December 2018
« Nov   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

Archive for December, 2018

TELL ME THIS DOES NOT MAKE YOUR BLOOD BOIL! We allow these people into our country, this is the way they treat it? Some say there are good Muslims, possible but, where are they when this stuff happens? You do not hear a word from them! Why you ask, because they support the terrorist contingency of Islam. We should direct all refugees to return to their homelands, do not allow any more Muslims into the country, they are not going to assimilate into our society, no more than they have in any of the countries in Europe, and look at the mess they now have!

Muslims in New York desecrate American flag with shouts of “Allahu Akbar”


Our God says to love all, how can you love people like this??

By Leah Rosenberg\  December 30, 2018
Stepping on the American flag is like stepping on democracy and freedom. But is it so shocking that radical Muslims would do that?

American Bikers@ABUAJ_US
Muslims in New York NOT Iran Desecrate U.S. Flag

4,906 people are talking about this

Radical Muslims in New York

Radical Muslims are trying to destroy America from the Middle East. But they do not just exist in the Middle East or other “far off” places. Some like to remove themselves from issues that are not as “close to home.” But the frightening thing is that it IS home! In America, Muslims are trying to destroy the American flag.
Take a look at this video. Things like this are happening IN NEW YORK! Listen to what they are preaching to other Muslims. Hear the way they despise America and desecrate the American flag. These radicals hate democracy! They hate freedom! Are you going to let them belittle your country in such a public and serious way?

The American Flag is More Than a Flag

The American flag might seem like just a piece of cloth. But it represents greats things. And the moment these Muslims took it and defaced, they dishonored the entire country and the entire American people. They want to overthrow democracy. And we cannot let them! Radical Muslims are burning American flags and destroying a symbol of freedom not only in their own countries. We can’t ignore what is happening before our eyes!



President Trump threw his full weight behind the First Step Act effort – Another Campaign promise made and kept.

Trump will go down in history for using the
First Step Act to redefine what it means to
be ‘tough on crime’

President Trump ran his 2016 presidential campaign in large part on a “law and order” platform, consistently painting himself and his future administration as tough on crime. He has not wavered from this position, contrary to the claims of reform opponents who attempt to argue that the First Step Act’s reforms are soft on crime. The facts speak quite to the contrary.
There is nothing so tough on crime as preventing crime from happening, which is what the First Step Act is specifically designed, through evidence-based practices, to do. To be tough on crime, we must be smart on crime. States like Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, and Mississippi, among numerous other traditionally red states, have proven as much. These reforms lower incarceration rates and crime rates simultaneously, while also bolstering the labor force and using government resources (aka taxpayer dollars) wisely
President Trump threw his full weight behind this effort, in collaboration with Jared Kushner in the White House; congressional conservatives such as Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Mike Lee of Utah, and Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia; and multiple law enforcement, faith, business, and conservative groups and leaders. Together they spurred rapid action in this year’s lame duck session of Congress.
Such widespread support for the First Step Act made the ultimately successful push for passage remarkable, in the face of extreme adversity from the fire of fellow Sens. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and John Kennedy, R-La. The pair secured votes in the Senate on three divisions of one single amendment, each division maliciously intended to kill the First Step Act. All three divisions went down in flames immediately prior to the bill’s overwhelming passage, with a supermajority of senators or just under voting against all of these “poison pills.” Just before 9:00 that Tuesday night, the Senate voted 87-12 on final passage of the First Step Act.
Less than two days later, the House of Representatives voted to pass the First Step Act 358-36, a larger ratio supporting the final legislation than even the earlier version, which passed the House in May by a vote of 360-59. This is no surprise, as the bill was markedly improved in the Senate through the addition of modest sentencing reforms that make the legislation even more effeective for the federal system. President Trump signed the First Step Act into law that Friday.
Needless to say, Republicans have proven their critics wrong. Guided by long-time reformers from every sector both inside and outside of Washington, President Trump, who is always willing to make a deal for the public (especially the forgotten ones), has put himself on the right side of history with the First Step Act. History will look back fondly on this landmark bill.
Enacting this legislation is a huge bipartisan win for policy, society, and fairness. For an issue whose time is now, the federal government has finally delivered in an overwhelmingly bipartisan, constructive manner. This type of victory is huge for Washington. Even in a political atmosphere of discord and strife at nearly every other turn, justice reform has done what it does best: unites ideologies, hearts, individuals, and minds.
America is ready for transformative change in the criminal justice system that will end the revolving door of reincarceration and move instead toward rehabilitation of and opportunity for its incarcerated population. This shift, which is to be seen as the First Step Act is implemented in the months and years to come, is long awaited and is truly tough and smart on crime.
Sarah Anderson is a federal affairs manager for FreedomWorks.

What does Illegal Immigration cost us yearly and Pelosi & Schumer worry about the price of a wall?

The cost of the wall is nothing compared to the
yearly cost of illegal immigration
Dollar signs in North America

themacx | Getty Images
Would you let criminals take your home and hurt your family, or would you pay for a front door that locks?
It typically costs roughly $1,500-$2,000 to purchase and install a no-frills exterior door on your home. Not cheap at all. But would you agonize over the cost for a minute when the entire cost and safety of your whole home and its occupants are on the line, especially when dangerous criminals, burglars, and murderers are specifically targeting your neighborhood for infiltration?
Well, elected officials are like the head of this household, America is our house, and our southern border is our exterior front door. But almost all leaders in both parties are unanimous that it’s more important to spend money on the front doors of states in the Middle East rather than our own to prevent, among others, Middle Eastern terrorists from coming here. These are people who have already funded the other seven governmental departments at record levels, yet they can’t find $25 billion or even $5 billion for a national front door.
To illustrate the warped priorities of the elites, one cowardly Republican senator gave the following anonymous quote to Politico, “Syria is crumbling. And we’re talking about a f&^king wall.”
The sad fact is that, putting aside the merits of our Middle East policies, if you believe we need security in the Middle East, then by a factor of 10,000 you should be clamoring for it on our own border.
Illegal immigration: the needless and expensive unfunded liability on Americans
Last week, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the Border Patrol is averaging 2,100 apprehensions per day so far this fiscal year. That is an annualized rate of 766,500 illegals. Those are just the ones we catch. How many are allowed to come in undetected as a result of the agents being tied up with family units? While there is no definitive number, the best estimate the government has is from a 2016 Institute for Defense Analysis report prepared for the DHS. If you look at the last time annual apprehensions reached over 700,000, our apprehension rate was only 40 percent, which would put us at a projected flow of 1.7 million per year. Now, it’s very likely that with the new era of lawfare and illegals surrendering themselves to agents on purpose, a higher share of the illegal crossers are being “apprehended,” but let’s just say the total border flow is slated for one million this year.
Can you imagine the fiscal, social, and security cost of one million individuals from the most impoverished countries being smuggled over by the most violent drug cartels? Suddenly, the two thousand soldiers in Syria doesn’t seem like such a big deal, does it?
According to Steve Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, the lifetime cost of an illegal alien is $74,722. If the descendants of these illegal immigrants are factored into the equation, the cost increases to $94,391 per illegal alien. And if different methodologies are used to calculate the lifetime fiscal cost (not using net present value), the cost could be as high as $140,000-$150,000 per illegal, according to Camarota.
At one million illegal aliens every year, that is a cost of between $74 and $150 billion every year just for that year’s flow of illegal immigrants. And no, there are not only 12 million illegal immigrants in the country. When prompted by Steve King at the judiciary hearing, Nielsen admitted that there definitely are somewhere between 12 and 22 million, “higher than originally estimated.”
The cost of illegal immigration is so unconscionable that the media makes sure we never have the data and anecdotes that will force such a conversation. Now, with the fight over funding a border wall, is the time for that conversation.
Moreover, aside from preventing the cost of illegal immigration, by focusing our investment in border enforcement specifically on a border wall, which is an upfront non-reccurring cost for something that actually works, we will save billions in extra funding for the many other assets that have failed to secure the border. Just over the past decade, we have spent over $100 billion on different methods of security, but to no avail — all to avoid the $25 billion cost of building a security barrier. Then there is the crushing cost of detention and housing. Even before the flow of family units, according to the Washington Times, HHS paid over $1.4 billion last year to care for nearly 41,000 Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) in its facilities, who stayed 41 days on average, costing taxpayers about $670 per day for each child.
In fact, by not building a wall, simply hiring more border agents is actually counterproductive.  The more border agents we have without a wall, the more the agents are used by the cartels in a tactical game of migration football, as one agent described to me, so they can bring in their drugs without detection.
The human toll of not having a national front door
And speaking of the cost of drugs, how do you put a price on the tens of thousands of people dying of drugs every single year? An analysis by the White House Council of Economic Advisers last year found that the overall cost of the crisis to the U.S. economy in 2015 was over $500 billion. Where does it come from? All of the heroin and methamphetamine, most of the cocaine, and most of the fentanyl come in through the Mexican border.
Then there is the crime. As I wrote last week, the number of ICE apprehensions of criminal aliens just for one year is mind-boggling, given that most illegals live in sanctuaries where ICE has limited access to arrest them:

As Secretary Nielsen said last week, there are one million criminal aliens in this country with orders of removal. Those are just the ones we caught and who have final orders of removal without some liberal judge overturning them.
Remember, these are recurring costs, crimes, and deaths, every single year, while the cost of the border wall is mainly up front.
While the media now reports on every single death of a migrant at the hands of the cartels and parents while blaming them on the Border Patrol, it fails to report on the appalling number of Americans killed every year because of our senseless border policies. ICE apprehends criminal aliens collectively responsible for 1,600-2,000 murders every single year. This past year, it was 2,028. Just last week, a 51-year-old Californian, Rocky Paul Jones, was killed by Gustavo Garcia, an illegal alien who had already been deported, after the local sheriff was forced to ignore an ICE detainer, according to Breitbart. Thanks to a lack of a border wall, he was able to come back again, and thanks to California’s sanctuary problems, Garcia was never turned over to ICE. Therefore, Jones never got to spend another Christmas with his family.
What about all that violence in Chicago? Believe it or not, the most wanted criminal responsible for gang violence in the city is not a domestic criminal. It’s El Mencho, the head of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, which is every bit as violent as ISIS, is flooding our country with migrants, gangs, and drugs, and is possibly responsible for an attempted attack on our consulate in Guadalajara. Except unlike fighters in Syria, these people are on our border and have agents in our major cities.
We haven’t even delved into the diseasescultural problemsstrain on our schools, and the flow of Middle Easterners coming in through Central America.
Lack of sovereignty is the greatest shutdown of the federal government
At its core, we have a federal government to protect Americans from external threats while states and local governments take care of internal affairs. We have 50 state governments, over 3,000 county governments, and a total of roughly 90,000 local and municipal governments in this country.  Why do we need a federal government if not to protect us from external threats? If the federal government refuses to take care of us and illegal aliens get to suck us dry with welfare, catch-and-release, sanctuaries, birthright citizenship, and being counted in our own reapportionment, then why even have a federal government at all? Moreover, if the onetime $25 billion cost of the border wall will trump the hundreds of billions of annual costs from illegal aliens, then what is the point of passing a federal budget at all?
Behold the difference between the nation-state shutdown and today’s so-called federal shutdown. Remember, 70 percent of government is mandatory spending and not subject to appropriations, while 75 percent of the remaining 30 percent of discretionary spending, including the military and Veterans’ Affairs, is already funded for the remainder of this fiscal year. For that matter, even the Department of Education is funded. To that end, today, the nonessential portion of 25 percent of the 30 percent of the government that is discretionary, yet not fully funded through September, is shut down. Americans would take that any day of the week over the shutdown of our nation-state at the hands of illegal invaders and drug cartels.
The most important decision a society will ever make is whom to admit as a permanent member of that society, which in turn will affect every other policy decision. As such, that decision must be kept at arm’s length by the existing citizenry through their elected representatives. When people enter or remain in a country against the national will, it is a violation of sovereignty and governance by the consent of the governed, and it reflects a failure of the social contract between the citizenry and its government. It also costs a heck of a lot more than a border wall, much like losing all your possessions is much more expensive than paying for a front door.
At this point, the only main departments that are not funded are Homeland Security and Justice. But if those agencies will not be permitted to protect our justice and homeland from invaders, let’s shutter the doors indefinitely. Why else have a federal government?

The price tag on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s latest pet project will make your jaw drop

Patriot Pulse
While the American people enjoyed Christmas with their families, Democrats spent that time plotting the rollout of the biggest government expansion since the New Deal.   Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a rising star in the Democrat party, is leading the effort.
House Democrats are preparing to unveil this nightmare plan to expand government, and the details of the plan will make your jaw drop.  Over 40 House Democrats have pledged their support for the so-called “Green New Deal.”
And more Democrats are following Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s lead.
Some estimates put the price tag for the plan at $5.2 trillion – and that could be just the tip of the iceberg.
The Daily Caller reports:

Democrats are increasingly lining up to support a “Green New Deal,” which, while vague on details, could end up being the largest expansion of government in decades.  As it stands, the “Green New Deal” is more aspirational than actual policy. Indeed, it takes its name from the New Deal of the 1930s, and its main backer, incoming Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, compared it to the Great Society of the 1960s.

More than 40 Democratic lawmakers support the “Green New Deal” as part of a broad plan to fight global warming and bring about what they see as “economic, social and racial justice.” A poll found most Americans supported the deal, but knew little about it.

The Green New Deal would cost taxpayers trillions of dollars.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is officially giving Bernie Sanders a run for his money.
The main objective of the Green New Deal would be to pivot our economy to be run on 100% renewable energy.  The Heritage Foundation estimates that moving the U.S. economy to 100% renewable energy would cost over $5.2 trillion over the next two decades.  While the Green New Deal is gaining popularity among Democratic-Socialists, it is yet to be determined if Nancy Pelosi will attempt to ram it through the House.

PULSE POLL: Do you support Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal?”

NO    98%
YES   2%
share this:


Pastor Umar Mulinde is a convert from Islam to Christianity. Mulinde, 40, was born a
Muslim and is now the head of the Gospel Life Church International in Uganda’s capital, Kampala.

He is married and has seven children. Since he converted to Christianity in 1993, his life
changed. His family disowned him, saying he was dead, and they and other Muslims tried
to kill him. He gave his bodyguards the day off, thinking there would be no attack on
Christmas Eve. On December 24, 2011, AS Umar was leaving his Church’s Christmas Eve
services, Muslims terrorist in Uganda threw acid on him and severely burned his face, neck
and back. He was transported to Sheba Medical Center for treatment with the help of Israeli
friends, and has been returning for treatment.


The Hill Tipsheet

The Memo: Trump veers between hardliner, dealmaker on shutdown


President Trump is presenting himself as both a hardliner and would-be dealmaker as the government shutdown hits the one-week mark.  It’s a mix that he may hope will throw off Democrats but it also leaves some members of his own party unsure of his ultimate intentions.
Read the full story here

Trump, GOP seek to shift blame for shutdown to Pelosi

White House officials and congressional Republicans are seeking to blame the partial government shutdown on House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), as the standoff over funding for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border appears likely to extend into the new year.
Read the full story here

Border closure could cost billions

Closing the U.S. border with Mexico, which President Trump threatened to do in a Friday tweet if Democrats do not approve funding for his wall, could cost the economy billions of dollars, say analysts who have studied the issue.
Read the full story here

Hoyer: Democrats won’t seat North Carolina Republican amid election fraud investigation

House Democrats will refuse to seat North Carolina Republican candidate Mark Harris on Jan. 3 as state election authorities investigate election fraud claims surrounding his race, incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Friday.
Read the full story here

House GOP probe into FBI, DOJ comes to an end

House Republicans on Friday announced that their investigation into FBI and Justice Department (DOJ) decision-making during the 2016 presidential election has concluded, marking the end of a winding probe launched last fall.
Read the full story here

Ocasio-Cortez, progressives express disappointment with climate panel

Democrats are getting their special committee on climate change next year, but it won’t be the plan climate activists and Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) championed.
Read the full story here

Trump threatens to cut aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador

President Trump on Friday threatened to cut foreign aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, accusing the Central American countries of “doing nothing for the United States but taking our money.”
Read the full story here
Coast Guard says final paychecks of year will come despite shutdown
Members of the Coast Guard will get their final paycheck of the year Monday despite the partial government shutdown, the service announced on Friday night after previously saying that the paychecks would be delayed.
Read the full story here
O’Rourke rips Trump’s border wall in video: ‘A symbol of division’
Outgoing Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) on Friday released a 48-second video ripping President Trump’s demand for a border wall.
Read the full story here

Festivus Edition’ of The Waste Report

Rand Paul issues ‘Festivus Edition’ of The Waste Report

Read it and weep, taxpayers.
Every Christmas since he took office, Senator Rand Paul has issued a “Waste Report” on government spending.  This year, Senator Paul has outdone himself in finding the stupid, inane, shocking, maddening, and depressing examples of how our federal government spends the hard-earned tax dollars of citizens.
So here we are, another year past, another year to forget.  A government shutdown resolved by hiking spending; nuked budget caps; a debt over $21 trillion; and Congress okayed $1.3 trillion in new spending – all in the first three months!  An October 2018 report from the Congressional Budget Office showed net interest payments on the debt for fiscal year 2018 at $371 billion, $62 billion more than payments for fiscal year 2017.  Given such largesse, it may seem like a few million dollars is a drop in the bucket.  But to borrow from a line credited to former Senator Everett Dirksen(R-IL): “a million dollars here and there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”
This year, The Waste Report is highlighting $114,514,631 of wasted money.  We feature an old favorite due for an update and some instant classics, like a study of daydreaming.  Exactly where taxes should go, right?  No matter how much federal agencies waste, politicians think they’ve never got enough.  But if there’s money to waste, there’s too much already.  So, before the Feats of Strength can begin, there must be an Airing of (spending) Grievance.
Just a few examples from the Waste Report:
1. Since 2009, the State Department has allocated more than $76 million to provide stipends to the nearly non-existent Somali army.
2. The Agriculture Department spent more than $13 million to promote the already overcrowded farmers’ market industry.
3.The U.S. embassy in Rwanda spent more than $250,000 to teach citizens how to lobby.
4. The National Endowment for the Arts spent $15,000 on “theatrical research” to combat poverty.
5. NIH spent more than $800,000 to study the sex lives of quails high on cocaine.
On and on it goes – thousands upon thousands of line items in the budget for useless programs that not only are questionable expenditures on their face, but raise questions about whether the federal government should even be funding these things.
Senator Paul informs us that he’s found an astonishing $114 billion of such waste in the budget.  When the government spends more than $4 trillion a year, and runs a deficit of nearly a trillion dollars, the $114 billion in waste is an asterisk in the budget.  But as Paul points out, it costs more than $8,000 to the average taxpayer.  That’s nothing to sneeze at.
Congress doesn’t care.  The federal budget has taken on a life of its own, spending hundreds of billions of dollars on auto-pilot with no oversight and no controls.  But Congress doesn’t care because the people don’t care.  No congressman or senator has ever been defeated because he voted to spend too much in tax dollars.
Until they start to lose, the situation will continue.
Read it and weep, taxpayers.
Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

The Memo: Trump veers between hard-liner, dealmaker on shutdown

News Alert

The Memo: Trump veers between hardliner, dealmaker on shutdown
President Trump is presenting himself as both a hardliner and would-be dealmaker as the government shutdown hits the one-week mark.
It’s a mix that he may hope will throw off Democrats but it also leaves some members of his own party unsure of his ultimate intentions.

Read the full story here


Fox News First

TRUMP CALLS OUT DEMOCRATS FOR ‘OBSTRUCTION’ ON BORDER-WALL FUNDING: President Trump continued making his case Thursday for funding a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, saying the project is “desperately needed” for the U.S. to combat drugs, crime and other ills.

“The Democrats OBSTRUCTION of the desperately needed Wall, where they almost all recently agreed it should be built, is exceeded only by their OBSTRUCTION of 350 great people wanting & expecting to come into Government after being delayed for more than two years, a U.S. record!” he tweeted, referring to the alleged slowness of Senate confirmation for appointments.
The president also suggested it was in the Democrats’ self-interest to end the partial government shutdown, which started nearly a week ago and threatens to force many federal employees to go without paychecks for an uncertain period.
“Do the Dems realize that most of the people not getting paid are Democrats?” Trump asked. – Reported by Adam Shaw

Cancellation of NAFTA on the table!

Trump weighs canceling NAFTA to force
hand of Democrats on trade

President Trump and his advisers are weighing whether to cancel the North American Free Trade Agreement to force through his revised trade deal, a strong-arm tactic that would present Congress — and resistant Democrats — with the stark choice of assent or disarray.  Two administration sources who asked for anonymity to speak freely with the press said that the idea has been discussed within the White House but that they did not think that Trump has reached a final decision to withdraw from NAFTA.
“As crazy as it sounds, you’ve got to have some kind of catalyst to get things to move,” said one of the White House staffers, emphasizing that administration staff would prefer to negotiate over Trump’s deal, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement or USMCA, without first removing the safety net of NAFTA.
Former senior administration officials and trade groups view Trump removing the U.S. from the nearly 25 year-old trade agreement early next year as an increasing likelihood.  “It could be that he withdraws [from NAFTA] before [USMCA ratification] even reaches Congress,” said Marc Short, former White House director of legislative affairs. “I think there’s a high probability of that, yes.”
The discussions about canceling NAFTA follow Trump’s previous statement that he intends to do it. In extemporaneous remarks to reporters on Air Force One en route back from Argentina earlier this month, Trump said that NAFTA has “been a disaster for the United States” and that he would “get rid of it.”
The logic of withdrawing from NAFTA before the USMCA would be to pressure Congress to approve Trump’s trade deal and any laws needed to comply with it. By formally withdrawing from NAFTA, Trump would set a hard deadline of six months for Congress to approve the USMCA or face having tariffs reintroduced on substantial portions of the approximately $1.3 trillion worth of trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
“Congress will have a choice of the USMCA or pre-NAFTA, which worked very well,” Trump said.
Trump did not provide a specific timeline to reporters in that interview. White House sources were unsure of when exactly the administration would send specific bills and the USMCA itself to Congress. But White House officials view 2019 as the timeline to wrap the trade deal, fearing Democrats could drag it out otherwise once the presidential campaign officially starts in 2020.
Canceling NAFTA would set up a showdown similar in political dynamics to the current partial government shutdown, but with international supply chains for U.S. companies and the health of the stock markets in the balance. On the other hand, implementing USMCA would provide Trump a policy win that he could tout as fulfilling a promise he made on the campaign trail.
“We are very confident that Congress will approve USMCA,” said Emily Davis, a spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative, in a statement provided by the White House press office. “From the beginning, Ambassador Lighthizer has worked closely with Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate on the renegotiation of this agreement.”
Trump may already feel he has the upper hand in the negotiation, and has shown a willingness in his shutdown fight to push the envelope to pursue his other major campaign objective, namely completing a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.
“Personally I could see the case for it because it puts it on the dual track for Congress to choose between USMCA … or pre-NAFTA,” said Stephen Pavlick, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Trump Treasury Department. “I don’t think he sees the Democrats as having much leverage here. And candidly I think they see that too.”
“Do [Democrats] really want to be responsible for blowing up NAFTA?” Pavlick asked.
A NAFTA withdrawal could intensify already tricky politics for Democrats around the USMCA. A number of labor unions oppose free trade agreements, including NAFTA and the USMCA, for fear their members could be displaced by them. Though the USMCA closely follows much of NAFTA’s language, and includes language to increase pay for workers in Mexico, unions — and Democrats closely allied with organized labor — so far don’t see it as enough.
“It doesn’t satisfy anybody in the labor movement, it doesn’t satisfy any Democrats,” Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, told the Washington Examiner. “We have told them for months that they have to have strong labor chapter enforcement and they didn’t.”
One risk for Trump, though, is that Democrats could call his bluff on NAFTA cancellation and refuse to back USMCA even in the absence of NAFTA on the grounds that Trump would own the political and economic fallout.
“I’m not pulling out of NAFTA. I can’t make that judgment,” said Brown, a potential 2020 presidential contender. “If the president’s going to throw a temper tantrum and pull out that’s on him.”
Reverting to the pre-NAFTA situation would damage the economy and the stock markets, imperiling Trump’s goal of growth. A withdrawal from NAFTA without a replacement would restore tariffs that were eliminated in the 1990s, requiring major supply chain reorganizations from companies that have grown accustomed to freer cross-border commerce.
“Any attempt to revoke NAFTA without an operational USMCA would represent a whole new risk that would weigh on investor sentiment like concrete boots,” said Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at Compass Point Research and Trading, in an email. “Investors are so fixated on the Federal Reserve, China, and economic growth that any strategy predicated on revoking NAFTA without its replacement in place would alarm markets and catalyze a whole new leg downward.”


7 Presidents Who Were Tougher Than
Trump on the Media

Fred Lucas  /  /

The president was frustrated with the media coverage of him and his policies, swearing that 85 percent of all newspapers were against him.  “Our newspapers cannot be edited in the interests of the general public,” the president griped. Then, almost derisively, he said: “Freedom of the press. How many bogies are conjured up by invoking that greatly overworked phrase?”
So, he opted to bypass the traditional media he was convinced was unfair and speak directly to America. And President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s fireside chats on the radio, beginning in 1933, proved to be a successful political move.
The verdict is still out on President Donald Trump’s tweets, though.  Trump regularly tweets about “fake news.” He has doubled down on the view that overly critical news outlets are the “enemy of the American people.”  He talked about more stringent libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations, threatened the broadcast license of certain networks, and the Trump White House pulled the press pass for CNN personality Jim Acosta after a confrontation at a press conference.
But so far he hasn’t taken government action, as Roosevelt and other past presidents have.
A Trump-appointed federal judge sided with CNN on the Acosta press pass. Congress is unlikely to enact new libel laws, as Supreme Court precedent sets a high standard for a public figure to sue a news outlet.  The Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to pull a license of a network (which aren’t licensed), having purview only over individual stations that operate on the public airwaves (which are licensed). Cable news outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News Channel also are not licensed and not subject to FCC regulation.
Past presidents have taken tangible actions to undermine a free press. Trump has so far taken only a more negative rhetorical tone toward the press, said David Beito, a history professor at the University of Alabama.  “Would he like to do something? He probably would, but a change of tone has been the biggest difference,” Beito told The Daily Signal, characterizing Trump’s rhetorical attacks on the press as more aggressive than most of his predecessors.
Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were among the biggest presidential offenders during the 20th century, he added.
“Wilson was extremely hostile to any sort of criticism, but it was couched in terms of wartime and the red scare,” Beito said. “Everyone knew Wilson was doing this. FDR was very subtle. Roosevelt was effective working through third parties. It was hard tying him to anything.”
Here are seven examples of presidential administrations that went well beyond rhetoric in going after the press.



Key players in new fight over Trump tax returns
House Democrats see getting President Trump’s tax returns as one of their top oversight priorities — and they are bracing for a fight in the new year.
Trump is the first president in decades who hasn’t made his tax returns public.
Democrats want to review Trump’s returns in order to get more information about any potential conflicts of interest.

Read the full story here

Deplorables must brace themselves for there will be ZERO Peace in the Valley in a destined to be worse 2019.


The January 3rd Squad Is Coming And They
Don’t Play Nice

By  —— Bio and ArchivesDecember 28, 2018

The January 3rd Squad Is Coming And They Don’t Play Nice

Keep your prayers and your perspective within easy reach because you’re going to need them as soon as the 2019 calendar reads January 3rd.
January 3rd, 2019 is the day that ultra radical Congress newcomers, the festering boil on the rump of the Democrat Party,  will prove it’s all all but impossible to lance.
Their message, written in harsh action rather than words,  could easily be:  ‘Move over Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer,  The Squad has arrived’. Only, you can’t call them “The Squad” even though they self-describe as one.

They’re only a handful among the 63 freshman incoming Congress members , but what a handful—OWS (Occupy Wall Street), Antifa, Black Lives Matter and the red roses of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) all rolled into one.

David Catanese of U.S. News calls them “a flock of progressive renegade freshman females hellbent on breaking the norms of the institution and challenging the notion that seniority means supremacy.”

“They’re young, they’re female, and they’re clear-eyed about upsetting the apple cart in Washington” (U.S. News, Dec. 27, 2018).

No one should be surprised that many see them as wild-eyed as opposed to “clear-eyed”.

The intention of the radicals elected to public office in 2018 midterms, unofficially led by the likes of New York’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib, and Minnesota’s Ilhan Omar, is to turn what they view as America’s anti-inclusive, nationalist, racist society on its ear.

Misogynists, of course will not be tolerated, even if they’re only accused of misogyny.

This time out, prime Dems like Pelosi will be largely ignored by both mainstream media and male reps and senators from both sides of the aisle, now effectively silenced by the fear of being targeted by the #MeToo Movement.

Forget the presidency snubbed-by-Obama Joe Biden, Bully Beto O’Rourke and any others, media darling Ocasio-Cortez, who has long held visions of the presidency in her head, is ready to take your place.

Nothing shy about Ocasio-Cortez,  who has already joined in a protest staged in Nancy Pelosi’s office.
Before even being sworn in, she’s become media-sanctioned as one of the most influential figures in the Democrat Party, and is as David Catanese describes her an “unordained leader” of The Squad.
This is how her sister renegades have already asserted themselves before the swearing-in.

“Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib, who at 42 years old is the first Palestinian-American woman elected to the House, raised eyebrows when she announced she would lead a delegation to her mother’s native West Bank rather than partake in the traditional freshman trip to Israel. She said she hoped to humanize the plight of Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied territory and show new members a part of the story that’s not been included in the usual voyage sponsored by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. She’s also a vocal supporter of the “BDS” movement, which advocates for boycotting, divesting and sanctioning Israel for its treatment of Palestinians.” (U.S. News)

“During freshman orientation, it was Tlaib who joined Ocasio-Cortez in calling out former White House adviser Gary Cohn for telling the newbies, “You guys are way over your head, you don’t know how the game is played.”

“No, Gary,” Tlaib responded, “YOU don’t know what’s coming – a revolutionary Congress that puts people over profits.” Her response earned more than 11,000 retweets and close to 49,000 likes.

“She also took to Instagram to reveal what she would wear for her swearing-in ceremony: a maroon-colored Palestinian gown, known as a thobe. Instead of a Bible, she’ll take the oath on a Quran.

“It’s a real huge symbol,” she said. “It’s history. It’s culture.”

“Ilhan Omar, a 36-year-old Democrat from Minnesota, will become the first U.S. lawmaker to wear a headscarf or hijab on the House floor. With her November victory, Omar becomes the first woman of color to represent Minnesota in Congress as well as the first Muslim refugee and first Somali-American.

“When a conservative talk radio host complained that Omar would now make Congress “look like an Islamic republic,” she took him on directly.

“Well sir, the floor of Congress is going to look like America,” she wrote. “And you’re gonna have to just deal.”

The new radicals elected to Congress are both female and minorities meaning that no one will be able to touch them with the proverbial 10-foot pole.

Some Democrats can already see what’s coming:

“The freshman class as an aggregate will have more power than the leadership,” says Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat about to start his second term.The balance of power is shifting in the House. Leadership doesn’t matter nearly as much. Ordinary members of Congress have a much bigger platform. The size of your Twitter following and the size of your external base makes a huge difference.” (U.S. News)

Meanwhile, the outgoing year of 2018 was one dominated by Fake News and visceral hatred unleashed worldwide by all of those suffering from the incurable Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).

Deplorables must brace themselves for there will be ZERO Peace in the Valley in a destined to be worse 2019.

As Ilhan Omar, the 36-year-old Democrat from Minnesota, soon to become the first U.S. lawmaker to wear a headscarf or hijab on the House floor, puts it: “We did not come to play”.

White Privilege is BS!

The concept of “white privilege” gets a lot of play among progressives and liberals, but as this clip shows, it is all but a fantasy due to demographic reality. In this insightful video, commentator Jay Fayza of The Rebel demonstrates that the facts of who earns what in America turn the concept of white privilege on its head and prove, like many liberal concepts, that white privilege is more of a vague notion of wishful thinking than anything else.
In fact, as he states, perhaps Americans should be talking more about particular ethnic privileges than white privilege. There are also steps outlined in a National Center for Policy Analysis report that Fayza goes through, proving that some African-Americans bring poverty — and all the side effects it engenders — on themselves through their own actions.
Whether these are cultural values that are handed down from generation to generation or are beliefs that are learned from contemporary society is debatable; there’s certainly evidence for both arguments.
But there’s no denying that examples Fayza cites are endemic to particular ethnic groups while being anathema to others. Watch as this fascinating debunking illustrates that white privilege is just another myth in a thick volume of progressive American fictions.

This isn’t my first rodeo! GM IS IN TROUBLE!


A mural in Lordstown, Ohio. The GM plant here employs 1,600 workers.
A mural in Lordstown, Ohio. The GM plant here employs 1,600 workers. Photograph: Tony Dejak/AP

Lordstown, Ohio, was defined by its General Motors plant. Now workers say job cuts threaten the lives they’ve built

 There’s a sign outside the General Motors assembly plant in Lordstown, Ohio, that reads: “GM, We Invested in You. Now It’s Your Turn to Invest in US.”

Ever since the US’s largest car company’s immense assembly plant opened here 52 years ago, it has dominated this blue-collar town. Now GM workers here are furious that the automaker plans to idle – and perhaps permanently close – the plant.

GM stunned its workforce on 26 November, the Monday after Thanksgiving, by announcing it would cut roughly 14,000 jobs and idle five factories in North America, including the Lordstown plant, which employs 1,600 workers. One factor stoking the workers’ ire is that GM’s move came after American taxpayers rescued it from bankruptcy with a $49.5bn federal bailout in 2009.

While some have blamed Trump policies for the closure, or at least for his inability to stop them, it’s the company that workers hold most responsible.

“Their announcement was really a kick in the stomach,” said Danny Adams, who has worked at the plant since 1996. “It’s not woe is me. It’s woe is us.”

Like many GM workers here, Adams, 53, is worried and bitter, not knowing where he might find a new job and wondering whether he’s too old to train for a new career. Adams could perhaps transfer to another GM plant, but he fears that such a move would be hugely trying for his 15-year-old son.

“This is devastating. This is our livelihood,” said Stephanie Allein, 40, who began working for GM in 2000 and was transferred to Lordstown in 2010.

This isn’t my first rodeo,” Allein said. This is my third GM plant. I’d like to be able to plant my roots somewhere. I feel like a gypsy.” Allein, who helps assemble dashboards, transferred to Lordstown when her GM plant in Shreveport, Louisiana, closed. Before Shreveport, she worked at a GM-owned Delphi auto parts plant in Lockport, New York, which laid her off in 2006.

“When I came here,” Allein said, “there was this feeling this plant has been around forever, that this plant wasn’t going anywhere. You felt a security coming here. People bought houses.” The Lordstown facility occupies over 900 acres and has produced more than 16m vehicles, including Pontiac Firebirds and Chevy Cavaliers and Vegas. Last year, it generated $250m in wages, money that was the engine of Lordstown’s economy.

GM’s decision left people fuming, but not without hope, because it didn’t say the plant was closing. Rather, it said the plant was “unallocated”. That day, GM announced it was ending production of the Chevy Cruze in the US – that’s the car the Lordstown plant makes (although GM will continue to produce the Cruze in Mexico along with several crossover vehicles). GM was responding to a slowdown in sales of smaller cars, like the Cruze, and to Trump’s easing fuel economy standards, a move making it easier for automakers to focus on producing larger cars and trucks.

 This is devastating. This is our livelihood Stephanie Allein, autoworker GM said it was idling Lordstown and four other plants – in Detroit; Baltimore; Warren, Michigan; and Oshawa, Ontario – to cut costs and free up money to invest in electric and autonomous cars. The Lordstown workers hope GM will opt to assemble another car, perhaps an electric car, here. “We should be building the next-generation car here,” Allein said. “We should be building the crossovers here, not in Mexico.”

For most of my life GM was America, the goal of all car makers, that they could never reach, because GM had more help from Uncle Sammy. After WWII, Uncle turned on GM, forced GM to accept imports right into their dealerships which were privately owned at the expense of GM. It was the beginning of the end of the GM icon.

When GM left one of my old home town’s back under Clinton’s gold rush to Asia, along with a half dozen other manufacturers, that town was relegated to third world status and it has never recovered.

When GM says it isn’t closing it’s just unalocating the plant, it’s just lubricant for the screwing Lordstown is getting.

While the squeeze put on GM for smaller, lighter more fuel efficient vehicles contributed to GM’s failures, Ford went the other way to pick up trucks and their same frame counterpart SUV’s and is surviving on those vehicles. Why? Because there is a large segment of the market that has tried little cars and either don’t like them or prefer imported little cars like Toyota for instance which has replaced GM as the auto industry’s success icon.

After decades of redistribution, birth control, sex re-education, bussing, community re-arranging, mass migration, wars of conquest, mass fumigation, inoculation and dosing, toleration of financial and political criminality, silly, impotent, irrelevant pulpiteers that we are mere experimental guinea pigs living on billionaire’s animal farms. As long as there is food in the feeding bin and endless entertainment do not expect a change in direction.

This isn’t your grandparent’s America that treasured family, community, culture, the dignity of the human person and accountability to the Divine.




Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text




This one is all to true with the Socialist
Democrats, after our guns, then us!


The Heritage Foundation
Member Briefing

Keeping the United Nations Out of America’s
Border Security Debate

By Dustin Howard


In a recent interview with Fox’s Harris Faulkner, President Trump cited Heritage Senior Legal Fellow Hans von Spakovsky’s work in The Daily Signal. The piece addressed the popular liberal argument that claims President Trump conspired to violate campaign finance laws by giving money to Karen McDougal and Stephanie Clifford.

The President’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, pled guilty to tax evasion and financial fraud charges, but von Spakovsky takes issue with the notion that there were violations to campaign finance law, which were part of Cohen’s plea agreement.

As a former member of the Federal Election Commission, von Spakovsky notes that spending restrictions established by the Federal Election Campaign Act specifically do not apply to expenditures that would “exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign.”
Von Spakovsky also recalled that the Justice Department’s prosecution of similar charges against former Senator John Edwards resulted in acquittal. The claim that the President violated campaign laws doesn’t withstand scrutiny.
When you have the best legal minds analyzing the issues of our day, it’s possible to dismantle an attempt to use election laws as a weapon against the president. Thank you for giving us the resources to defend the truth and lay out the facts for all—even the President of the United States.

Laura Ingraham: Lame duck negligence


Last week, President Trump threw down with Democrat leaders over his signature promise to build a wall. Well, naturally, open border Democrats desperate to replace you with new voters are digging in against the president.  “President Trump should understand there are not the votes for the wall in the House or the Senate,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said over the weekend. “He is not going to get the wall in any form.”
Oh, no shock there. He’s not thrilled about it. But what about the House GOP? Surely in their waning days of power, they have their priorities straight. They’ll finally support the president’s agenda and the rule of law. Right?   Well, not so much. Retiring House Speaker Paul Ryan seems to have his mind on other things, like his favorite Christmas movies.
“I like ‘Elf.’ I think ‘Elf’ is probably the — my favorite is ‘It’s a Wonderful Life.’ It’s one of my favorite movies of all time,” Ryan said in a recent interview. “I love ‘It’s a Wonderful Life.’ I watch it every Christmas. It’s a thing I do. It’s a thing I make my kids do. It’s in black-and-white. They think they’re very confused about that.”   They are not the only ones confused. The cold, hard facts are this: Many Republicans have no desire at all to build the wall. They don’t want to fund it and they don’t want it or anything else that actually matters to the voters who elected them.
While they’re still being paid to do the people’s work, I think they’ve clearly moved on to merry-making, frivolity, talking about old family movies and family favorites. Meanwhile, the administration, however, is doing its best to light a fire under Congress. So what if they only have a few legislative days left in the majority?


Tucker Carlson responds to his immigration critics:

 We’re not intimidated, we’ll continue
to tell the truth!


We’ve talked a lot on this show about the threat to free speech. It turns out it’s very real.
Here’s one example: Last week, we interviewed a man named Genaro Lopez. Lopez is an elected official in Tijuana, Mexico. He’s exactly the kind of person you’d think a lot of American journalists would want to talk to. For months, the media have demanded that the migrant caravan from Honduras must be admitted into the United States. Once it gets here, they’ve told us, our country will be greatly improved by its presence. That’s how immigration works.
OK. It turns out we can test that hypothesis. That very same caravan, the one they’ve been telling you about, is now encamped in Tijuana. It’s been there for weeks. Simple question: Has the caravan made Tijuana better? Genaro Lopez would know the answer. His job is to represent the citizens of that city. We’ve invited Lopez on twice to ask about the caravan. He’s some of what he told us.
I asked him, “Behind you it seems that somebody’s cleaning up garbage. Is there a lot of trash there?”
Lopez responded: “There’s a lot of trash because, what I was trying to tell you, the 360 [people we had here] grew to 6,200. And that’s why it got out of hand. So, we got another facility. It’s a big concert hall where you can have like 10,000 people under a roof.”
That was on December 3. Ten days later, we invited Genaro Lopez back on to the show to see how Tijuana was doing.
Nobody else in the media seemed interested in what had happened to the caravan. As long as the migrants remained in Mexico, they couldn’t really be used to attack Donald Trump. So the press moved on to the next dumb, shiny thing. But we were interested. Here’s what Lopez told us:
“Things aren’t getting better. They’re probably getting worse,” he said. “Last weekend, we issued an ultimatum to all the Hondurans and Guatemalans that are camping out here on the street. They’re blocking the street. And they’re bringing all their necessities, trashing the street. … Problems are still going on. There’s been like 280 arrests. Before, it was solely for drug possession and being drunk in the streets. Now, it’s for breaking and entering into homes.”
Trashing the street. Doing drugs in public. Blocking traffic. Breaking into homes. That’s not at all what CNN promised us.



John Nelson -
Bob Gilmore
Dick Fankhauser