Monday, January 30, 2017

Where was LEFTY, Democrat Outrage when Bill Clinton Called for End of Illegal Immigration

GP ^ | 01/20/17 | Red 


HEY DEMOCRATS, YOU’VE COME A LONG WAY BABY …
 
Over the weekend in the wake of President Donald Trump’s executive order on illegal immigration, the LEFT, Democrats, Hollywood and moonbats alike all lost their collective minds in horror and outrage at such actions.
 
But where were they when their own Democrat president Bill Clinton called for the very same things during his 1995 State of the Union address? What happened to the LEFT’s notion that we are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws? So does the Democrat party no longer think we are not a nation of laws? Seriously, are we or are we not a nation of laws? Maybe that can explain exactly why Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the GOP controls both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate, only 16 states of Democrat governors and Sate Houses are overwhelming Republican.
 
We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.
 


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

Trump Is Doing What He Said He’d Do!

Five Thirty Eight ^ | January 29, 2017 | Nate Silver, founder and editor in chief 

It’s up against some stiff competition, but there’s a runaway front-runner in the “wrongest idea of 2016” derby. It’s the aphorism, once fashionable on the morning-talk show circuit, that the media mistakenly took Donald Trump “literally but not seriously,” when they should have taken him “seriously but not literally,” as Trump’s supporters did.
If the idea is that the media should have taken Trump more seriously, then I’d emphatically agree. But it turns out that they probably ought to have taken him literally too. It’s been an exceptionally busy first 10 days in office for President Trump, culminating in an executive order on Friday that banned immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days and banned all new refugees from entering the U.S. for 120 days. (Over the weekend, several courts issued rulings temporarily blocking parts of Trump’s order.)
Almost all of the actions that Trump has undertaken, however, are consistent with statements and policy positions he issued repeatedly on the campaign trail and during the presidential transition. It was more than a year ago that Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” for instance. (Friday’s executive order stops short of that, but Trump allies such as Rudy Giuliani have spoken of the order as a legal workaround that seeks to accomplish the same objectives as a Muslim immigration ban.) Another executive order called for building a border wall with Mexico, which was perhaps the signature policy position of Trump’s campaign. And Trump might even try to “make Mexico pay for it” by imposing a tariff on Mexican imports....
(Excerpt) Read more at fivethirtyeight.com ...

Do The Democrat Leaders Really Believe In Socialism/Communism?

blueunicorn6 | 1/29/2017 | blueunicorn6 

Why do Democrats behave the way they do?

That's a question that probably ever Conservative has asked at one time or another. They sure don't vote like we do. That was very evident in the last election.
As the mind controls the body, we can infer that Democrats thus think differently than we do. The big question is, "What are Democrats thinking that would cause them to vote for the Democrat candidate instead of the Conservative candidate?"
There have been many ideas put forward to explain Democrat voting behavior. One thought is that they vote the way their parents voted. Another explanation given is that they are easily convinced by famous people in our country who vote Democrat.
One of the best known explanations for Democrat voting behavior is that they vote Democrat because the Democrat leaders believe in socialism/communism and they have convinced many people that socialism/communism is a great way to live and that the Democrat Party wants to implement socialism/communism in the United States.
But is that true?
Do the leaders of the Democrat Party really want to implement socialism/communism in this country?
Or is that just a smoke screen to win elections?
The big name behind socialism/communism is Karl Marx.
You can boil down all his thoughts and writing, and boy did he have a lot of those, to one sentence.
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
Kind of an interesting sentence. So how do we examine it. Well, I choose to examine it from two perspectives. The first perspective is what the Democrat Party says they believe about this sentence. The second perspective will be from the view of reality.
"From each according to his abilities"
THE DEMOCRAT VIEW: We all have inherent abilities. Some of us are ballet dancers. Some people are born to be scientists. People are happiest when they are busy doing the work that they have the natural ability to do. They will be so happy that they will produce many new inventions and a sufficiency of all products. People will not be held back by the prejudices of the rich capitalists.
THE REALITY: Somebody has to determine what every bodies abilities are or everyone will think their ability is to be a movie star or writer. And who decides that? Can people change their abilities with ducat ion and training. Yes. But someone has to slop the hogs. The reality is that there are good jobs and some really nasty jobs. Who decides who gets these jobs? Well, the bosses do. But I thought there were no bosses? See. Reality really shatters dreams. So you are always going to have a majority who feel that the bosses are screwing them. Doesn't sound so utopian, huh?
"To each according to his needs"
THE DEMOCRAT VIEW: How many needs does a person really have? They need so many calories per day. They need water. They need clothing. They need a warm dry place to sleep. Once all people have these needs met, then we can move forward to address other issues like recreation and philosophy. We will produce a perfect world with perfect people.
THE REALITY: Who decides a person's needs? Maybe I need a Mercedes. Maybe I need plastic surgery. Who decides if these needs will be met? Well, again, the bosses will decide what you really need. This inherently leads to shortages as that Mercedes worker "needs" time off and the Democrat Governor "needs" a Mercedes more than you do. Human beings don't stop being human beings under socialism/communism. They don't become robots with no feelings who can be started and stopped at will.
Communism fails every place it is tried. Human beings are human beings with all kinds of emotions.
Do the Democrat Party leaders know this?
Of course they do.
So why do they keep hinting that they are socialists/communists if they know it doesn't work?
Because they know that most people don't take a hard look at socialism/communism. And without taking a hard look, people can easily be convinced that they actually can have something (their needs met) for nothing (no great abilities means no hard work).
My Dad taught me that "Actions speak louder than words."
President Obama talked a lot about policies that were socialist/communist. What were his actions after he left the Presidency? Did he go to Turnip Commune #43 to help pull weeds?
Nope.
Off to a private island for some vacay.
How about Hillary?
Did she sell everything she owns and give the money to the poor?
Nope.
No pulling turnips for her either.
The Democrat Party leaders have absolutely no intention of bringing socialism/communism to our country.
They have every intention of putting more money in their own pockets.
This hinting at socialism/communism is just a smokescreen to get votes and donation money.
It is to blind us to their true purpose which is to enrich themselves.

Understanding Trump’s Refugee Order

LifeZette. ^ | January 29, 2017 | Brendan Kirby 

President suspends migration from terror hotbeds while vetting process reviewed.
President Trump on Friday signed an executive order indefinitely halting the Syrian refugee program, barring all refugees for 120 days and prohibiting entry of all residents from certain high-risk countries for 90 days.
At a ceremony swearing-in Defense Secretary James Mattis, Trump said the suspension would allow time to improve procedures to screen for potential terrorists.
President Trump on Friday signed an executive order indefinitely halting the Syrian refugee program, barring all refugees for 120 days and prohibiting entry of all residents from certain high-risk countries for 90 days.
At a ceremony swearing-in Defense Secretary James Mattis, Trump said the suspension would allow time to improve procedures to screen for potential terrorists.
“I’m establishing new vetting measures to keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America,” he said. “We don’t want them here.”
He added: “We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country and love deeply our people.”
The order will cut the number of refugees America will take in the fiscal year that ends in September to 50,000, less than half the 110,000 limit set by former President Barack Obama. The plan includes exceptions for religious minorities claiming religious persecution.
The Associated Press reported that the State Department identified seven majority-Muslim countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen — where the 90-day immigration ban will apply. Trump’s order instructs diplomatic and intelligence officials to determine the information they need to adequately vet people coming into the United States.
Unless those countries provide within 60 days the information American officials request, their citizens will be barred from traveling to the United States.
Clare Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Washington-based Center for Security Policy, praised Trump for undertaking a long overdue review of America’s refugee program.
“It’s a very good start forward,” she told LifeZette. “Our refugee resettlement policies have needed reform for a long time.”
A long list of liberal activists, however, lined up to condemn Trump. Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, called the policy discriminatory and ineffective.
“President Trump rode a wave of bigotry into the White House and ushered in a new era of hostility against American Muslims,” he said in a statement. “He campaigned as a demagogue and is now governing as a demagogue.”
Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Coalition, argued that Trump’s actions are un-American.
“This is not what America is about,” she said in her own statement. “We stand strongly against these hateful actions, and in solidarity with our Muslim and immigrant neighbors.”
But Lopez said entry into the United States is not a right.
“It’s a privilege, and it may be decided by the people who come here,” she said.
Lopez said a pause in immigration based on geography, however, might not be the best approach. Instead, she said, it should be focused on ideology. She said consular officers and other State Department employees must be trained to suss out foreigners who could pose a risk to Americans.
That means asking questions about people’s belief in Sharia law, Lopez said. She added that other questions could focus on whether visa applicants believe in equality of men and women under law.
Such vetting would not discriminate against Muslims but would ban those holding “allegiance to a different legal system” incompatible with America’s democratic pluralism, she said.
“It’s not about religion. It’s about Article VI of the Constitution,” she said, referring to the a provision that America’s governing document is the supreme law of the land.
Trump signed a second executive order Friday, calling for a “great rebuilding of the Armed Services of he United States.”
Rebuilding the military was a key plank in Trump’s platform during last year’s campaign. On Thursday, he told Fox News Channel Sean Hannity that the military takes precedence even over balancing the budget.

Donald J Trump Statement Regarding Recent Executive Order Concerning Extreme Vetting

Facebook ^ | December 29, 2017 

“America is a proud nation of immigrants and we will continue to show compassion to those fleeing oppression, but we will do so while protecting our own citizens and border. America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave.
We will keep it free and keep it safe, as the media knows, but refuses to say. My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the Executive Order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror. To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting.
This is not about religion - this is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order. We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days.
I have tremendous feeling for the people involved in this horrific humanitarian crisis in Syria. My first priority will always be to protect and serve our country, but as President I will find ways to help all those who are suffering.”
(Excerpt) Read more at facebook.com ...

The Miracle That Is Ivanka Trump (PHOTOS)

Jewish Press ^ | Jan 29 2017 8 hours ago | Rabbi Lenny Oppenheimer 

Virtually every Rabbi started their sermon this past Shabbos with a similar theme, I am quite sure. The juxtaposition of the inauguration of President Trump with the verse from Parshat Shmos “And a new King arose” was too providential to ignore. No matter what one thinks, in this very divided country, about the new President, it is certainly an exciting time to be living, with great promise of change in the air.

In the Orthodox Jewish community, of course, there is particular excitement, given that, for the first time, Orthodox Jews have such proximity to the most powerful human on the planet (at least for the next few years). The long list includes Jason Greenblatt, special representative for international negotiations, David Friedman, Ambassador to Israel, and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is clearly Trump’s most trusted advisor and right hand man. The President has made it abundantly clear that he is very pro-Israel and intends to try to undo much of the damage that the Obama administration has been complicit in; Nikki Haley, his choice for UN Ambassador, could not have given a more pro-Israel speech at her confirmation. (It increasingly astonishes me how willfully blind the Jewish left is in accusing Trump of being anti-Semitic, of all things.) Surely this is yet another manifestation of the "Isaac Covenant" times that I have been writing about lately (Please see here for more on this important topic). She brings honor and respect to Torah and our way of life in a way unparalleled perhaps since Queen Esther
But, of course, the Orthodox Jew who is closest to him – and who we are most blessed to have as one of us – is his amazing daughter, Yael (Ivanka) Trump. Extraordinarily well-spoken, intelligent, beautiful and successful, she is a walking Kiddush Hashem (sanctification of G-d - the highest mitzvah a Jew can do) as she brings honor and respect to Torah and our way of life in a way unparalleled perhaps since Queen Esther.
Having written those words, I know that while hopefully most readers will agree with them, there are those who will feel that I have gone too far. “Kiddush Hashem?” they will exclaim. “Many of her clothing choices do not conform to Halachic standards of Tzniyus that we expect in our communities.” “She doesn’t cover her hair as a married woman should”. “She does not seem to be as careful about physical contact (negiah) with members of the opposite gender as we generally consider acceptable.” And this week, a new charge. She and Jared sought and got a “Hetter” (Rabbinic Ruling) allowing them to be driven in a car on Shabbos (Sabbath) to attend the inauguration festivities, including photo sessions and even going into a church. Most unfortunately, some even went as far as to question the validity of her conversion, given these deviations from the standards that they are accustomed to.
This attitude is most unfortunate, and (potentially) extremely harmful. It shows an ignorance of some basic Hilchos Geirus (Laws of Conversion) and – as is all too often the case among us – belies a lack of tolerance for those with other viewpoints and standards than our own.
This short article is not the place to go into this complex area of Halacha, but even a cursory look at Yoreh Deah 268 will show that – at the most basic level – what is required for a proper conversion is a deep desire to become a part of the Jewish People, to seek to share in their destiny with all of its difficulties, coupled with a complete acceptance of the obligatory nature of Halacha (Jewish Law) as presented to the potential candidate by the converting Rabbi and Bet Din, who themselves must be properly qualified to be Dayanim.
In the case of Ivanka, the Halachic community that she was introduced to by her potential husband (a graduate of the co-ed Modern Orthodox Frisch school) was the Modern Orthodox community of the upper East Side of Manhattan. The shul that she attended and wherein she received her training in Judaism and Halacha was Kehillath Jeshurun, led by Rabbi Haskel Lookstein. In that community, as opposed to many communities that I have been privileged to be part of, standards of tznius, negiah and hair covering are quite liberal; what is considered perfectly acceptable – and in fact modest and dignified – there, would be considered wholly unacceptable in most other Orthodox communities. Those are the standards that she was presented with, and it is on the basis of a completely sincere acceptance of those standards that the Bet Din converted her. My aim in this essay is not to discuss the propriety of the standards of that community; that is between them, their spiritual leaders, and the Almighty.[1]
Rather, I seek to make a simple point. When Ivanka undertook a commitment to follow Halacha upon completing her conversion, I have full confidence (more below) that she fully accepted on herself to follow all of the Halacha as presented to her by the teachers that she had. Given this, and the fact that she has, in fact, lived by those commitments, she is 100% fully Jewish. As such, she must be accepted with love by us as a Ger Tzedek (Righteous Convert), who we are commanded on twenty six separate occasions in the Torah to love and cherish – and not Heaven forbid to cause pain to – by questioning her integrity and Halachic validity.
Why am I so convinced that this was a proper Geirus? What about the questions raised above? Is it not well known that the Bais Din Harabbani HaGadol (BHG -The supreme Israeli Rabbinical Court) recently questioned Rabbi Lookstein’s conversions? My conviction is based on one important reason: The Conversion was done by the Manhattan chapter of the Beth Din of America under the GPS (Geirus Policies and Standards) system. Permit me to explain.
While it is true that Rabbi Lookstein has a long and distinguished career of not only being the Rabbi at KJ, but of also being the Head of the Ramaz school and a professor of Rabbinics at Yeshiva University, and is considered a Rabbi’s Rabbi, he has nevertheless taken certain public positions that were viewed as quite controversial over the years. As I have no desire, nor am I in any position, to judge him, I will not go into any detail here. Nevertheless, one position that he took is important in understanding this issue. That was his public opposition to the call of the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) to have all of its member Rabbonim perform their conversion through the auspices of the GPS system.
The GPS system is, in my view, the single greatest achievement of the RCA. While all know of the infamous “Who is a Jew” question regarding Conservative and Reform conversions, it is less well known that there are serious problems within the “Orthodox” Rabbinate, where for a variety of unfortunate reasons, some Rabbis “convert” people who do not have a sincere Kabbalat (acceptance of) Mitzvot and thereby cause enormous problems. From the RCA website, “GPS was established to aid potential converts to Judaism, while at the same time diminishing thorny questions of personal status. For years, conversion had been performed in ad hoc fashion by local rabbis, but without detailed mutually agreed upon standards and procedures. While the vast majority of conversions were handled appropriately, some were not. As a result, in recent years even those who had fulfilled the halachic requirements were finding their conversions unfairly questioned and scrutinized - not just in Israel but in many Orthodox communities to which they or their children had moved.” To solve this problem, the GPS set up a system of regional Courts with policies and standards that will allows converts to be confident that their conversion will be recognized and prevents Rabbis from being put under pressure to convert people for ulterior motives.
For his own reasons (although Rabbi Lookstein was originally involved in the GPS formation) he is unhappy with what he sees as its rigidity, and has joined with some other RCA Rabbis in opposing it. From what I am able to gather, this was perhaps the main reason that the BHG did not want to accept his private, non-GPS conversions. Be that as it may, when it came to the very high profile conversion of Ivanka Trump, Rabbi Lookstein wisely chose to guide her conversion through the GPS system and the conversion was officiated by the Bet Din of America.
And that is good enough for me, as it should be for everyone in the Jewish community.
And that is why I think that all the “frum police” who are engaging in commenting and yenta-ing, whether on online forums such as Facebook and Twitter or at the shul Kiddush need to stop. They have no right to question or criticize her level of observance, or the choices that Jared and Ivanka have made, any more than any of us – who are so imperfect in our treatment of others, and lashon hara, and limmud hatorah, and tefilla – have a right to criticize anyone else.
For those interested, there certainly is halachic precedent, brought in the Bet Yosef YD 178:2 (and the Taz and Prisha and Darkei Teshuvah ad. loc.) for one who is קרוב למלכות – in a position of close proximity to the ruler, where they can avert trouble from the Jewish people – that certain Rabbinic prohibitions, e.g. being driven on Shabbos in a car, may be set aside if need be to maintain their position with the ruler. I do not know if this was the basis of the hetter they obtained, but one should be דן לכף זכות (assume the positive) that they asked the Shayla (Halachic Query) of a legitimate Rov who gave them this answer.
Certainly, the famous maxim אַל תָּדִין אֶת חֲבֵרְךָ עַד שֶׁתַּגִּיעַ לִמְקוֹמוֹ (Do not Judge another until you stand in their place - Avot 2:4) ought to apply. None of us can know what sorts of intense pressures from the media, family, and everyone around them they are living with every day, and what sorts of compromises they are constantly being pressured to make. And they have come through in a way that is making שם שמים מתאהב , making Hashem and Torah look beautiful to the world while living under that incredible spotlight.
One might wish that instead of getting a “Hetter” to attend the inaugural ball on Friday night and be driven home (ostensibly because of the pikuah nefesh situation caused by many who were expressing their fear of how Trump will destroy America by destroying what they could of a great American city) they would have stayed home and perhaps have the President drop by for a l’chaim. One certainly wishes that the spiritual and Torah aspirations of Jared and Ivanka will grow over time, leading them to take on more of the traditional ways of Halacha. I do not know what the future will bring, nor any more details about where “they are holding” right now. I take them at their word that their commitment to Halacha as they understand it is strong and deep.
One thing, however, I can predict with great certainty. None of the snarky comments and questions about the legitimacy of her conversion or the level of their observance will draw them closer to observance; they are far more likely to drive them in the other direction.
Let us celebrate this wonderful gift that Hashem has given us in having such attractive and prominent models of serious Jews in our time. My readers know that although I had many misgivings about Donald Trump as President, I think that if he can hold his negative side in check he is capable of being a great force for the good. It is well known that the person who can influence him best in this direction, is “our” Yael.
May she have the strength and courage to help her father stand up for all that is good in the very strange times in which we live, and may we come to properly appreciate Hashem’s putting her neshama in this very special place as she works for the betterment of the USA and Am Yisrael.
[1] I also will not discuss in this essay the difference between the “Very Modern Orthodox” community and “Open Orthodoxy”, which I consider to be beyond the pale, in that their deviations extend beyond mere levels of observance to fundamental matters of faith. I have discussed related matters elsewhere .

I would put her out front and center every day! 


AMEXIT: Bill Introduced In Congress To Remove The US From The United Nations!

Gateway Pundit ^ | Jan 23rd, 2017 6:12 pm | Ryan Saavedra 

The Republicans are wasting no time helping President Donald Trump deliver on his promises that he made will campaigning to be President of the United States.
Recently a bill was introduced by Alabama Rep. Mike Rogers called the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017 which is in response to his call earlier this month for the United States to sever all ties ties from the United Nations.

From The Business Insider:
The bill, titled the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017, was proposed on January 3. It is cosponsored by a handful of Republican lawmakers, including North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones, Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, Missouri Rep. Jason Smith, Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, Tennessee Rep. John Duncan Jr., and Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz.
Biggs said in a statement on Monday that he cosponsored the bill because he believes that “our sovereignty as a country is harmed by our membership in this body.”
“We need to take a long look at our relationship with the United Nations to ensure that American interests are protected first and foremost,” Biggs said. “I’m grateful to Congressman Mike Rogers for introducing this legislation.”…
…The bill proposes barring the US from committing funds or troops to UN peacekeeping operations worldwide and stipulates that the UN must vacate property owned by the US government. It would repeal the 1973 Environment Program Participation Act, strip UN employees of diplomatic immunity in the US, and repeal the US’s membership and participation in the World Health Organization.

Breaking the law

itzmRsp.jpg

The Trump Agenda

D-Obstruction-600-LI.jpg

Check Bounced!

3yqfkMI.jpg

Trump Creates

196253_image.jpg

Which?

Tc9VPDZ.jpg

Real Women

ErDUpsY.jpg

Meet Her!

kQAEQuS.jpg

The View

zqgASDt.jpg

Replacements

tq6fGTz.jpg

Black Community

l4lKkcV.jpg

Degraded?

IX3BaFa.jpg

WHY?

2VfU8ZV.png

Mass Deportations Loom: 7 Ways To Get Kicked Out Of America If You Are Here Illegally

SHTF Plan ^ | 1-29-2017 | Mac Slavo 

As of this writing there are reportedly scores of individuals being detained at airports across the country because they originate from countries on President Trump’s “ban list.” Though the ban is indefinite for refugees from war-torn Syria, the White House’s Executive Order stops short of permanently restricting access for those in other predominantly Muslim countries on the list. The purpose of the order based on its language is to ensure that the United States has extensive screening and biometric procedures in place prior to opening our borders again. The process, according to the order, should be completed within 120 days, something that seems to have been under reported by the mainstream media, likely in order to fuel further tensions such as the widespread protests we are seeing at international airports in the United States. Further, the Trump administration has now made it clear the holders of green cards are legal immigrants and will not be affected by the order.
The tensions we are witnessing today across the country will likely be raised significantly in coming days because in addition to the Executive Order banning immigration from certain countries, the Trump administration has also enacted an order to deal with illegal aliens who are already in the United States. It was a major position for the President in the run-up to the election and now Trump looks to be making good on his promise to deal with illegal immigration head on.
Dubbed Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, this Executive Order outlines numerous guidelines for dealing with undocumented immigrants who are in the United States illegally.
The order uses a sweeping definition for “criminal” activity, likely threatening millions of people with the real possibility of deportation...
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at shtfplan.com ...

The Trump Bulldozer

The real shocker: Trump is a politician who delivers on his promises!

New York Post ^ | 28 Jan, 2017 | Michael Walsh 

Here we are, barely a week into the Trump administration, and half of the country that opposed him during the election is quivering with rage. He’s building the wall! He’s banning immigration from some Muslim countries! He’s wrecking ObamaCare! He’s sacking top officials at the State Department! He’s threatening sanctuary cities! What’s going on here?
It’s called: keeping his campaign promises.
The answer is simple: we’ve become so inured to politicians lying to us to get elected that we find it hard to believe that the new man in the White House actually meant what he said — and can’t wait to get on with it.
Not since the heyday of Ronald Reagan have the Democrats been in such shock and disarray. First, they — and their “never Trump” collaborators on the right — said he’d never get the nomination. When he did, they assured themselves there was no way he could beat the Hillary Clinton juggernaut so beloved of the media, the insulated superrich and the dependent class.
Whoops!
That all changed on Nov. 8. Of course, they’ve reacted to the upending of their fantasy world with petulance, threats, marches, actual violence and lawfare. Indeed, a few dead-enders calling themselves the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed suit last week charging the nation’s First Businessman with violations of the emoluments clause in the Constitution, which forbids US office holders from accepting things of value from foreigners.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...



Trump Roller Graphic By FReeper Smoothsailing.

Let’s Be Real: Obama ‘Barred’ Syrian Christian Refugees

The Stream ^ | 1/29/17 | Rachel Stolzfuss 

President Trump said he’s righting a wrong in ordering his administration to prioritize refugee applications from Christian minorities in Muslim countries Friday, but critics are declaring the move unfair and “un-American.” Let’s look at what the numbers have to say about the way Christian refugees were treated under President Obama.
The country admitted about the same number of Christian refugees as Muslim refugees in Fiscal Year 2016, according to Pew Research Center figures cited by The New York Times in an effort to refute Trump’s statement. About 38,000 Christian refugees were admitted compared to about 39,000 Muslims.
But this figure is a sum total of refugees worldwide, when Trump was clearly referring to specific Christian minority populations in the Middle East. The way it’s deployed in The New York Times report is incredibly misleading and entirely misses the point.
Previous administrations made it “almost impossible” for Syrian Christian refugees to gain admission, Trump told the Christian Broadcasting Network Friday, although they were “horribly treated” in their country.
“If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible,” he said. “I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”
The numbers regarding refugees from Syria in particular actually bolster Trump’s case. Obama admitted more than 12,000 Muslim refugees from Syria in Fiscal Year 2016, but fewer than 100 Christian refugees from the same country. Christians make up about 10 percent of the population in Syria, some 2.2 million people. Yet they only made up about one-half of one percent of Syrian refugees admitted that year.
Elliot Abrams tackles one explanation for the disproportionate numbers in a November opinion piece published by Newsweek, titled “The U.S. Bars Christians, Not Muslim, Refugees From Syria.” While some argue the dramatically low numbers are because Syrian Christians aren’t fleeing the country, or aren’t applying to move to the U.S., Abrams offers a simpler answer: “In effect, we make it almost impossible for Christian refugees to get here.”
“Is the title of this column an overstatement, suggesting that the United States ‘bars’ Christian refugees from Syria?” he writes. “Sure, in that we do not and could not legally ban Christian refugees any more than we could or should bar Muslim refugees. But when you have been running a refugee program for years, and you have accepted 10,612 Sunni refugees and 56 Christians, and it is obvious why and obvious how to fix it, and nothing is done to fix it — well, the results speak more loudly than speeches, laws, intentions or excuses.”
Another interesting fact The New York Times omitted from the Pew report is that 2016 was a record year for Muslims admitted into the country. Nearly half of the 85,000 refugees admitted into the country in fiscal year 2016 were Muslims, Pew reported, and half of those Muslims came from just two countries, one of which was Syria.

Trump SLAMS senators for ‘provoking WORLD WAR 3’ instead of dealing with immigration

The Daily Express ^ | 00:00, Mon, Jan 30, 2017 | UPDATED: 01:00, Mon, Jan 30, 2017 | Will Kirby 

Trump has hit back after two sentaors criticised his executive order on travel The President took to Twitter to criticise Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham after they released a statement warning about the potential counterproductive effects of Trump’s executive order on travel from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Trump tweeted: “The joint statement of former presidential candidates John McCain & Lindsey Graham is wrong - they are sadly weak on immigration.

“The two Senators should focus their energies on ISIS, illegal immigration and border security instead of always looking to start World War III.”
(Excerpt) Read more at express.co.uk ...

Bill de Blasio Struggles Differing Trump’s Immigration Policy From Obama’s

Washington Free Beacon ^ | 1/29/17 | Jack Heretik 

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio had trouble differing President Donald Trump’s immigration policy with that of former President Barack Obama on Sunday.
CNN’s Jake Tapper raised the point that Obama and former President Jimmy Carter had both taken similar moves during their presidencies as Trump did with his executive order restricting immigration from certain countries with terrorism problems.
“Now there have been times in the nation’s history when detainees–I’m sorry, not detainees–when refugees or immigrants from a specific country were put on hold, were suspended,” Tapper said.
“Barack Obama did it with Iraqis for six months,” Tapper continued. “Jimmy Carter did it with Iranians during that hostage crisis. How is this different?”
“Well, I don’t know the details of those orders,” de Blasio said before criticizing Trump’s order.
De Blasio also criticized Trump’s executive order for what he called prioritizing non-Muslim immigration, but Tapper reminded him that it is for all religious minorities.
“Well, to be clear, what the executive order says is it provides for prioritization if people are of a religious minority in these countries and obviously they are majority Muslim countries, but theoretically, we don’t know how it’s going to be implemented,” Tapper said.
“Theoretically, that could be a Sufi Muslim could be considered a religious minority, a Shia Muslim could be considered a religious minority, no?” Tapper asked.
“Well, Jake, I understand that point, but I would be careful on that, the notion that there’s not a pattern of exception for individuals, that the only indication suggests bluntly non-Muslims should be very, very worrisome here,” de Blasio responded.

T-Shirt