February 2019
« Jan    
PAYPAL Donations

< If you don’t stand behind our troops, why don’t you stand in front of them.

Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.

Proud to be an American.

Salute a Veteran!

Please consider a monthly donation; Click on the PayPal Button to contribute with PayPal

Donating by PayPal is Safe and Convenient

Send Checks to: The Highlands Tea Party 4196 Smoke signal Sebring, FL 33872

All donations are greatly appreciated, Thank You & God Bless

Donations are not tax-deductible.

My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy! ~Thomas Jefferson P>

General information

THE HIGHLANDS TEA PARTY MEETING – February 28, 2019 -Pastor Umar Mulinde – Conversion from Islam




1000 Sebring Square
Sebring Florida

February 28, 2019
NOTE: This is a Thursday Evening

Pastor Umar Mulinde
Coming back to
 Highlands the day
before he heads back to Uganda, he would like to finish his story
Conversion from From Islam


March 5, 2019Dr Rich Swier –  Talk will be Uncontested Absurdities
March 12, 2019 –  Don Elwell – Highlands county Commissioner – Review of recent
Town Hall Information.

March 19, 2019 – Dr. John PrinceGovernment Intrusion in Health Care.
September 24, 2019 Karen Schoen – Knowledge is Power

Vice Chair Bob Gilmore – Talking Points
Chairman John Nelson – Talking Points

Tina Altic AFP Regional RepresentativeActivities
February 22nd –  CVA Speaker, Rick Disney debuting a
film, “The Care They’ve Earned”. 
Veterans, don’t miss this!
6:30pm, food provided
Phone Banks rest of month on Wednesday at 11:00am.

Please let myself or Bob know if you or any member is going in for
surgery, or have other issues we should put in our prayers.


February 23  Gun Show Bartow Last chance before drawing March 5th
Saturday 9:00 am till 5:00 pm

2 Helpers committed Thank you for volunteering.

We are working to make America better, the grassroots are the base
for positive change in this nation, but we all need to pitch in whether it be:

  • Working Guns Shows for raffles to raise the needed monies to run this tea party,
  • Writing letters to senators, many we try to set up for you to make it easy,
  • Sign up for NumberUSA send the faxes, they are all written, and you
    can add your comments.  It’s to easy folks let’s use it!
  • Making phone calls to Legislators, not just the ones that represent us, all on
    the list we send out.
  • Writing letters to the editors. you folks have to be the voice that fires back at
    these Left-Wing progressives in the local paper, they will only accept so many
    of my letters each month WE NEED TO SPEAK UP AND ANSWER THEIR LEFTIST
    PROGRESSIVE SPIN!.  Please Let me know by email if you send a letter.
    John Larsen Letter 1/23 – Citizens of the U.S are to be protected
    Jack Nelson Letter  1/10 – Walls vs technology: What Does America Say?
    Jack Nelson Letter 2/19 – Who reallyl had the Highest National Debt.

We need someone to write a rebuttal on the “Stop Selling guns across from the High school” letter to the editor 02/19;

What’s the issue, it’s on the weekend, school is closed!  The writer also stated “Unregulated gun shows” they are not unregulated, in fact if you are not a CC carrier, you cannot buy and take home a gun from a show, you must go through the background check. Also, if you are an individual, want to sell a gun at show walking the isle you must go to one of the dealers and have your Drives license recorded. They are very regulated.

Education is the key – This is The Tea Parties Objective!
We are a conservative, partisan, patriotic, Constitution loving organization.






WATCH: Conservatives fear new Democrat bill could lead to voter fraud

One America News Network
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 9:04 PM PT — Thursday, February 21, 2019
Democrats are pushing new legislation that conservatives claim could interfere with voting
procedures. One America’s John Hines has more from Washington.

Maduro closes Venezuela’s border

One America News Network

Maduro closes Venezuela’s border

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 6:24 AM PT — Friday, February 22, 2019
Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro is proposing drastic measures in an attempt to block aid from entering the country. On Thursday, the embattled leader threatened to completely shut down the border with Brazil, and floated the idea of doing the same with Colombia.  “The land border with Brazil will be completely and absolutely closed until further notice,” he announced. “It is better to prevent than to regret, to take all the measures for the assurance and protection of our people.”
This comes as opposition lawmakers, including self-proclaimed interim President Juan Guaido, headed to the Colombian border in buses in order to bring back humanitarian aid. However, soldiers set up roadblocks and got in scuffles with the lawmakers, so only a few vehicles managed to get close to Colombia by the end of the day.
Soldiers stand at the entrance of the Tienditas International bridge that connects Venezuela with Colombia, in Urena, Venezuela, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2019. As a showdown looms over U.S.-supplied humanitarian aid destined for Venezuela, much of it warehoused near the Tienditas International bridge, President Nicolas Maduro closed off his country’s border with Brazil, vowing on Thursday to block the emergency food and medicine that has rallied his opponents and which he claims is part of a U.S.-led coup plot. (AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd)
“Pretending that humanitarian aid is not going to reach Venezuela is an act of cruelty, we know that these soldiers are facing the same need as all the people of Venezuela — humanitarian aid comes in yes or yes,” stated Venezuelan lawmaker Delsa Solorzano.
Traffic was jammed along the border as troops tried to prevent people from crossing to bring back needed food and medicine.  “Look, this is just a taste of what happens everyday, and with violence. Nothing is achieved, we are victims of this on a daily basis.” — Jose Martinez, Venezuelan citizen
Maduro has continued to deny there is a humanitarian crisis at all, and has claimed aid efforts are just a front for the U.S. to invade the country. Protesters at the border are pushing for Maduro to let in the aid as the country faces shortages of food and medicine.  “Maduro wants to close the border, because he doesn’t want to recognize that Venezuela is in an economic crisis, a food crisis, of heath care, of medical attention — he does not want to recognize it.” —  Frank Mendonca, Venezuelan citizen
The final showdown over humanitarian aid is set for Saturday after Guaido set the deadline for the government to let in the aid.

People arrive to the Venezuela Aid Live concert on the Colombian side of Tienditas International Bridge on the outskirts of Cucuta, Colombia, on the border with Venezuela, Friday, Feb. 22, 2019. Venezuela’s power struggle is set to convert into a battle of the bands Friday when musicians demanding Nicolas Maduro allow in humanitarian aid and those supporting the embattled leader’s refusal sing in rival concerts being held at both sides of a border bridge where tons of donated food and medicine are being stored. (AP Photo/Fernando Vergara)



Man who shot at California cop previously deported, arrested but cops wouldn’t honor ICE detainer, feds say

In a graphic, 48-second clip released Wednesday, body camera footage from Sunday’s traffic stop shows Javier Hernandez Morales rolling down his window, grabbing a handgun and opening fire. Napa County sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki narrowly avoided getting struck before running to the other side of the car, firing at least 15 shots into the red Honda.
Hernandez Morales, 48, died at the scene and the deputy was not seriously injured, officials said.
Javier Hernandez Morales was arrested several times -- but authorities reportedly refused to place an ICE detainer on him.

Javier Hernandez Morales was arrested several times — but authorities reportedly refused to place an ICE detainer on him.  A second weapon – a loaded .22-caliber rifle – was found in the backseat of the Honda in addition to the pistol.

Immigration officials said Thursday that the shooting and the man’s death could have been prevented, but California’s state law prohibited them from arresting the Mexican citizen with a long rap sheet and multiple deportations.
Napa County Sheriff's Deputy Riley Jarecki can be seen in a refection on the window of a car, asking Javier Hernandez Morales to roll down the window.

Napa County Sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki can be seen in a refection on the window of a car, asking Javier Hernandez Morales to roll down the window. (Napa County Sheriff’s Office)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Hernandez Morales has been deported three times before 2011 – twice in 2007 and once again in 2010.  Since then, ICE had issued four separate detainers for him related to various arrests including suspicion of driving under the influence, battery on a peace officer and unknown probation violations.
ICE said detainers were issued to Napa County Jail in 2014, 2015 and 2016 while Sonoma County Jail received one in 2016. None of the detainers were honored by jail staff.
“This incident may have been prevented if ICE had been notified about any of the multiple times Hernandez-Morales was released from local custody over the last few years,” immigration officials said. “This is an impactful, scary example of how public safety is affected by laws or policies limiting local law enforcement agencies’ abilities to cooperate with ICE.”
The statement added: “ICE is grateful the deputy involved in this shooting was not harmed during this attack. It’s unfortunate that our law enforcement partners and the community are subjected to dangerous consequences because of inflexible state laws that protect criminal aliens.”  California’s sanctuary law – signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2017 – largely prohibits local enforcement from keeping illegal immigrants in custody at the request of federal immigration officials.
Javier Hernandez Morales quickly pulled out a weapon and fired at Napa County Sheriff's Deputy Riley on Sunday.

Javier Hernandez Morales quickly pulled out a weapon and fired at Napa County Sheriff’s Deputy Riley on Sunday. (Napa County Sheriff’s Office)

Napa County supervisors told ABC 7, which broke the news, that the county has been following state law since 2017.
“Compliance with state law is what Napa County will, in fact, follow through upon, whether there are changes in the future that change things but as of right now we do need to comply with state law and that is what our policy reflects,” Napa County Supervisor Belia Ramos told ABC 7.  Henry Wofford, a sheriff’s spokesman, told the San Francisco Chronicle that the department was alerted by immigration officials to Hernandez Morales’ status prior to ICE issuing a press release on Thursday.
“We’re not talking about that information because that’s an ICE issue,” he said. “We know our role has always been sticking with the role in the community.”


Officials said Hernandez Morales worked as a farm laborer in the area and had prior arrests for DUI, resisting arrests and possession of a firearm. There was a warrant for his arrest at the time of the shooting.  The sheriff’s department said Jarecki, who has been placed on administrative leave, was sworn in as a Napa County deputy six months ago, and her father is a sergeant in the department. Her grandfather also served with the Napa Police Department.
Fox News’ Travis Fedschun contributed to this report.

Coast Guard officer ordered to jail, accused of being ‘domestic terrorist’

Coast Guard lieutenant who authorities say espoused white nationalist views and compiled a hit list of Democratic lawmakers and prominent media personalities should be held without bail for at least two weeks while federal prosecutors continue to investigate his activities, a judge ruled Thursday.

Lt. Christopher Paul Hasson, 49, was arrested Friday in the parking garage of the Coast Guard’s Washington headquarters on drug and gun charges. Federal agents recovered 15 guns and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition from Hasson’s Maryland apartment.

Prosecutors alleged in court documents filed Wednesday that Hasson had compiled a spreadsheet of so-called “traitors” that included House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and presidential hopefuls including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris. Also mentioned were such figures as MSNBC’s Chris Hayes and Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Chris Cuomo and Van Jones.

Investigators say Hasson repeatedly studied a manifesto authored by Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian right-wing extremist who killed 77 people in a 2011 bomb-and-shooting rampage. Prosecutor Jennifer Sykes claimed Thursday that Hasson would also log onto his government computer during work and spend hours searching for information on such people as the Unabomber, the Virginia Tech gunman and anti-abortion bomber Eric Rudolph. Hasson also allegedly Googled topics like “most liberal senators,” “best place in dc to see congress people,” and “civil war if trump impeached”

Prosecutors’ motion for pre-trial detention included extracts from a 2017 draft email in which Hasson wrote that he was “dreaming of a way to kill almost every last person on the earth.”

Also, Hasson sent himself a draft letter in 2017 that he had written to a neo-Nazi leader and “identified himself as a White Nationalist for over 30 years and advocated for ‘focused violence’ in order to establish a white homeland,” prosecutors said. Hasson’s public defender, Julie Stelzig, identified that neo-Nazi leader as white separatist Harold Covington, who died this past July.


1985 Interview Where Bernie Sanders Praised Castro, Slammed Reagan, and More

Independent Vermont Senator and 2020 presidential candidate Bernie Sanders gave a
lengthy interview in 1985 in which he praised Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, defended
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, and slammed then-President Ronald Reagan as a liar.
The interview originally aired on August 8, 1985 on Vermont’s Channel 17/Town Meeting
Television, and followed then-Burlington Mayor Sanders’ visit to Nicaragua, where he
attended a rally at which Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega railed against the United
States government.
The video resurfaced during the last presidential campaign when Buzzfeed posted it
in June of 2015, and given Sanders’ decision to run again in 2020, will likely be
circulated again. Indeed, it already has.
In the interview, Sanders said that he was “impressed” by the leaders of the Sandinista
government, singling Ortega and others out for praise. The comment that got the
most attention in 2016, though, was his praise for Fidel Castro.
Sanders drew an analogy between Cuba and the situation in Nicaragua,
“Way back in, what was it, 1961, they invaded Cuba,” Sanders said, “and everybody was
totally convinced that Castro was the worst guy in the world and all of the Cuban people
were going to rise up in rebellion against Fidel Castro. They forgot that he educated their kids,
gave their kids healthcare, totally transformed the society.”
“Not that Fidel Castro and Cuba are perfect, they certainly are not,” Sanders added, “but just
because Ronald Reagan dislikes these people doesn’t mean that people in their own nations
feel the same way.”


Army General Exposes 9/11

Published on Feb 20, 2019

General Wesley Clark discusses the “Project For The New American Century”, which
was written one year before 9/11. It mentioned needing a catastrophic event, like a
new “Pearl Harbor”, to expand America’s dominance.


Do You Believe in the Deep State Now?


The revelation that top Justice officials
considered unseating Trump should
answer that question for good.

Then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe with justice department officials in 2017. (Photo by Eli Alford, DOJ/EOUSA)

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

That’s a natural reaction to the revelation of Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy FBI director, that top Justice Department officials, alarmed by Donald Trump’s firing of former Bureau director James Comey, explored a plan to invoke the 25th Amendment and kick the duly elected president out of office.
According to New York Times reporters Adam Goldman and Matthew Haag, McCabe made the statement in an NBC 60 Minutes interview to be aired on Sunday. He also reportedly said that McCabe wanted the so-called Russia collusion investigation to go after Trump for obstructing justice in firing Comey and for any instances they could turn up of his working in behalf of Russia.
The idea of invoking the 25th Amendment was discussed, it seems, at two meetings on May 16, 2017. According to McCabe, top law enforcement officials pondered how they might recruit Vice President Pence and a majority of cabinet members to declare in writing, to the Senate’s president pro tempore and the House speaker, that the president was “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” That would be enough, under the 25th Amendment, to install the vice president as acting president, pushing aside Trump.
But to understand what kind of constitutional crisis this would unleash and the precedent it would set, it’s necessary to ponder the rest of this section of the 25th Amendment. The text prescribes that, if the president, after being removed, transmits to the same congressional figures that he is indeed capable of discharging his duties, he shall once again be president after four days. But if the vice president and the cabinet majority reiterate their declaration within those four days that the guy can’t govern, Congress is charged with deciding the issue. It then takes a two-thirds vote of both houses to keep the president removed, which would have to be done within 21 days, during which time the elected president would be sidelined and the vice president would govern. If Congress can’t muster the two-thirds majority within the prescribed time period, the president “shall resume the powers and duties of his office.”
It’s almost impossible to contemplate the political conflagration that would ensue under this plan. Citizens would watch those in Washington struggle with the monumental question of the fate of their elected leader under an initiative that had never before been invoked, or even considered, in such circumstances. Debates would flare up over whether this comported with the original intent of the amendment; whether it was crafted to deal with physical or mental “incapacitation,” as opposed to controversial actions or unsubstantiated allegations or even erratic decision making; whether such an action, if established as precedent, would destabilize the American republic for all time; and whether unelected bureaucrats should arrogate to themselves the power to set in motion the downfall of a president, circumventing the impeachment language of the Constitution.
For the past two years, the country has been struggling to understand the two competing narratives of the criminal investigation of the president.
One narrative—let’s call it Narrative A—has it that honorable and dedicated federal law enforcement officials developed concerns over a tainted election in which nefarious Russian agents had sought to tilt the balloting towards the candidate who wanted to improve U.S.-Russian relations and who seemed generally unseemly. Thus did the notion emerge, quite understandably, that Trump had “colluded” with Russian officials to cadge a victory that otherwise would have gone to his opponent. This narrative is supported and protected by Democratic figures and organizations, by adherents of the “Russia as Threat” preoccupation, and by anti-Trumpers everywhere, particularly news outlets such as CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times.
The other view—Narrative B—posits that certain bureaucratic mandarins of the national security state and the outgoing Obama administration resolved early on to thwart Trump’s candidacy. After his election, they determined to undermine his political standing, and particularly his proposed policy toward Russia, through a relentless and expansive investigation characterized by initial misrepresentations, selective media leaks, brutal law enforcement tactics, and a barrage of innuendo. This is the narrative of most Trump supporters, conservative commentators, Fox News, and The Wall Street Journal editorial page, notably columnist Kimberley Strassel.
The McCabe revelation won’t affect the battle of the two narratives. As ominous and outrageous as this “deep state” behavior may seem to those who embrace Narrative B, it will be seen by Narrative A adherents as evidence that those law enforcement officials were out there heroically on the front lines protecting the republic from Donald J. Trump.
And those Narrative A folks won’t have any difficulty tossing aside the fact that McCabe was fired as deputy FBI director for violating agency policy in leaking unauthorized information to the news media. He then allegedly violated the law in lying about it to federal investigators on four occasions, including three times while under oath.
Indeed, Narrative A people have no difficulty at all brushing aside serious questions posed by Narrative B people. McCabe is a likely liar and perjurer? Doesn’t matter. Peter Strzok, head of the FBI’s counterespionage section, demonstrated his anti-Trump animus in tweets and emails to Justice official Lisa Page? Irrelevant. Christopher Steele’s dossier of dirt on Trump, including an allegation that the Russians were seeking to blackmail and bribe him, was compiled by a man who had demonstrated to a Justice Department official that he was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and…passionate about him not being president”? Not important. The dossier was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party? Immaterial. Nothing in the dossier was ever substantiated? So what?
Now we have a report from a participant of those meetings that top officials of the country’s premier law enforcement entity sat around and pondered how to bring down a sitting president they didn’t like. The Times even says that McCabe “confirmed” an earlier report that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein suggested wearing a wire in meetings with Trump to incriminate him and make him more vulnerable to the plot.
There is no suggestion in McCabe’s interview pronouncements or in the words of Scott Pelley, who conducted the interview and spoke to CBS This Morning about it, that these federal officials ever took action to further the aim of unseating the president. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that they approached cabinet members or the vice president about it. “They…were speculating, ‘This person would be with us, this person would not be,’ and they were counting noses in that effort,” said Pelley. He added, apparently in response to Rosenstein’s insistence that his comments about wearing a wire were meant as a joke, “This was not perceived to be a joke.”
What are we to make of this? Around the time of the meetings to discuss the 25th Amendment plot, senior FBI officials also discussed initiating a national security investigation of the president as a stooge of the Russians or perhaps even a Russian agent. These talks were revealed by The New York Times and CNN in January, based on closed-door congressional testimony by former FBI general counsel James Baker. You don’t have to read very carefully to see that the reporters on these stories brought to them a Narrative A sensibility. The Times headline: “F.B.I. Opened Inquiry into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia.” CNN’s: “Transcripts detail how FBI debated whether Trump was ‘following directions’ of Russia.” And of course, whoever leaked those hearing transcripts almost surely did so to bolster the Narrative A version of events.
The independent journalist Gareth Porter, writing at Consortium News, offers a penetrating exposition of the inconsistencies, fallacies, and fatuities of the Narrative A matrix, as reflected in how the Times and CNN handled the stories that resulted from what were clearly self-interested leaks.
Porter notes that a particularly sinister expression in May 2017 by former CIA director John O. Brennan, a leading Trump antagonist, has precipitated echoes in the news media ever since, particularly in the Times. Asked in a committee hearing if he had intelligence indicating that anyone in the Trump campaign was “colluding with Moscow,” Brennan dodged the question. He said his experience had taught him that “the Russians try to suborn individuals, and they try to get them to act on their behalf either wittingly or unwittingly.”
Of course you can’t collude with anybody unwittingly. But Brennan’s fancy expression has the effect of expanding what can be thrown at political adversaries, to include not just conscious and nefarious collaboration but also policy advocacy that could be viewed as wrongheaded or injurious to U.S. interests. As Porter puts it, “The real purpose…is to confer on national security officials and their media allies the power to cast suspicion on individuals on the basis of undesirable policy views of Russia rather than on any evidence of actual collaboration with the Russian government.”
That seems to be what’s going on here. There’s no doubt that McCabe and Rosenstein and Strzok and Brennan and Page and many others despised Trump and his resolve to thaw relations with Russia. They viewed him as a president “who needed to be reined in,” as a CNN report described the sentiment among top FBI officials after the Comey firing.
So they expanded the definition of collusion to include “unwitting” collaboration in order to justify their machinations. It’s difficult to believe that people in such positions would take such a cavalier attitude toward the kind of damage they could wreak on the body politic.
Now we learn that they actually sat around and plotted how to distort the Constitution, just as they distorted the rules of official behavior designed to hold them in check, in order to destroy a presidential administration placed in power by the American people. It’s getting more and more difficult to dismiss Narrative B.
Robert W. Merry, longtime Washington journalist and publishing executive, is the author most recently of President McKinley: Architect of the American Century.



Here is all I know from my research; some from Congressional Records, some  From the USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Service), and other documented reliable sources. You will notice that the term “Parents” is used throughout the documentation.

The facts on Kamala Harris Candidate for President of the United States.

Kamala is technically what we call an “anchor baby”, why do I say this you ask?

Her mother is a Tamil Indian who immigrated to the United States in 1961, her Father was a Jamaican who immigrated to the U.S in 1962.

Kamala Harris was born in 1964, neither one of her parents were Naturalized Citizens at the time of her birth. The earliest her mother could have been naturalized would have been 1966, and her father 1967.

This means Kamala Harris is no different than a baby born to illegal Alien Hispanic parents in the United States.

To become a Naturalized Citizen of this country according to the USCIS, you must reside here for a period of 5 years.
90 days before your 5 years are up, you may submit the paperwork to become a naturalized citizen,

The time to process the paperwork will take up to 6 months, it will then take another 6 months or longer for the process to be completes and you become a Naturalized Citizen of the United States.

The Constitution states that be the president of the United States, you must be a “Natural born citizen”,

Representative John Bingham on birthright Citizenship;

Rep. John Bingham is the “Father of the 14th Amendment”.

All from other lands, who by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of “parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural-born citizens.

Kamala Harris’s parents owed their allegiance to another sovereignty

New York Tribune 1896: Those born of non-citizen parents may not be eligible for POTUS.

The Boston Globe: “native born” does not equal “natural born” for Presidential eligibility. »
The House of Representatives Definition of “Natural Born Citizen” = Born of citizen “parents” in the US.

In the following statements by John Bingham, please pay specific attention to the Term “PARENTS” Plural, not singular like Barack Obama, who was not, by these congressional statements in the U.S Congress in 1862 & 1866 (never contested by the congress) a “Natural born citizen”!

Representative John Bingham, aka “Father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins.

Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor: “All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens.

Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested.

However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the US) was never challenged on the floor of the House.

Our Legislators should be able to  understand this simple plain language and enforce it as they have sworn an oath to do?


Image may contain: text

Over 30,000 Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax

A staggering 30,000+ scientists have come forward confirming that man-made climate change is a hoax perpetuated by the elite in order to make money.
One of the experts is Weather Channel founder, John Coleman, who warns that huge fortunes are being made by man-made climate change proponents such as Al Gore.

In a recent interview with Climate Depot, Coleman said:

“Al Gore may emerge from the shadows to declare victory in the ‘global warming’ debate if Hillary Clinton moves into the White House. Yes, if that happens and the new climate regulations become the law of the land, they will be next to impossible to overturn for four to eight years.”
Climate change proponents remain undeterred in their mission, ignoring numerous recent scientific findings indicating that there has been no warming trend at all for nearly two decades.

Al Gore’s dire predictions of the melting of polar ice on a massive scale have proved to be completely false.

In fact, in 2014 – a year that was touted as being “the hottest ever” in the Earth’s history – there were record amounts of ice reported in Antarctica, an increase in Arctic ice, and record snowfalls across the globe.

Top Scientist Resigns: ‘Global Warming is a $Trillions Scam — It has Corrupted Many Scientists’

Debunking the “97 percent” lie

On top of those “inconvenient truths,” the White House’s assertion that 97 percent of scientists agree that global warming is real has been completely debunked.

Several independently-researched examinations of the literature used to support the “97 percent” statement found that the conclusions were cherry-picked and misleading.
More objective surveys have revealed that there is a far greater diversity of opinion among scientists than the global warming crowd would like for you to believe.

From the National Review:

A 2008 survey by two German scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, found that a significant number of scientists were skeptical of the ability of existing global climate models to accurately predict global temperatures, precipitation, sea-level changes, or extreme weather events even over a decade; they were far more skeptical as the time horizon increased.”
Other mainstream news sources besides the National Review have also been courageous enough to speak out against the global warming propaganda – even the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece in 2015 challenging the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) pseudoscience being promulgated by global warming proponents.

And, of course, there are the more than 31,487 American scientists (to date) who have signed a petition challenging the climate change narrative and 9,029 of them hold PhDs in their respective fields.

But hey, Al Gore and his cronies have also ignored that inconvenient truth, as well.

Many of those scientists who signed the petition were likely encouraged to speak out in favor of the truth after retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist John L. Casey revealed that solar cycles are largely responsible for warming periods on Earth – not human activity.

Al Gore and cronies continue getting richer from the global warming hoax

But the global warming crowd continues to push their agenda on the public while lining their pockets in the process.

If you’re still inclined to believe what Al Gore has to say about global warming, please consider the fact that since he embarked on his crusade, his wealth has grown from $2 million in 2001 to $100 million in 2016 – largely due to investments in fake “green tech” companies and the effective embezzlement of numerous grants and loans. Al Gore is likely to become the world’s first ‘carbon billionaire’.

O’Reilly: Analyzing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Democratic Socialism

Bill O’Reilly   Published on Jan 9, 2019

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aired on 60 Minutes and expressed her
dedication to breaking down capitalism. Bill O’Reilly is on with Wayne Allyn Root
to discuss whether or not the majority of Americans are buying the socialistic policies
being put forth by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and other celebrity Democrats.


1) Hopefully she will be one and done, what a dope
2) What’s to analyze….shes a power hungry little communist
3) I can’t believe over 110k voted for this dumb crazy eye creature
4) O’Riley is right — she indeed should in be considered dangerous — her ideas are DANGEROUS to America. Cortez actually spilled the beans by admitting that she’s skipping on the facts because she just can’t justify and showcase economic sustainability with her radical socialist agenda. From her point of view, it doesn’t matter if America’s economy goes down the toilet as results of her CRAZY taxation policy as long as her supporters can take the money from the rich to have new permanent entitlements.
5) The democrats are rapidly making themselves IRRELEVANT to the real world. Only the naive ignorant kids are buying it and the brainwashed “adults?”. Or brain dead.
6) I’m so sick of hearing AOC talk about Sweden like she actually knows what she’s talking about. Sweden has a socialist government with a capitalist society. BUT…. it took them roughly 300yrs to get that right. And still messed it up by becoming a Sanctuary country. Their immigration policies are decimating their economy, their culture, & their ppl. So, it’s still not a positive country to use for the socialist argument. She’s too ignorant to even understand this


O’Reilly: Who is Funding the Migrant Caravan?


Bill O’Reilly   Published on Nov 20, 2018

The media has dedicated plenty of coverage to the caravan, but no network has uncovered its large funding. Anna Paulina, the Director of Hispanic Engagement at Turning Point USA, joins the No Spin News on Monday to discuss their findings.

Hates Americans and Jews: Rep Ilhan Omar

Socialist Muslims infiltrate democrat party and congress

lhan Omar Received Tens of Thousands of Dollars from PACs and Lobbyists

Lori Lowenthal Marcus
When Ilhan Omar complains about the role of lobbyists in politics, it seems she only means certain lobbyists.

Ilhan Omar: So young…So anti-Semitic

You are not in Somalia anymore, Rep. Omar, you are in the USA.
Jack Engelhard, 13/02/19 18:36 | updated: 18:30

Jack Engelhard

Jack Engelhard’s classic international bestselling novel Indecent Proposal, which later became a worldwide hit movie, has been republished to meet readers’ demands. His other major works include Compulsive: A Novel, his award-winning post-Holocaust Montreal memoir Escape from Mount Moriah, plus Slot Attendant: A Novel About A Novelist. His website: www.jackengelhard.com
Lately I seem to be running a scandal behind. So much craziness – who can keep up? But for anti-Semitism, it’s never too late. You are always up to date.  Because each day brings forth another late-breaking display of ignorance from Ilhan Omar, or is it Rashida Tlaib, or do I mean Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? Help me. I can’t tell them apart.
Sisters in dental hygiene and anti-Semitism, these newly minted Congresswomen.
Anti-Semitism appears to be the path these days for anyone wishing to make it to Congress as a Democrat. – where one half of them, say statistics, support the Palestinian Arab terrorists.
So young…so anti-Semitic. Who expected this?  
From Omar, her roots are in Somalia. Why wonder where that bigotry came from! FROM THE SWAMPS OF MOGADISHU, THIS ONE COMES TO LECTURE AMERICA AND JUDGE ISRAEL.
Attention Liberated Ladies – you may want to rethink the Somali Values she intends to impose upon America and the Somali gifts Omar has in store.

She swore allegiance to “the Palestinian cause.” Ask her the chances of a Gay Pride Parade in Ramallah.

Read this from only yesterday in The Guardian about “female genital mutilation” as performed in Somalia.
Then more on that from the World Health Organization, which reveals that 97.9 percent of women and girls over there in Somalia have to get that done. It’s quite the craze.
So, if you think Islamic anti-Semitism is all she’s got, no, she’s got more…more where that came from.
From Tlaib, we also know the score. The moment she was sworn in she said nothing about the Michigan voters who made it all possible, so far as I could tell.   She swore allegiance to “the Palestinian cause.” Ask her the chances of a Gay Pride Parade in Ramallah. (A must read. So this, of course.)
Ocasio-Cortez – who knows? Last year or so she was a cocktail server and this year she is saving the world. I am not kidding. You should read what she has in mind.
So… this is the generation that is going to “repair the world and make it a better place.” Spare me.
My generation, it is true, did not stay up nights worrying about Climate Change – except to know what clothes to wear outside. We did not think of it as a world-shattering phenomenon.
Nor did we lose much sleep wondering who is a boy and who is a girl. We knew right away, and never imagined TRANSGENDER – or that there exists a menu of 140 different genders to choose from, and that if we find that ridiculous, immediately we are scolded for being racists and bigots. Everything offends these up and comers.
That appears the thing for this new generation — no tolerance for any dissenting point of view.
First comes their anti-Semitism, always that, next a slew of rules to “make the world a better place” through Soviet-style enforcement.
I will say this for my generation – we did enact Civil Rights and we did stop the spread of Communism, which we knew, and still know, as the equal distribution of misery.   Strangely, that’s up next for the new generation – Socialism. Ocasio-Cortez and the others are very excited about implementing this.
But first, anti-Semitism. So naturally, BDS. So, don’t forget, people – remember to boycott Salk’s Polio Vaccine, and no matter the emergency, do not use the Heimlich Maneuver.  New York-based bestselling American novelist Jack Engelhard writes regularly for Arutz Sheva.
He is the author of the international book-to-movie bestseller “Indecent Proposal.” His sequel to that sensation is, “Slot Attendant: A novel about a Novelist.” His classic Inside Journalism thriller, “The Bathsheba Deadline,” is being prepared for the movies. Contemporaries have hailed him “The last Hemingway, a writer without peer, and the conscience of us all.” Website: www.jackengelhard.com

Antisemitic Rep. Omar(D-MN) Funded by Israel-hating BDS Leaders and PACs     

BREAKING NOW: White House Confirms Trump Will Sign Budget Bill, Declare ‘NATIONAL EMERGENCY’

Trump Will Sign Budget Bill, Declare ‘NATIONAL EMERGENCY’

The White House confirmed Thursday the President will sign a bipartisan funding agreement and subsequently declare a national emergency along the United States’ southern border with Mexico.
“President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action — including a national emergency — to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border,” said White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

View image on Twitter

Sarah Sanders @PressSec
Statement on Government Funding Bill:
“The President is once again delivering on his promise to build the wall, protect the border, and secure our great country,” she added.

Trump’s Border Wall Is Currently Being Built

The Political Insider
Trump’s Border Wall Is Currently Being Built

During his campaign rally in El Paso, Texas, Monday, President Trump said, “We’ve actually started a big, big portion of the wall today at a very important location, and it’s going to go up pretty quickly over the next nine months.”  Many assumed this was just the President riling up the crowd, but as it turns out Trump was being truthful.

The Washington Examiner’s Eddie Scarry reports:

I checked in with agents at the Rio Grande Valley border sector to see if they knew what new “wall” Trump was talking about. They sent me information on construction for new border barrier announced last year. The project funds six miles-worth of concrete and steel barrier of the sort that agents told me in January is immensely successful in deterring illegal border crossings.
The wall will be supplemented by “detection technology, lighting, video surveillance, and an all-weather patrol road parallel” to the barrier, according to a release sent out by the CBP in November.
Scarry also notes that the $145 million didn’t come from an older Obama-era budget, but was part of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s budget for fiscal year 2018.  So everything Trump said about the wall already being constructed was legit.
Which leads to the real question: Why aren’t more people hearing about this?  For a media that spends so much time spreading fake news about this president, how come when he says something that is significant to the current debate over border security and government shutdowns, journalists aren’t trying to follow up and report on it?
If the wall is already being built, isn’t this important news? If Trump was lying about it, wouldn’t that also be important news?
So why aren’t journalists covering it? Without conservative outlets like the Washington Examiner and The Political Insider, how would anyone know?
In fact, the President said this twice this week. “We just started a big, big section [of wall] on the Rio Grande,” Trump said at the White House on Tuesday.  Where are the “fact checkers” when you need them? Maybe they don’t like finding facts that make the President look good.

Alex Epstein: “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” | Talks at Google

The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels

Energy philosopher Alex Epstein, author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,
challenges conventional wisdom about the fossil fuel industry and argues that
if we look carefully at the positives and negatives of all our energy alternatives,
we have a moral obligation to use more fossil fuels, not less.



Many people think Sweden is socialist, but
its success comes from free markets.

Democratic socialists in the United States point to Sweden as a socialist success. But Swedish historian Johan Norberg says, “Sweden is not socialist.” Norberg hosts a documentary called Sweden:
Lessons for America?, in which he notes that in Sweden, “government doesn’t own the means of production. To see that you have to go to Venezuela or Cuba or North Korea.”

John Stossel asks Norberg why so many Americans think Sweden is socialist. Norberg answers, “We did have a period in the 1970s and 1980s when we had something that resembled socialism: a big government that taxed and spent heavily.” But big government led to problems. “Our economy was in crisis, inflation reached 10 percent, and for a brief period interest rates soared to 500 percent.

At that point the Swedish population just said, ‘Enough, we can’t do this,'” Norberg says. Sweden cut public spending, privatized the national rail network, abolished certain government monopolies, eliminated inheritance taxes, sold state-owned businesses, and switched to a school voucher system. It also “lowered taxes and reformed the pension system,” adds Norberg.

So Stossel asks why we keep hearing “that Sweden is this socialist paradise.” Norberg answers: “We do have a bigger welfare state than the U.S. and higher taxes than the U.S. But in other areas, when it comes to free markets, when it comes to competition, when it comes to free trade, Sweden is actually more free market.” He’s right, according to the Heritage Foundation’s Economic Freedom Rankings. Sweden ranks higher than the U.S. Norberg also tells Stossel that Sweden’s tax system may surprise Americans. “This is the dirty little secret….We don’t take from the rich and give to the poor. We squeeze the poor, because rich people might leave.”

Even people who earn below average income pay up to 60 percent in taxes. Stossel asks: What lessons should Americans take from Sweden? “You can’t turn your backs [on] the creation of wealth,” warns Norberg.

Sweden: Lessons for America? airs on PBS on October 29th at 7 p.m. Eastern. You can also watch it at freetochoose.tv. The views expressed in this video are solely those of John Stossel; his independent production company, Stossel Productions; and the people he interviews. The claims and opinions set forth in the video and accompanying text are not necessarily those of Reason.

Pelosi’s mafia ties explain Democrat opposition to border wall”

One America News Network   Published on Jan 30, 2019

Recently released FBI documents from decades ago have found the family of Nancy
Pelosi might have had deep ties to organized crime. One America’s Kristian Rouz
examines the reports.

John Nelson - jenkan04@gmail.com
Bob Gilmore
Dick Fankhauser

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com