutes" that he planned to follow through on his campaign promises.
"What we're going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country," he said.
Trump said he will pressure these hotbeds of immigration anarchy financially. "We will cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities," he said.
Emanuel, a Democrat who previously served in Congress and as President Obama's White House chief of staff, is far from alone.
Since the election, many mayors across the country have thrown their lot in with street gangs and criminals by saying they will fight Trump's desperately overdue crackdown on sanctuary cities.
On the East Coast, mayors vowing to resist Trump's push include: Bill de Blasio (D) of New York; Marty Walsh (D) of Boston; Jim Kenney (D) of Philadelphia; Muriel Bowser (D) of Washington, D.C.; Ras Baraka (D) of Newark, N.J.; Steven Fulop (D) of Jersey City, N.J.; Brian P. Stack (D) of Union City, N.J.; Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (D) of Baltimore; Kate Stewart (D) of Takoma Park, Md.; Jorge Elorza (D) of Providence, R.I.; Toni Harp (D) of New Haven, Conn.; and Miro Weinberger (D) of Burlington, Vt.
Mayors on the West Coast and elsewhere promising to fight the enforcement push include: Eric Garcetti (D) of Los Angeles; Ed Lee (D) of San Francisco; Libby Schaaf (D) of Oakland, Calif.; Tom Butt (D) of Richmond, Calif.; mayor-elect Jesse Arreguin (D) of Berkeley, Calif.; mayor-elect Darrell Steinberg (D) of Sacramento, Calif.; mayor-elect Ted Wheeler (D) of Portland, Ore.; Ed Murray (D) of Seattle; Michael Hancock (D) of Denver; Suzanne Jones (D) of Boulder, Colo.; Javier Gonzales (D) of Santa Fe, N.M.; Betsy Hodges (D) of Minneapolis; and Steve Adler (D) of Austin, Texas.
Left-wingers only pretend to support the Constitution when it advances their causes.
A case in point is Mayor Jim Kenney who has been particularly sanctimonious. He no longer refers to Philadelphia as a "sanctuary city," preferring instead the phrase "Fourth Amendment city."
"We respect and live up to the Fourth Amendment," he said, "which means you can't be held against your will without a warrant from the court signed by a judge."
New York's Marxist mayor Bill de Blasio vowed to shield the estimated 500,000 illegal aliens living in his city from immigration enforcement officials. "We are not going to sacrifice a half million people who live among us, who are part of our community," he said. "We are not going to tear families apart."
De Blasio even promised to destroy a database of undocumented aliens who have city identification cards rather than let the Trump administration have it.
There are a number of ways that the incoming administration could go after Emanuel and rogue mayors like him.
During Bobby Jindal's brief run for the Republican presidential nod last year, the then-governor of Louisiana vowed to "criminalize" sanctuary cities by "making city officials that enact those policies as an accessory to the crimes committed by the illegal aliens those policies enabled."
"Absolutely, I would hold them as an accomplice," Jindal said on a radio show. "Make them criminally culpable. I'd also make them civilly liable so that families, victims' families could sue. Especially if the prosecutor isn't taking action or the mayor's not changing their ways, I'd allow the families to go to court as well to recover damages."
While Attorney General Loretta Lynch and her predecessor Eric Holder spent their time making up excuses for not acting to end the lawlessness, under Trump it seems likely a way could be found for sanctuary city-related prosecutions to move forward.
Lawyers caution that the First Amendment guarantees Americans very wide latitude in public discussions and that mere advocacy of something illegal at some indefinite time in the future is not necessarily a crime. So these city officials have to be nailed for specific acts of lawlessness.
With newly nominated Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) as attorney general, Trump's new Department of Justice doesn't have to follow the Obama DoJ's see-no-evil approach to sanctuary cities. U.S. attorneys could set up sting operations using FBI agents.
As one lawyer told FrontPage:

Many U.S. attorneys have political instincts, so there is little being done with the current DoJ overlooking them. When the new Trump DoJ takes over and/or Congress passes stronger sanctuary policy legislation - such as by withholding federal funding to cities that act contrary to federal policy -- I would expect some U.S. attorneys to act on this as a way of making a name for themselves, especially with the new DoJ actively encouraging it.
Actively interfering with immigration enforcement could constitute obstruction of justice, another lawyer said in an interview. Moreover, the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act contains provisions making it unlawful to "harbor" an illegal alien.
According to FAIR, "It is a violation of [federal] law for any person to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection in any place, including any building or means of transportation, any alien who is in the United States in violation of law."
The FAIR summary continues:

Harboring means any conduct that tends to substantially facilitate an alien to remain in the U.S. illegally. The sheltering need not be clandestine, and harboring covers aliens arrested outdoors, as well as in a building. This provision includes harboring an alien who entered the U.S. legally, but has since lost his legal status.
An aggressive federal prosecutor could make the argument that a jailer refusing to hand over a prisoner to U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) constitutes harboring within the meaning of the statute.
And then there is the possibility that the Trump Justice Department could install federal monitors in local governmental agencies as it did in Ferguson, Mo., which it accused of violating local residents' civil rights. If officials in monitored governments run afoul of immigration laws, the DoJ could drop the hammer on them.
And President-elect Donald Trump would go down in history as a champion of the American people who restored law and order to lawless sanctuary cities. (see creepy looking man below)

 

Trump has a plan for government workers. They’re not going to like it.

MSN News ^ | November 21, 2016 | Lisa Rein 

President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are drawing up plans to take on the government bureaucracy they have long railed against, by eroding job protections and grinding down benefits that federal workers have received for a generation.
Hiring freezes, an end to automatic raises, a green light to fire poor performers, a ban on union business on the government’s dime and less generous pensions — these are the contours of the blueprint emerging under Republican control of Washington in January.
These changes were once unthinkable to federal employees, their unions and their supporters in Congress. But Trump’s election as an outsider promising to shake up a system he told voters is awash in “waste, fraud and abuse” has conservatives optimistic that they could do now what Republicans have been unable to do in the 133 years since the civil service was created.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...

An Obama pardon cannot protect Hillary Clinton from prosecution at the State level

The Coach's Team ^ | 11/21/16 | Russ Vaughn 

The following article was published by the American Thinker on November 18th of this year. Should Barack Obama decide to pardon Hillary Clinton, it would only apply against federal investigation and prosecution. Interested parties would retain the right to indict and prosecute the former Secretary of State and investigate the goings on at the Clinton Foundation on the state level. Russ Vaughn explains in his article below.

Leslie Rutledge, Arkansas A.G.: Hillary's worst nightmare?
By Russ Vaughn
The blog for the Arkansas Times is reporting that our attorney general, Leslie Rutledge, is in New York meeting with Trump transition planners. Rutledge, a diminutive fireball conservative elected two years ago, is quoted:
"My interest is in helping the Trump administration," Rutledge told reporters as she arrived for meetings at Trump Tower in New York. "Whether that's continuing on as the attorney general of Arkansas or (working) in the administration, then my ears are open."
It's the first of those two options, "staying on in Arkansas," that sets my antennae tingling for the simple reason that Rutledge is one of two state attorneys general in the country who have undisputed standing to investigate the Clinton Foundation. The other state is New York, but their thoroughly politicized Democrat attorney general would never lift a hand against the Clintons, no matter how outrageous their corruption. Both A.G.s have standing by virtue of the physical location of Clinton Foundation offices within their borders.
Rutledge could do a great service for both her own considerable political ambitions and the Trump administration by accepting the Trump's Justice Department's help...
(Excerpt) Read more at thecoachsteam.com ...

BRICKS!

bricks.jpg

So...you telling me?

iOmVoLx.jpg

Protest

E2WIbBm.jpg

Remember?

cHTvRN2.jpg

Doing Fine!

EkeCuup.jpg

Compromise

191406_image.jpg

Flags

U3P3qZB.jpg

Like a Muslim!

dEnt6eY.jpg

Safe Space!

gDp3fuJ.jpg

Eventually

fFk78Ni.jpg

Canadian Rules!

Soa8Lj2.jpg

Waiting!

ssZP5r8.jpg

Bring it!

Kw3aYp1.jpg

Everyone gets a trophy!

LeNrjWg.jpg

Polls are NEVER wrong?

KoA9vbO.jpg

Exterminator!

gRH93Bz.jpg

Thanksgiving

tECiY37.gif

Shocker: In Wake of Hillary's Defeat, Donations to Clinton Foundation Dry Up

PJMedia ^ | November 20, 2016 | MICHAEL WALSH 

Donations to the Clinton Foundation plummeted amid Hillary Clinton's failed presidential run, it has been revealed. The non-profit organization's latest tax filings show contributions fell 37 per cent to $108million - down from $172million in 2014, according to the New York Post.
Donations fell as the former Secretary of State left the group in April last year shortly after announcing her run for the White House. Her departure also meant that revenue brought in from paid speeches plunged from $3.6 million in 2014 to just $357,500.
The foundation became an issue during the presidential campaign when Donald Trump pledged to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate it amid pay-to-play allegations. Trump called the foundation 'the most corrupt enterprise in political history' adding, 'It must be shut down immediately.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...

After Election, Liberal Finally Admits Sarah Palin Was Right All Along About the Horrible Polls

Young Conservatives ^ | November 20, 2016 | John S. Roberts 

Pollsters from coast to coast were dead wrong about how the presidential election was going to shake out – with the exception of very few.

Most polls showed Hillary Clinton up bigly over Donald Trump, which was pretty much the left’s way of discouraging Republicans from showing up.
Almost a suppression of the vote, if you will.

Didn’t work out so well.

Who knew the polls were a complete joke from the start?
That would be 2008 VP candidate and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.
(Excerpt) Read more at youngcons.com ...

Flynn & fear of Islam - is the left now branding MOST Americans as "bigots"?

 by FreedomUS

With Democrats and MSM criticism of Trump's pick of general M Flynn, is the left now branding most Americans as "bigots"???
Poll: Majority Now Say Islam Promotes Violence, Support Ban on Muslims Entering ... MRCTV Mar 29, 2016 - Following the terrorist attack in Brussels, a slight majority of Americans now support a ban on Muslims entering the United States ...

Meanwhile, the taqyyia (lying to the infidel and deceiving) "professor" who lied about his "scholar" credentials, and lying to liberals about Islam Resa Aslan,CNN's favorite guest, (Nov/19/2016) used the hype and fear mongering tactic in debating Kayleigh McEnany that in Flynn's saying Islam is not a religion, that Muslims will therefore lose religious rights... scaring Americans into casting the debate as some kind of a "Human rights" struggle. What really angered him it seems, the very notion to see Islam as different than other religions.

Religious phylosophies aside, to the point, most Americans do see Islam as violent. Seeing the violence in the name of Islam. Call it criticism of the culture of Islam, Are they all "bigots" now?

Majority of Americans say Hillary should retire from public life!

Washington Times ^ | November 20, 2016 | Jennifer Harper 

"Following Hillary Clinton's surprise loss to Donald Trump, most voters think it's time for her to quit the public arena," notes a new Rasmussen Reports survey, which finds that 55 percent of all likely voters agree that Mrs. Clinton should perhaps find something else to do. The inevitable partisan divide: 82 percent of Republicans, 54 percent of independents and 31 percent of Democrats agree with the idea, while 57 percent of the loyal Democrats say Mrs. Clinton should stay in the public life. But the dynamics appear to have changed.
"Democratic voters now believe their party should go more in the direction of Clinton's primary opponent, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Fifty four percent of likely Democratic voters think the party should be more like Sanders. Only 26 percent think the party should stay more like Clinton, although a sizable 20 percent are undecided," the poll reports.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


I don't want to see Granny Pickles "quit the public arena" until she is convicted in a public trial and carted off to Leavenworth ... but from a practical perspective, it looks like she may not live that long. 
1 posted on 11/21/2016, 1:02:31 AM by Zakeet

To: Zakeet

 

Trump’s Victory Will Mean Five Major Changes In The Gun Industry

Bearing Arms ^ | November 14, 2016 | Bob Owens 

Last week’s 2016 Presidential election saw bombastic Republican populist businessman Donald Trump pull out a stunning victory over one of the most self-evidently corrupt candidates to ever run for the office, influence-peddling Democrat Hillary Clinton.
The immediate reaction of most gun owners and the gun industry ranged the spectrum from relief to joy. After all, Hillary Clinton was the most radically anti-gun candidate to ever run for the Presidency, and she had made clear that bankrupting the gun industry be finding a way to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) was a key focus of her administration.
Now that Mrs. Clinton is vanquished, the gun industry is now facing another reality: the world we were all expecting and preparing for as an industry had radically changed, and we have been overtaken by events.
Clinton’s unexpected defeat, along with the sudden possibility that some major gun reforms now stand a high probability of being passed early in the allegedly pro-gun Trump administration, means that the industry itself is going to probably face a radical change in demand from buyers that will favor some companies and drive others out of business.
Here are five ways I expect the fallout of the 2016 election to radically change the gun industry.
The Death of the Budget AR?
Springfield Armory’s Saint series of AR-15 rifles was timed to enter the market at a time everyone expected that there would be a mad post-election rush on any and all “military style” rifles that could be produced.
Now that Clinton has skulked off to Chappaqua and the likelihood of a federal “assault weapon” ban has become very remote, it isn’t likely that the market is going to see as much demand for people attempting to stockpile multiple budget AR-15s. Instead, we’re likely to see the AR market contract, with buyers consolidating around manufacturers of “better-than-mil-spec” offerings in the $1,200-$2,000 range which can better handle the demands of serious shooters who put thousands of rounds through their rifles every year, and who may put that many rounds through an AR-15 in a single class.
The contraction is liable to force many smaller boutique AR-15 companies out of the market over the next few years, but don’t fret; what will remain will be those companies who are able to innovate, carve out a solid market niche, and deliver bomb-proof guns at a good price.
We could also possibly see a breakout of bullpup-style rifles as they are better adapted to American shooters and their price points no longer seem quite as high in comparison with other rifles.
Enjoy the Silence
Another gun law reform we expect to see passed this year is the Hearing Protection Act, which removes silencers from the National Firearms Act (NFA), a move long overdue. Under current law, people who desire one of these gun mufflers to help reduce the sound of the muzzle blast must pay a punitive $200 federal tax, and then wait the better part of a year for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Incredibly Poor Service (BATIPS) to approve the paperwork. If removed from the NFA, silencers will become much more attractive investments for many shooters, and we can expect demand for them to skyrocket.
The National Rifle Association no-so-subtly showed that the Hearing Protection Act was high on their interest list by tweeting about silencers within hours of Trump winning the election, even before Mrs.Clinton conceded.
Concealed Carry Market on Maximum Overdrive
Two things President-Elect Trump had promised should have a significant impact on the concealed carry market: an executive order repealing prior executive orders that have made military bases and facilities “gun free zones” ripe for terror attacks, and the passage of some version of a national concealed carry reciprocity act, which will open up the entire country to concealed carry. Concealed carry has already surged in recent years thanks to state laws expanding where people can carry, and opening up entire regions of the country that were previous verboten will only accelerate the trend.
Expect these changes to help not only manufacturers of concealed carry handguns, but also manufacturers of concealed carry holsters, tactical lights, and related concealed carry paraphernalia ranging from ammunition to weapon lights to defensive knives often carried in conjunction with concealed handguns.
Here Comes the (Training) Boom
It’s comparatively easy to make an educated guess on emerging trends within the firearms buying market based upon prior performance and changes in laws, but it’s a bit more difficult to to predict what people are going to do with their guns and accessories once they’ve purchased them.
That said, recent trends have suggested that there is a firearms training renaissance well under way in the United States in recent years. Youth programs have exploded in popularity in recent years, and as these shooters grow older and matured, they’re following other market trends, and have purchased handguns and modern sporting rifles.
Shooters are also showing an interest in a wide breadth and depth of training, ranging from rudimentary concealed carry concepts to extreme close quarters (ECQC) to team tactics classes to aerial gunnery from helicopters (which is becoming surprisingly popular as helicopter hog hunting takes off) to precision rifle shooting, to various classes designed to help people excel in differing shooting sports.
Return of the Bolt Gun
From economy hunting rifles capable of astonishing out-of-the-box accuracy to the surge in popularity of high-end long range target shooting, to newfound interest in scout rifles from both manufacturers and shooters, bolt-gun enthusiasts have never had it as good as they do now. Now that prospective buys aren’t as focused on the guns that another President and congress might have attempted to take away with an “assault weapon” ban, they will be stretching their dollars (and their effective range) with guns designed to go the distance.

This will be boost not just for traditional rifle companies, but for manufacturers of scopes, slings, bipods, and related accessories.
Conclusions
Every market endures periods of booms and busts, disruptive events, and evolutions in both marker demand and product performance. In 2017, we’re likely to see Johnny-come-lately companies out to make a quick buck exiting the market as it contracts, while innovators and the old guard weather the downshift by focusing on turning out quality to discerning shooters.
It’s going to be a bumpy ride as things shake out, but the strong will survive, forging a stronger industry.