Wednesday, August 23, 2017

The (Hollywood's) 9th Circuit Court Rules Against Christians : WOW - Who Knew?

Oh No! How can it be? Who knew the 9th Circuit of Appeals would side with Hollywood? The 9th circuit si the most progressive liberal court in the land, and littler wonder being in California.

And that it attacked a religious organization with it rulings for taking a stand against the Hollywood elites doesn't require rocket science to understand. With more the 70% of federal judges admitting to being progressive, little is left to wonder how they would vote, especially on a matter of Christian's religious liberty.

Hollywood Wants to Force This Profanity-Filtering Service Out of Business, and May Succeed
Peter Parisi /    

The ideological and philosophical divide between Republicans and Democrats has seldom, if ever, been broader and deeper, and the divide between partisans in the degree of their aversion to swearing in feature films is just the latest manifestation of that.

A new Harris poll—commissioned by the makers of a forthcoming faith-based film, “Generational Sins,” that itself reportedly contains 32 profanities—found that Republicans are offended by swearing more than Democrats are, by a margin of nearly 2-to-1. Nearly half (45 percent) of Republicans surveyed, compared with just 1 in 4 (25 percent) Democrats, find the “F-bomb” objectionable, for example, the poll found.

Among all respondents, however, the poll found the use of “Jesus Christ” as a profanity and “G.D.” both narrowly edged out the four-letter F-word as vulgar dialogue that would keep them from seeing a movie if they knew ahead of time they were used in the film.

One in three (33 percent) of those surveyed objected to using “Jesus Christ” as an expletive. Thirty-two percent said the same about “G.D.,” while 31 percent said “f—” would keep them from buying a ticket. Among evangelical Christians, the corresponding numbers were 90 percent, 86 percent, and 74 percent, respectively.

The poll also found a divide along other demographic lines, with Christians, not surprisingly, objecting more than non-Christians. More women object to the use of the “F-bomb” in movie scripts (37 percent to 26 percent). Objections also increased with age, with more than half of those over age 72 telling the pollster they would shun movies with strong profanity. “Milder” profanities, among them “sh–,” “p—,” “damn” and “hell,” were found objectionable at lower rates across all demographics.

It’s all a far cry from the days of “Gone With the Wind,” when in 1939, producer David O. Selznick agonized over whether to tone down Rhett Butler’s famous retort to Scarlett O’Hara, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn,” out of concern for moviegoers’ sensibilities.

Given today’s anything-goes ethos in Hollywood, it seems positively quaint that Selznick would have to defend the line before members of the film industry’s self-regulating Hays Code. “It is my contention that this word as used in the picture is not an oath or a curse,” Selznick said. “The worst that could be said of it is that it’s a vulgarism.”

Alas, that was then, and this is now.

At one time, not so long ago, it was widely believed that swearing represented intellectual poverty or at best, the sign of a stunted vocabulary. But revisionism apparently is no longer limited to history.
In the April 2016 article “Is Swearing a Sign of a Limited Vocabulary?” Scientific American reported on studies that sought to debunk the “poverty of vocabulary” explanation for the use of profanity.
“This research has led to a competing explanation for swearing: Fluency with taboo words might be a sign of general verbal fluency,” Piercarlo Valdesolo wrote. “Those who are exceptionally vulgar might also be exceptionally eloquent and intelligent.”

Thus, with the mainstreaming of the acceptability of swearing, and movies, cable TV, and streaming services arguably leading the charge, what the “bleep” is a person who doesn’t want to hear all the “@#$%^&*” to do?

One recourse is VidAngel, a video-filtering service that enables subscribers to filter out profanity and other graphic and objectionable material (nudity, sex, violence, drug use, and the like) from content on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and other streaming services, making them more family-friendly.
VidAngel has said that 96 percent of its customers filter at least two items—and an average of 17—from a typical film.

Regrettably, however, VidAngel—begun by four brothers who grew up in Idaho—is in an existential legal battle with leading production companies, including Disney and Warner Brothers. They accuse the Palo Alto, California-based company of copyright infringement.

VidAngel argues that viewers should “have the choice to watch however the bleep [they] want,” and insists that it “just facilitates that.” It contends that the federal Family Movie Act of 2005 protects its customers’ right to use its service to filter films. Federal court rulings—as recently as Aug. 2 at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—have consistently gone against VidAngel, however.

If VidAngel is forced out of business, the large numbers of people who told the Harris pollsters they found film profanity objectionable will be left with little recourse but to stick their fingers in their ears.

Smithsonian Inducts Colin Kaepernick : Clarence Thomas to The Back of The Bus

Colin Kaepernik's support of Black Lives Matter(BLM) and his induction into the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture is a direct slap in the face of all black people. BLM might have been a legitimate organization when it was founded, but given it's history of bringing disruption and conflict to the population, regardless of the law, can now be seen as just self serving.  

The Black Lives Matter organization is not about black people being used and abused in society, it is about get power that will bring them influence and money to control events as they see fit even when means black people will not be helped. BLM is a self serving group dedicated to bring chaos and conflict to the larger society, including the black community as a means to dictate it's own terms for control.

That a man as prominent as Clarence Thomas, with an incredible  history of dedication to the rule of law in the highest court in the land, is denied recognition as worthy of even being part of the larger black communities best and brightest, but heaps praise on a mediocre football player as a symbol of great accomplishment just because he is radical in a civil society.

Where is the justice? Where is the common sense? Where is the community of responsible citizens?

Kaepernick Makes Black History Smithsonian Before Clarence Thomas
Kevin Daley / /    

Free agent NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick will be featured in a Black Lives Matter collection at the National Museum of African American History and Culture, museum curators announced this weekend. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, the nation’s longest-serving black justice, remains absent from the museum.

USA Today Sports reports items belonging to Kaepernick will be incorporated into the museum’s Black Lives Matter collection. The quarterback became a symbol of the nation’s complicated racial politics and social relations when he declined to stand for the national anthem during the 2016 NFL season. The quarterback said his gesture signaled solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement.

“The National Museum of African American History and Culture has nearly 40,000 items in our collection,” sports curator Damion Thomas told USA Today. “The Colin Kaepernick collection is in line with the museum’s larger collecting efforts to document the varied areas of society that have been impacted by the Black Lives Matter movement.” Featured items will include shoes and a game-worn jersey.

The quarterback’s protest inflamed racial and political tensions around the country. He returned to San Francisco’s starting lineup in advance of its week six game against the Buffalo Bills in October 2016. Anti-Kaepernick displays outside the Bills stadium before the game prompted allegations of racism.

Kaepernick was released from his contract with the San Francisco 49ers in March 2017 and is currently a free agent. He finished the 2016 NFL season on 2,241 passing yards, 18 touchdowns, and four interceptions.

The quarterback’s admission into the nation’s premier black history museum was fairly speedy relative to Thomas, only the second black man in American history to serve on the Supreme Court. The Daily Caller News Foundation reported that Thomas was not included in the museum in 2016. His exclusion prompted resolutions in both houses of Congress urging his incorporation in the museum.

Thomas was born in Georgia’s coastal lowlands among impoverished Gullah speakers. By his own account, he did not master English until his early 20s. He came of age in Jim Crow Savannah, Georgia, where he was ridiculed by white neighbors and classmates for his unpolished style. During this period, most public spaces in Savannah were segregated by race.

Despite the startling racial injustices of his youth, he went on to the College of the Holy Cross and Yale Law School. He was appointed to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.
The museum has consistently denied that it applies ideological litmus tests in preparing its exhibits.
“There are many compelling personal stories about African-Americans who have become successful in various fields, and obviously, Associate Justice Thomas is one of them,” a spokesman said. “However, we cannot tell every story in our inaugural exhibitions.” “We will continue to collect and interpret the breadth of the African-American experience,” the spokesman added.

Editor’s note: Ginni Thomas is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

The Golf Cart Overturned : No Ones Hurt (Humor)

Here is a little comedy relief from the riggers of the day and the nonsense of media politics.

While golfing, a senior gentleman accidentally overturned his golf cart late one afternoon.  A very attractive, young, female golfer, who lives in a villa on the golf course, heard the noise and called out, "Are you OK?", "I’m OK, thanks," he replied, as he pulled himself out of the twisted cart.

She said, "Come up to my villa, rest a while, and I’ll help." The old guy noticed her silky bathrobe was partially open, revealing what appeared to be a very nice figure. "That’s mighty nice of you," he answered, "but I don’t think my wife would like it."

"Oh, come on now!" she insisted. She was so pretty, and very, very persuasive. He was weak.
"Well, OK," he finally agreed.

After a couple of Scotch and sodas, he thanked her and said: "I feel a lot better now. But I know my wife is going to be really upset. So I’d better go now." "Don’t be silly!" she said with a smile, letting her robe fall slightly more open. "Stay for a while. Your wife won’t know anything. By the way, where is she?"

He replied, "Probably still under the cart, I suppose."

Chicago Citizens Innovate For Safety : A New Neighborhood Strategy

I wonder what the next move is going to be for the democrats in Chicago to stem the killing of it's citizens? It appears going to the neighborhood grocery store is like running the gauntlet in some war where the enemy fire is coming from all sides.

Still, I like how the American spirit of innovation takes command to stem the problems of daily life in one of America largest cities.

Is this like the movie Saving Private Ryan? How this will work on a daily basis for the average citizen has yet to seen. Still, life goes on in Chicago, or maybe not.
Chicago citizens innovate and prosper. It's the American way.

Chicago Moves to Proptect Children : New School Buses Work!

Has it come to this? Chicago's understanding of the killings, murders of it's citizens, has taken a new twist in that to combat the murderous numbers of the dead, the city officials have implemented a new strategy to help children and young adults stay safe from gang members, that daily are killing them selves and others.

Will this new strategy work remains to be seen. The progressive democrats that are in charge say it will require a rise in taxes to pay for these expensive school busses and the man power to operate them effectively.

Still, city officials, including the mayor believe they are doing everything in their collective power to keep the citizens of Chicago safe, including, but not limited to, suing the federal government to prevent federal funds from being cut off because of the city's 'Come one, come all'  sanctuary city stand that welcomes illegal immigrants that are now flooding into Chicago.

The mayor says there is no price to high for Chicago taxpayers to pay to keep our children safe from being murdered on their way to school. You have to admit, the mayor is on top of his program!

What's the problem? 

New York Times Comes Out of The Shadows : The Gray Lady Is A Socialist!

Let there be no mistake about who they are and what the New York Times believes to be the truth about communism and America's right to individual freedom.

But it's not about freedom at all, it is about controlling the events that shape the country with an ideology that was designed to take control from the people by force. Hungry? Poland?  Czechoslovakia? East Germany? Cuba?

The New York Times explains what they really believe to be true.
It is about who will be in charge and who will dictate the rules and regulation that everyone must follow, and how those rules must be enforced and the consequences for disobedience.

The New York Times is being exposed with these articles that explain how great communism is and how capitalism has driven out country into a despair of inequality among the different classes of people. 

What the New York Times is saying here is they believe this old Soviet motto, that is the founding principle of communism established by Marx and Lenin, ''To each according to one needs and From each according to ones abilities'', is equitable and sustaining form of government.

Given what the Times is writing about, ignoring the catastrophic events in real time in Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba, and this ideology's tortured history of death and destruction around the world were ever it was forced on a population, we have to believe that the once vaulted 'news paper of record' is now no more then red socialist rag, a mouth piece for the expansion of progressive socialist liberalism.

As the New York Times is referred to as the 'Gray Lady of Journalism', a center piece for truth has now taken a new track for truth, they are telling us unabashedly what they truly believe is the truth.

And sadly, with that new truth telling, the once proud 'Gray Lady' has now become just a whore for the Left's 'new world order' of progressive socialist liberalism.

The New York Times Continues Its Tradition of Whitewashing Communism
Jarrett Stepman / /    

It seems communism is back in vogue at The New York Times. A sad but common issue in the modern West is that progressives have created a fanciful and distorted picture of socialism to make it seem like an intriguing alternative to American-style capitalism. Ikea socialism—with Sweden as the model—is an utterly distorted, but at least understandable, example for leftists to trot out as a demonstration of success.

And it’s even a bit amusing how they try to dance around the fact that Venezuela—which is utterly collapsing and egregiously abusing human rights—is a socialist country they praised just 10 years ago.

 Socialism Has Destroyed Venezuela
But The New York Times now has actually found a way to create fanciful notions of Soviet-style authoritarianism—and whimsical tales of its influence in America—in a new section dedicated to the “Red Century,” which explores “the history and legacy of communism, 100 years after the Russian Revolution.”

Romanticized Tyranny
While some of the pieces explore the horrors and failures of communist rule, others delve into topics that would seem funny if the subject matter weren’t so horrifying. For instance, the Times ran what can aptly be described as a “puff piece” on Vladimir Lenin, the man who led the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and is linked to the death and murder of millions of people.

The article, titled “Lenin’s Eco-Warriors,” paints the man as some kind of Siberian John Muir, and incredibly concludes that leaving “landscapes on this planet where humans do not tread” was the Soviet dictator’s “legacy.”

As absurd as that piece was, the Times managed to outdo itself with another article on, no joke, “Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism.” This piece is an idealized account of how life under an absolutist government could be liberating and possibly a better model for the feminist movement.
The author wrote:
Those comrades’ insistence on government intervention may seem heavy-handed to our postmodern sensibilities, but sometimes necessary social change—which soon comes to be seen as the natural order of things—needs an emancipation proclamation from above.
The absurdly romanticized account of life under tyrannical government explains little of the hopelessness of a system where an individual has no hope and no future. These examples certainly weren’t the first, or the worst, instances of the Times engaging in communist revisionism. One of the most egregious examples of “fake news” in the mid-20th century was conducted by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Walter Duranty in the 1930s.

Fake News
Duranty, who was the Times’ Moscow bureau chief, wrote a series of glowing pieces about the USSR’s policies under General Secretary Josef Stalin in 1931. While millions of people were starving in Ukraine, Duranty reported back that things were going swimmingly under the communist regime despite a few bumps in the road. “Enemies and foreign critics can say what they please,” Duranty wrote. “Weaklings and despondents at home may groan under the burden, but the youth and strength of the Russian people is essentially at one with the Kremlin’s program, believes it worthwhile and supports it, however hard be the sledding.”

He attacked reports that portrayed the Soviet policies in a negative light as “malignant propaganda.”
Though the total number of deaths due to forced starvation in the Holodomor is unknown, estimates are generally at least 3 million from 1932 to 1933. Despite his blatant misreporting, Duranty was never stripped of his Pulitzer and has still been listed on the Times’ honor roll.

It would be good on The New York Times if it ran a piece about Duranty’s egregious reporting and disinformation campaign that gave Americans a distorted picture of communist reality, but, alas, that hasn’t happened amid the various fables about socialist “successes.”

It may seem easy to dismiss The New York Times accounts as eyerolling fantasies of the left trying to defend a broken ideology, but the danger of this historical revisionism is real.

Dangerous Historical Fantasy
A worrying study sponsored by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation found that millennials are generally clueless about communism. “Just 37 percent of millennials had a ‘very unfavorable’ view of communism, compared to 57 percent of Americans overall,” according to a Daily Signal report. Perhaps even worse, a full third of millennials say they think that more people were killed under former President George W. Bush than under Stalin.

Watch video :

Historical ignorance of communism’s crimes is real, and ultimately dangerous.

‘Communism for Kids’ Turns Deadly Ideology Into a Fairy Tale
As The New York Times joins with others to peddle a warped image of what communism is really about, generations that have never witnessed its horror may be lulled into buying the clich├ęd line that “real communism has never been tried.”

As historian Sean McMeekin wrote in his book “The Russian Revolution,” after communism’s “century of well-catalogued disasters … no one should have the excuse of ignorance.”

Communist revival is growing in Western countries even as it is nearly extinct in the countries it was tried. This is folly fueled by historical blindness. “Today’s Western socialists, dreaming of a world where private property and inequality are outlawed, where rational economic development is planned by far-seeing intellectuals, should be careful what they wish for,” McMeekin wrote. “They may just get it.”

Monday, August 21, 2017

Apple CEO Tim Cook Donates to SPLC : Mr Cook's Support Questioned?

Does Apple's CEO Tim Cook really believe that the Southern Poverty Law Center is founded as an organization to support the rule of law? Really?? Given all of the information that is available to him to make a logical and informed decision to give money and use his company to support a known criminal organization like the SPLC, doesn't compute.

Or does it. Is Tim Cook just another progressive socialist liberal democrat that is willing to support the defeat of any Republican or Conservative that might support organizations that are in opposition to his core beliefs, even when those that are associated with the SPLC have committed attempted murder?

I guess the hand writing is on the wall for Mr Cook, 'you are known by the company you keep'.

In Misguided Response to Charlottesville, Apple Donates to Liberal Group That Endangers Conservatives
Katrina Trinko / /    

In trying to fight racism—a laudable goal—Apple CEO Tim Cook has made a huge mistake by choosing to donate $1 million to the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that smears some conservative groups as “hate groups.” “What occurred in Charlottesville has no place in our country. Hate is a cancer, and left unchecked it destroys everything in its path,” Cook wrote in an email to Apple employees Wednesday announcing the donation, according to BuzzFeed.
Cook continued:
Apple will be making contributions of $1 million each to the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League. We will also match two-for-one our employees’ donations to these and several other human rights groups, between now and September 30.
In the coming days, iTunes will offer users an easy way to join us in directly supporting the work of the SPLC.

But the Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t just blast neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups as “hate groups.” It also smears groups like Family Research Council and Alliance Defending Freedom, two socially conservative organizations that have bravely advocated traditional marriage, as “hate groups.” There is no equivalence between the actions and views of a KKK supporter and a traditional marriage supporter.

Yet that equivalence is exactly what the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “hate groups” list promotes, by listing groups like the American Nazi Party and Aryan Nations on the same list as Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that just won a case in front of the Supreme Court this year, and Family Research Council, a respected social conservative group.

And it’s not just social conservatives at risk: It’s anyone who disagrees with the left’s thinking who can be tarred as a hater.  In a July City Journal article, Mark Pulliam wrote:
The SPLC … also labels moderates with whom it disagrees ‘extremists’ if they deviate from its rigid political agenda, which embraces open borders, LGBT rights, and other left-wing totems. The SPLC has branded Somali-born reformer Ayaan Hirsi Ali an ‘anti-Muslimn extremist’ for her opposition to female genital mutilation and other oppressive Islamic practices, and designated the respected Family Research Council as a ‘hate group’ for its opposition to same-sex marriage.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s labels have already led to violence.

James T. Hodgkinson, the alleged shooter of Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., and others at the baseball field just this June, was a fan of the Southern Poverty Law Center on Facebook, according to Washington ExaminerHad it not been for the courageous actions of the Capitol Police, there would have been a massacre that day of the lawmakers playing baseball.

Furthermore, in 2012, Floyd Corkins, who was armed, went to the Family Research Council. “Corkins—who had chosen the research council as his target after finding it listed as an anti-gay group on the website of the Southern Poverty Law Center—had planned to stride into the building and open fire on the people inside in an effort to kill as many as possible, he told investigators, according to the court documents,” reported CNN in 2013.  He was only stopped because of the efforts of a security guard.

So when Apple donates to the Southern Poverty Law Center, it’s donating to a group whose smears of conservatives have already contributed to real violence against good people. Again: It’s laudable and understandable for Apple to respond to the events of Charlottesville by wanting to take action against racists. It was horrifying to see the footage of men in the streets of the United States shout “Jews will not replace us.” It’s unbelievable that 32-year-old Heather Heyer was killed and 19 others injured because a car was plowed into a group of counterprotesters. The driver of the car, James Alex Fields Jr., has been charged with second-degree murder.

According to Derek Weimer, who told the Associated Press he was a high school history teacher of Fields, “Once you talked to James for a while, you would start to see that sympathy towards Nazism, that idolization of Hitler, that belief in white supremacy.” (Weimer also claimed Fields had told him he had been diagnosed with schizophrenia.)

As Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Saturday in a statement, “The violence and deaths in Charlottesville strike at the heart of American law and justice. When such actions arise from racial bigotry and hatred, they betray our core values and cannot be tolerated.”

We should push back against the hateful actions in Charlottesville—the actions of the Nazi and KKK sympathizers, the white supremacists, and yes, the actions of Antifa as well—and it’s commendable that Apple’s Cook wants to do so.  But unfortunately, in choosing the Southern Poverty Law Center, Cook is promoting an alternate hate-filled agenda targeting social conservatives and others.

Antifa Alt-Left Progressive Agitators : Chaos And Conflict

It nice to know just who all is involved in attacking our civil society with malicious violence to gain power at the expense of the rule of law. But then it's not about the law or who might be committing crimes against the people, this is all about groups waging war against each other to show who has the most power to control events.

And the scarcest part in all this is sinister people and groups hiding behind the curtain of secrecy are funding much of the riots and destruction of public property like the billionaire George Soros, an international terrorist. Why does the media hide this involvement by criminals like Soros from scrutiny? Does the media have a stake in supporting alt-left organizations that commit violence to gain power?

And when Republicans like Mitt Romney and others that claim to be Republicans, take a stand pointing out the 'alt- right white nationalist' as the bad buys but fail to mention the alt-left progressives waging a war for reasons that have nothing to do with nationalism or fascism, but only to causes as much chaos as they can to gain power in social media and the national media, one has to wonder who the hell are the good guys?

Far-Left ‘Antifa’ Agitators on the Rise in the Age of Trump
Ken McIntyre / / Kevin Mooney / /

When self-described anti-fascists showed up in force Saturday to oppose a rally of white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia, some of them turned violent, according to media reports and eyewitness accounts.
President Donald Trump did not specify radicals who operate under the banner of Antifa, an abbreviation for anti-fascist or anti-fascist action, when he said Tuesday that “both sides” bore responsibility for the violence and bloodshed that left three dead and dozens injured.

It is hard to know at this juncture how many of the hundreds of counterprotesters considered themselves affiliated with Antifa. Nor is it clear how many of them were among those who squared off against the white supremacists marching in downtown Charlottesville, trading punches and blows, some with lengths of wood. The full facts await the findings of a Justice Department investigation of the Charlottesville violence announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

“Antifa is a coalition of hyperviolent activists who are far-left anarchists or communists,” said Matthew Vadum, senior vice president at the Washington-based Capital Research Center. “They could be considered domestic terrorists. They are not legitimate actors in the democratic process.”
Fox News Channel’s Doug McKelway, on the scene in Charlottesville, was among reporters who described individuals in clashing groups wearing helmets and padded clothes, carrying shields, and brandishing lengths of wood.

Initially, the network of radical activists did not attract as much media attention as the white nationalists and neo-Nazis they were confronting, but this has begun to change.
This short video from the pro-Trump outlet Very Fake News, which contains strong language, documents some Antifa members’ behavior toward media organizations reporting on events in Charlottesville:

Watch the video :

The liberal media outlet Slate, however, reported that clergy and other peaceful protesters of the white supremacists credited Antifa activists with trying to protect them from violence.

Absurd Suggestions
There is no cohesive, centralized structure to Antifa. Instead, it appears to be set up as a network of anarchists, communists, and socialists who say they are opposed to “racism, sexism, homophobia, and capitalism” and take inspiration from a European movement in the 1930s called Anti-Fascist Action, as The Economist explains in a brief profile:
Antifa groups are not as widespread as they might seem. Their lack of coordination and endorsement of violence hinders their appeal as a mass movement. In America, their ongoing guerrilla war with the alt-right has helped bring more publicity to white supremacists and nationalists while doing little to advance their (somewhat unclear) cause.
Prior to its clashes with white supremacists in Virginia, Antifa—often rendered in lowercase as antifa–gained some notoriety June 4 after confronting Trump supporters in Portland, Oregon, which resulted in violent clashes.

Antifa allegedly had a hand in threatening violence against Portland’s 82nd Avenue of Roses Business Association if the business group allowed the Multnomah County Republican Party to participate in its annual Rose Festival. The business group canceled the event.

Arthur Milikh, associate director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal in an interview that Antifa has avoided spelling out its positions and goals in an effort to evade scrutiny.

“They have been very careful to avoid laying out what precisely they desire to obtain, or what fascism means,” Milikh said. “Whatever one may think of President Trump, his rhetoric, or his policies, it’s absurd to suggest that he intends to or could dissolve Congress, cancel elections, shred the Constitution, and name himself dictator, as a fascist would.”
Writing in The Atlantic, Peter Beinart—who has written before about Antifa in an essay titled “The Rise of the Violent Left”—suggests that adherents are hard to pin down, noting:
Antifa activists are sincere. They genuinely believe that their actions protect vulnerable people from harm. Cornel West claims they did so in Charlottesville. But for all of Antifa’s supposed anti-authoritarianism, there’s something fundamentally authoritarian about its claim that its activists—who no one elected—can decide whose views are too odious to be publicly expressed. That kind of undemocratic, illegitimate power corrupts.
Beinart points to Portland’s Rose Festival confrontation as an example.

Muzzling Milo at UC Berkeley
Antifa has been connected with other far-left organizations such as one with the unwieldy name of Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, & Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary, or BAMN.

Antifa activists sometimes stand out from the pack by dressing “head to toe” in black, a style and tactic known as “Black Bloc.” Antifa has operated with a heightened profile since Trump’s election. During official festivities surrounding Inauguration Day in Washington, Antifa was part of anti-Trump protests and engaged in destruction of property, The Washington Post reported.
In February, Antifa activists took part in fiery protests at and around the University of California, Berkeley.

In Photos, the Latest Example of Liberal ‘Tolerance’

Antifa joined with others to aggressively oppose a scheduled appearance at UC Berkeley by Milo Yiannopoulos, a British-born libertarian commentator, making Antifa part of the movement to suppress free speech on college campuses.
CNN reported:
Black-clad protesters wearing masks threw commercial-grade fireworks and rocks at police. Some even hurled Molotov cocktails that ignited fires. They also smashed windows of the student union center on the Berkeley campus where the Yiannopoulos event was to be held.
UC Berkeley, which reported $100,000 in damages, canceled that speech.

‘Stir Up the Debate’
In many respects, Antifa appears to exist mostly as a conduit for social media organizing strategies, as opposed to a single organization. Using Facebook, Twitter, and other tools, the network attracts participants in its activities, including its role in the Berkeley protest and the counterprotest in Charlottesville. The Economist notes:
The biggest impact of American Antifa groups has been to stir up the debate on free speech through their insistence on preventing so-called fascists from expressing themselves, such as at Berkeley in February, where Antifa groups staged violent protests against Milo Yiannopoulos, an alt-right provocateur. Shutting down speech is hardly anti-fascist.
Trump Protesters Vow to ‘Shut Down’ Inauguration

Coverage of Antifa appears to focus narrowly on its opposition to white supremacist and neo-Nazi organizations, but a significant number of Antifa members appear to regard Trump and the Republican Party as fascist and racist. A growing number of videos supporting and attacking Antifa pop up on YouTube and other social media outlets, including this example, a 10-minute video in which two masked young members call themselves socialists.

In an Aug. 8 post about Antifa on the Capital Research Center’s website, four days before the violence in Charlottesville, Jacob Grandstaff wrote:
In Sacramento, California in June 2016, hundreds of Antifa rioters attacked 30-odd members of the white nationalist Traditional Workers Party (TWP). Although Capital Research Center does not support the goals of the TWP, the group had obtained a lawful permit to demonstrate when Antifa protesters violently refused to to allow the group to express its First Amendment rights. In the ensuing melee, 14 people received stab wounds, and two were sent to the hospital in critical condition (they both survived).
Conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro posted a video Thursday questioning the left’s embrace of Antifa, which he calls “a violent, communist, anarchist organization”:

Watch the video ;

‘Vibrating With Anger’
Antifa’s source of funds is as murky as its leadership. The Capital Research Center’s Vadum told The Daily Signal that the Alliance for Global Justice, associated with hedge fund manager and leftist financier George Soros, “acts as fiscal sponsor for Antifa groups.” Heritage’s Milikh described two main tactics the left has employed against the Trump administration.

“Since the left currently controls neither Congress nor the White House,” he said, “they decided they will try to rule the public mind and preserve their own power and respectability through two means.”
The first tactic is to propagate and circulate accusations, Milikh said. “Right now, they have no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government,” he said. “But they have made it their biggest issue, which is used to undermine the president’s powers by turning public opinion against him.”

The second tactic is “deploying well-organized and well-funded protests on the ground,” Milikh said, adding:
Protests are often successful for the left because a willing press often assists their cause by leaving the impression that the entire country—not just a handful of protesters—is vibrating with anger. This in turn teaches viewers the lesson that the bigger and angrier the crowd, the more just their cause. This tactic aims to prevent serious, reasoned public deliberation and debate.
‘Cultural Resistance’
The New York City branch of the Antifa network says on its website that it is keen on using social media to galvanize support. “NYC ANTIFA is an autonomous blog that is trying through different media (news, videos, and information in general) [to] help to build, defend, educate, and create an effective cultural resistance against fascism,” the website says.

The New York group recently marked its third annual International Day of Solidarity With Antifascist Prisoners, an event detailed and described on its website:
The July 25 International Day of Solidarity With Antifascist Prisoners originated in 2014 as the Day of Solidarity with Jock Palfreeman, an Australian man serving a 20-year sentence in Bulgaria for defending two Romani men being attacked by fascist football hooligans. Whether acting as individuals or as part of larger organized demonstrations, this is the kind of bravery and solidarity which defines antifascist actions against the forces of hate.
Since the day of solidarity last year, we have seen this spirit all over the world—in Indonesia, Czech Republic, Brazil, Poland, England, Greece, the United States, France, Syria, Australia, Japan, and all points in between.
Among the fringe groups on the right participating in the so-called “Unite the Right” event in Charlottesville, as chronicled on Wikipedia, were clubs of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, the neo-Confederate League of the South, the National Policy Institute, and the National Socialist Movement. Other involved groups include the Ku Klux Klan, the Fraternal Order of Alt-Knights, the Traditionalist Workers Party, Vanguard America, the American Guard, the Virginia Minutemen Militia, the Nationalist Front, and Anti-Communist Action.

Among liberal and leftist groups identified on Wikipedia as on hand in Charlottesville were Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Anti-Racist Action, the Democratic Socialists of America, the Workers World Party, the Revolutionary Communist Party, the Industrial Workers of the World, the Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Council, Redneck Revolt, and Showing Up for Racial Justice.

President Wins Election With Only 40% Of The Vote : Unprecedented Death Threats

Nothing new under the sun it seems. The democrats will always be democrats and the single worst source of moral and ethical corruption in our country. 

Now the democrats are called 'progressives' to hide their history of misinformation, duplicity and subservient capitulation to their own needs for power and control.

But it's only now that the progressive liberal democrats believe they must use hate and violence to obtain what they want, proving beyond any doubt that might have lingered, they don't give a dam for the country, it's Constitution or it's people.

It's who they are and always will be. It's 2017 and their collective history is on display in real time.

The President won the election with less than 40% of the popular vote but had the majority of electoral vote.  The Republican Party had put forth a candidate to win several crucial states that could swing the electoral college.
The election was a bitter one with the Democratic Party fractured between two candidates.
The incoming President received so many death threats that he chose to arrive in Washington in secrecy. The security for the inauguration was the tightest ever with troops stationed on buildings throughout the day.
This was an unprecedented amount of protection for any President-elect. Many members of Congress chose not to attend the ceremony. 
Despite all this Republican  Abraham Lincoln was sworn in as our 16th president.

Sunday, August 20, 2017

Export/Import Bank Needs To Be Shuttered : Trump's Nominee A Good One!

WOW - if democrats are joining with corporations in an endeavor like approving to extend a fraud like the Export/Import bank, and approved by a progressive socialist liberal democrats like Chuck Schumer, one has to understand the project has to be corrupt and the taxpayer are in for a real screwing. When has anything the progressive socialist liberal democrats supported and are involve in and actively advocating have been beneficial to the general public?

Health care? Immigration? National defense? Individual freedom? Justice? The rule of law? Education? Civil Rights? Crime? etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

There are many more of course, but it isn't necessary. The cast has be set and the public must decide to extend the activity of these self-serving, sanctimonious political disciples of money rent seekers, or shut the thing down saving the taxpayer $billions of dollars.

Corporations, Democrats Join Forces to Block Trump Nominee to Run Export-Import Bank
Fred Lucas / /    

The business community of South Carolina is pressuring Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott to oppose President Donald Trump’s nomination of a critic of the Export-Import Bank to run the institution. Thus far, the most vocal critics of the nomination of former Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., have been large national business groups and Senate Democrats. Garrett, while serving as a member of Congress, opposed the bank as a form of crony capitalism.

The Export-Import Bank is frequently derided by conservatives as “the Bank of Boeing.” General Electric and Caterpillar are also major beneficiaries of the federally subsidized loans. More than half of the loans went to those three companies, critics note. “Boeing and GE are in the state, but the reality is, the suppliers to Boeing and GE are small manufacturers, who indirectly benefit from the Export-Import Bank,” Ted Pitts, South Carolina Chamber of Commerce president, told The Daily Signal on Thursday.

The National Association of Manufacturers, the Business Roundtable, and other industry groups oppose Garrett’s nomination since he opposes the mission of the bank. The South Carolina chamber is one of the few state groups to vocally come out against the nomination, issuing a strong public statement in July. Scott is a member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
“We have communicated with both senators and made it clear where the South Carolina business community stands, but we haven’t heard back from them definitively,” Pitts said in a phone interview. Neither the offices of Graham nor Scott responded to multiple phone and email inquiries on Thursday. Scott is a conservative, while Graham is a moderate Republican. The Senate is currently in recess.

A confirmation hearing for Garrett hasn’t been scheduled yet, said Rob Sumner, spokesman for Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, in an email. The committee will make an announcement when a date is set.

Garrett and other members of Congress supported the bank’s closure in the past. If confirmed, he could not shutter the bank—which would take an act of Congress. But he could bring needed reforms, said Andy Roth, vice president of government affairs for the Club for Growth, a conservative free-market advocacy group. “The nomination is in line with the president’s ‘drain the swamp’ agenda,” Roth told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “At least Garrett can bring transparency to a lot of the bad deals that have gone through under a shroud of secrecy, covered by taxpayer money.”

The Club for Growth and seven other conservative groups, including Heritage Action for America, signed on to a letter to Crapo on Aug. 7 denouncing the opposition to Garrett’s nomination. The letter says:
On behalf of the following organizations representing millions of Americans, we write to strongly denounce the special-interest business groups that are urging the White House to drop the appointment of Scott Garrett as the next president of the Export-Import Bank. …
As recently as 2015, the Bank had almost 800 fraud claims levied against it. There have been 85 indictments, 48 criminal judgments, and 66 years of prison sentences brought to bear because of the Bank’s activities. Letting special interests continue to control the Bank’s leadership and operations will only extend this disastrously corrupt track record.
A preferred solution would be closing the bank entirely, rather than just having a critic running it, Diane Katz, senior research fellow in regulatory policy at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “The bank is defined by cronyism. Could Garrett pursue reforms? Certainly, but he can’t impose them unilaterally,” Katz said. “It’s better to have a critic than to have a cheerleader.”
She added that many are upset by Trump’s reversal—having supported the elimination of the bank as a candidate, to deciding to keep it in April. “I don’t want to imply that Garrett is a good substitute for eliminating the bank,” Katz said. “The critics I know and respect who want the bank shut down are not appeased by the appointment of Garrett.”

In April, Trump nominated Garrett to be president of the controversial bank and former Rep. Spencer Bachus, an Alabama Republican and bank supporter, to be a board member. Garrett was a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus and delivered a 2015 floor speech in opposition to the bank.
“The Export-Import Bank transformed the role of government from a disinterested referee in the economy into a biased actor that uses your taxpayer dollars to tilt the scales in favor of its friends,” he said in the speech.

The bank’s charter lapsed in June 2015, but it was reopened by December of that year. However, it doesn’t have a quorum on the board, with only two of five positions filled. In the absence of a quorum, the bank cannot approve deals worth more than $10 million.
In a joint statement by nine Democratic senators, including Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York and Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, the ranking member of the banking committee, Democrats said:
So we’re supposed to trust that someone who has extensive history undermining and disparaging the Bank will now support and lead it, even though he doesn’t seem to believe his own words? We need a nominee who truly believes in the mission of the Bank and who wants to support and defend an agency that has a more than 80-year history supporting American jobs and businesses.

The New World Order of Progressivism : What Is Fascism?

Isn't just easier to be obedient to my demands?
If I say it's so, then it is so - don't argue or debate the question. There can not be any other answer other then what I believe is the correct answer.

Isn't just easier to agree with me then run the risk of being attacked morally, ethically and even physically for having an opinion that is different then the one I just told you is the correct one?

How many times have I told you what is correct and what is not correct behavior? How many times do I have repeat myself before you believe what I say is right and correct?

Maybe if I strike you about the head and shoulders you can begin to understand there is no alternative, no compromise, no debate. What is say is final and if you persist in having an opposing view of the events, then you and yours will be destroyed.

See, when we level the playing field so everyone thinks and acts accordingly, society will finally become a paradise of social equality and diversity. That is, ''To each according to one's needs and from each according to one's ability''.

Europe Is A Sanctuary for Terrorists : America's Sanctuarys Are Next?

The sign says 'the bridge is out', find another route. Easy enough, right?
There are sign post along the road of life for us to follow that will direct us to ur destination.

But if the directions aren't followed because the person can't read and understand what the sign post tell them, then the road they take will not lead to a satisfactory conclusion of their journey.

And of course the first thing they will say upon finding they are lost in trouble is, 'how did this happen?' They have no clue.

Not understanding how the real world works to guide most of us to satisfactory outcomes, will enviably cause the unaware and gullible person chaos and conflict in their lives.

All that is required to move forward in a civil society is to pay attention, and then use some common sense when deciding on a course of action. That is, seeing the signs along the road and then using them to accomplish your journey just makes good sense and is logical.

Not obeying the signs can have consequences that will be life changing. Why is this so difficult for so many to understand?

Saturday, August 19, 2017

Sessions Moves Against Sanctuary Cites : No Tolerance For Progressvie Ideology

In a real world, why would a city go our of it's way to protect criminals from established and procedural federal law enforcement? The only reason I can find is the city officials do not posses the mental capacity to understand how the real world works, or for that matter care.

It is about the invasive disease that is the psychosis of a progressive socialist liberal ideology that doesn't allow rational behavior of it's victims. The victims know beyond a doubt they cannot relent to common sense or logic as the mental conflict that would occur would be detrimental to their health.
And of course, the detrimental consequences, retaliation from other victims of this disease that would come in response for their acquiescence to the will of others would be total.

That allowing the city to begin to end the destruction to it's citizens from pestilence and murder is of no consequence to city officials. Keeping the faith must be total or fellow followers will look else where for support and leadership.

What is transpiring in these cities like Chicago begs exceptional understanding as most of us in the trenches cannot fathom people that lack a total sense of realty. People that act strictly on a failed ideology regardless of the consequences shows contempt for it's citizens or worse, they don't care what happens to the citizens as long as they keep the faith.

Sessions Defends Withholding Funding: No Tolerance for Loss of ‘Innocent Lives’ in Sanctuary Cities
Fred Lucas / /    

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Wednesday that a sanctuary city is a “trafficker, smuggler, or predator’s best friend,” specifically taking a whack at Chicago, the first sanctuary city to sue the Justice Department for withholding federal grants.
Sessions heralded Miami-Dade County, the first jurisdiction to reverse its sanctuary policy after President Donald Trump took office, as an example of how localities can work with federal officials who enforce immigration law.

“I know that Miami-Dade will be an example of the good that comes from following the law. We have already seen that: The same Independence Day weekend when Chicago suffered more than 100 shootings and 15 homicides, Miami-Dade also had a historic number of shooting deaths—zero,” Sessions said during his remarks at PortMiami.

Sanctuary cities endanger not only their own citizens and police but federal immigration officers, Sessions said, yet “have the gall to feign outrage when their police departments lose federal funds as a direct result of their malfeasance.” Sanctuary cities are municipalities that opt against working with federal law enforcement on applying immigration law to illegal immigrants.

“So to all ‘sanctuary’ jurisdictions across the country, I say this: Miami-Dade is doing it, and so can you,” Sessions said, adding:
Work with us to enforce a lawful immigration system that keeps us safe and serves our national interest. The Department of Justice will not concede a single block or street corner in the United States to lawlessness or crime. Nor will we tolerate the loss of innocent life because a handful of jurisdictions believe that they are above the law.
The attorney general’s remarks come two days after California joined the cities of San Francisco and Chicago in suing the Justice Department for saying it would withhold certain law enforcement grants from sanctuary jurisdictions. The separate lawsuits claim the Justice Department lacks authority from Congress to put conditions on the use of the funds.

The Trump administration’s policy on sanctuary cities includes requiring localities to give 48 hours’ notice to federal immigration officials before releasing an illegal immigrant jailed for another crime. The policy allows time for such prisoners to be taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE. Sessions also credited Lansing, Michigan, and Westchester County, New York, for reversing their policies.

“The Trump administration cannot manipulate federal grant fund requirements to pressure states, counties, or municipalities to enforce federal immigration laws,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said Monday. “By placing unconstitutional immigration enforcement conditions on public safety grants, the Trump administration is threatening to harm a range of law enforcement initiatives across California,” Becerra, a Democrat, said. “This is pure intimidation intended to force our law enforcement into changing the policies and practices that they have determined promote public safety.”

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a Democrat, has been an outspoken critic of the administration’s policy. “So if voters in Chicago are concerned about losing federal grant money: Call your mayor,” Sessions said, adding: “Rather than acknowledge soaring murder counts or the heartbreaking stories told by victims’ families, Chicago’s mayor has chosen to sue the federal government.”

The Trump administration contends its policy on sanctuary jurisdictions simply puts Justice Department grant-making in compliance with existing federal law. The administration argues that, in a danger to public safety, sanctuary cities release thousands of criminals each year, resulting in preventable murders and other violent crimes.

A Harvard-Harris poll found that 80 percent of voters agree that local authorities should report to federal agents when they come in contact with illegal immigrants.

The issue isn’t entirely an either-or situation, since many localities across the country want to work with federal immigration officials but feel constrained by certain state policies, said Jonathan Thompson, executive director of the National Sheriffs’ Association.

The National Sheriffs’ Association has worked with the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security to develop a plan to make local jurisdictions safer from both crime and litigation.
“The overwhelming number of sheriffs across the country want to adhere to the rule of law,” Thompson told The Daily Signal in a phone interview: But disagreements between state and local jurisdictions carry risk. It can be financial roulette. If you free someone, an offender could harm another victim. If you hold them, the ACLU will come in and sue, and probably win at the district court level. … We want to legally and constitutionally transfer these detainees over to ICE.
Strings typically come attached to federal funds, Thompson noted, citing federal highway dollars that historically have been tied to states’ adopting speed limit, seat belt, and drunken driving laws.
Sessions was careful to praise local law enforcement, saying:
Local police are not the problem. They risk their lives each day in service of the law and the people they protect. The problem is these sanctuary jurisdictions tie our police officers’ hands and endanger federal immigration officers as well when they are forced to pursue these criminal aliens outside of the jails and prisons. Yet these sanctuary jurisdictions have the gall to feign outrage when their police departments lose federal funds as a direct result of their malfeasance.
“The people of Miami-Dade know that the rule of law guarantees equality and opportunity,” Sessions said. “Protecting this guarantee is why the government of Miami-Dade made its decision to work with federal law enforcement, not against us.”

Miami-Dade was not always a model, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies. It previously was identified as one of 10 jurisdictions that could lose funding, but developed a plan to work closely with federal officials.
“This shows that federal government sanctions, in many cases, can change policies,” Vaughan told The Daily Signal. “I wish they would do it for the right reason, because sanctuary policies are a threat to public safety. But sometimes money talks. Other cities want to be martyrs to their sanctuary policy.”

Of about 300 sanctuary towns, cities, and counties, “a handful are truly egregious,” Vaughan said, naming Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and New York. Smaller jurisdictions in Massachusetts, Oregon, and Washington state, she said, also are adamant about not working with ICE.

Sanctuary jurisdictions that sue the federal government to gain federal funds don’t likely have a case, said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. “This is not a coercion of local law enforcement to enforce federal law, it’s simply asking a city to notify the federal government if and when it releases a criminal illegal immigrant,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal. “The lawsuits border on frivolous.”

Corporate Executives Retreat in Fear of Retaliation? : Social Media Attacking Capitalism?

It seems the corporate executives are doing what they think is necessary to protect their industries and themselves, their families, from being attacked on social media or worse, physically attacked by organized mobs where they live or in public.

I believe many of these executives that have opted out of Trump's advisory council fear retaliation for taking a stand on Capitalism and it's most foundational principle of making a profit in an open market place. This is something that radical, if not all progressive socialist liberals find reprehensible and must end.

What a fine place we now live in, our great country being over run by domestic terrorists posing as liberators of inequality and hate. It's the 'brave new world' of radical progressive socialism where everyone can fail together.

Oh, except the ones operating the levers of power from behind the scenes of chaos and conflict, the terrorists in the streets, and unscrupulous and subservient politicians that have willingly perpetrated this sinister religious ideology of hate for individual freedom and liberty on a unsuspecting, gullible and what appears to be an easily duped public.

But is it just fear of these monsters in the streets and acquiescent politicians in Washington that are now forcing these executives to retreat into their safe places, or is it that maybe the politicians, and many of the people are just ready to be controlled, just ready to take a knee rather the taking a stand for what they have to know is the right thing to do? Time is not on our side as more and more supposedly right thinking citizens everyday shrink from their responsibility for the safety of the nation as founded.

And given what is in process in the radical progressive media and from the socialist liberal left, tyranny of the few rules the day. Again, as I have stated on many other occasions, Edmund Burke said it best, ''All that's necessary for tyranny to exist is for good men to do nothing''. And from what we see happening around the conty tyranny is winning.

Where Is the Corporate Disavowal of Black Lives Matter?
Michelle Malkin / /    

Liberal business executives are leaping like lemmings from President Donald Trump’s manufacturing advisory council. Good riddance. These silly string-spined CEOs have sided with social justice agitators, Beltway media enablers, and Democratic resistance knuckleheads who believe Trump was wrong to condemn violence and hatred on all sides of the political spectrum.

Never mind that of the four people arrested after the violent outbreak in Charlottesville, Virginia, this weekend, two were identified with the white nationalist movement and the other two were left-wing “Antifa” counter protesters. One of those radical leftists is the man identified as having reportedly punched a female reporter for the D.C.-based newspaper The Hill.

But since that doesn’t fit the national media narrative of journalists allegedly being victimized by right-wing incitements to violence, mum’s the word from corporate media executives and the rest of the preening CEOs.

Merck CEO Kenneth C. Frazier claimed he stepped down from the Trump business panel because he felt “a responsibility to take a stand against intolerance and extremism.” But Frazier, who served on President Barack Obama’s Export Council, felt no equivalent responsibility to take a stand against intolerance and extremism when the White House invited leaders from the violence-inciting Black Lives Matter movement for a forum on policing in July 2016.

The invitation was a grievous affront to law enforcement officers and their families across the country outraged at the deadly ambushes committed against cops in Dallas and Baton Rouge that summer, along with several other forgotten cop killings fueled by Black Lives Matter-linked hate and vengeance. Who remembers the slaying of Kentucky State Trooper Joseph Ponder by Black Lives Matter marcher and “Hands up, don’t shoot” slogan-spreader Joseph Thomas Johnson-Shanks in September 2015?

At least 11 police have been shot dead and at least nine more wounded by Black Lives Matter protesters, activists, and/or supporters to date.

One of the surviving policemen in the Baton Rouge massacre filed suit last month against Black Lives Matter and laid out the case against its leaders, who “not only, incited the violence against police in retaliation for the death of black men shot by police, but also did nothing to dissuade the ongoing violence and injury to police. In fact, they justified the violence as necessary to the movement and war.”

The permanently disabled cop’s lawsuit recounts escalating riots, arson, and plundering after the police-involved deaths of Michael Brown and Freddie Gray in Ferguson, Missouri, through the ambushes in Dallas and Baton Rouge, and leading up to the Obama administration’s embrace of Black Lives Matter’s leaders.

After the meeting, Black Lives Matter leader DeRay McKesson responded to questions about his movement’s culpability for inciting violence by asserting that his “people take to the streets as a last resort. … So when I think about anything that happens when people are in the street, I always start by saying, ‘People should not have had to have been there in the first place.'”

As the lawyers for the Baton Rouge cop, who must remain anonymous to protect his family, properly concluded: “These statements were a ratification and justification of the violence.” But instead of recriminations, the militants of Black Lives Matter enjoy continued praise and coddling from corporate America. Tech execs from Netflix, YouTube, and Google all donated to McKesson’s failed mayoral bid in Baltimore.

Business execs have been coughing up untold hundreds of millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter and related causes, funneled through left-wing nonprofits such as the Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy.

On Tuesday, Walmart executive Doug McMillon wagged his finger at Trump, urging “elected officials to do their part to promote a more just, tolerant, and diverse society.” This from the head of a retail giant that only recently stopped selling racially divisive, anti-cop taunting, violence-glamorizing T-shirts that bragged: “Bulletproof: Black Lives Matter.”

And the disavowal double standards beat goes on.
Editor’s note: President Donald Trump disbanded two business advisory councils on Wednesday, Aug. 16.

Mainstream Media Reporting On Hate : But They Don't Look In The Mirror

What we have now in our country is essentially the mainstream media can be considered as a domestic terrorist group that has dedicated themselves to the destruction of our way of life by destroying America's legacy of our guaranteed individual freedom to chose our own destiny, and the rule of law that protects it as laid out in our Constitution.

As events have taken place around the country of chaos and conflict, the mainstream media rolls out their tortured interpretation, even as the facts are readily available to everyone, this can only be understood by us as having to have a ''willingness to suspend disbelief''. (That's one of Hillary's best)

To believe that the media is actually reporting the news without bias as anything else other then nonsense, is to make us all just useful idiots. Meanwhile, mental professionals are taking notice of these people's derangement, fearing for their safety and the safety of others.

How the Mainstream Media Gets Hate Wrong
Ryan T. Anderson / /    

We have a problem in the United States with hate.
We saw this last week in Charlottesville, whether it be racism or anti-Semitism, whether it be the KKK or neo-Nazi. Those are hate groups, and they have no place in the United States and they should be condemned without mincing words without any equivocation.
But we have a problem when organizations label good groups as hate groups. We see this with the Southern Poverty Law Center. It’s labeling good groups that it disagrees with as hate groups.
So, it labeled the Alliance Defending Freedom, a public interest law firm that just this year won a Supreme Court case 7-2 defending religious liberty. It labeled that group as a hate group because it disagrees. It labeled the Family Research Council, a think tank here in D.C. that defends marriage and the family. It labeled that group as a hate group.

Watch the video :

Five years ago, a shooter walked in the Family Research Council and started shooting because he found it listed as a hate group on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website. CNN itself reported this fact four years ago when the shooter was convicted of domestic terrorism.
It’s irresponsible for CNN today to be simply reprinting the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate map as if it’s fact. It destroys the label of hate and it trivializes the real evil that is out there. This isn’t news. This is simply lefty propaganda.