Surprisingly a lot of people are standing with Colin Kaepernick in his decision not to stand during the national anthem, "calling the Star Spangled Banner "weak" and saying that he doesn't truly love the song. Here is what he had to say on twitter: For those defending the current anthem, do you really truly love that song? I don't and I'm very good at singing it. Like, one of the best He continued to add: My vote is for America the Beautiful. Star spangled banner is a weak song anyway. And then you read this... https://t.co/iAE62FAbxj John Legend linked to an article titled, "Colin Kaepernick Is Righter Than You Know: The National Anthem Is A Celebration Of Slavery" The article makes the arguement that an unsung verse of the Francis Scott Key poem is a moral "atrocity." The author claims the end of the rarely sung third verse "literally celebrated the murder of African-Americans." The verse reads: No refuge could save the hireling and slave From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave, And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave. @johnlegend not sure why it's turned into a battle over the lyrics of our anthem. The lyrics were never Colin's argument in the first place All of John Legend's tweets were made in support of the 49ers quarterback who refused to stand while the national anthem was being played during a preseason game. Kaepernick said that his sitd own was for "people that are being oppressed" and he'll end the protest when "I feel like that flag represents what it's supposed to represent."


From Israel’s prime minister down to the lowliest clerk, from the Commander in Chief down to the lowest ranking officer, from the Mossad down to the police by way of the Shabak – since 1994, everyone has been chanting the same mantra about peace with Jordan. The prevalent reasoning is that peace with Jordan is Israel’s most important strategic resource for the following reasons: 1.Security: The 500-kilometer border between Israel and Jordan is Israel’s longest border with another country, reaching from Hamat Gader and the Yarmouk River in the north down to Eilat in the south. Jordan makes sure the border is quiet along its entire length and prevents hostile forces from approaching it and continuing west into Israel. If not for the peace declared between the two states, Israel would have to keep large forces along the border to guard it against infiltration. Israel sees the very existence of Jordan to its east as a security asset in itself because Jordan acts as a buffer zone between the Jewish state and the violent chaos in Iraq, Syria, and Iran. There is full cooperation between the Jordanian and Israeli armies, including visits by officers, the handing over of information, and coordinated activity along the border, under the assumption that radical groups are a shared enemy. In exchange for this, it is said, Israel played a part in guarding Jordan’s northern and eastern borders during the years 2014-16, the period when ISIS posed a threat to Jordan. 2. Jordan is the second Arab nation to have signed a peace treaty with Israel, proving that Israel can find itself accepted in the Middle East as a sustainable country with whom former enemies can make peace by rethinking their previous positions. This could occur despite the August 1967 Khartoum Arab summit where it was declared that the Arab nations would not recognize Israel, would not negotiate with Israel and would not make peace with it. King Hussein of Jordan was a party to these decisions but carried on negotiations with Israel, recognized it and signed a peace treaty, as did Egypt before him. The obvious conclusion is that any Arab nation can do the same, making peace with Jordan a significant accomplishment, 3. There is a wide array of cooperative ties between Israel and Jordan, mostly in the economic sphere. Three issues are involved: a. Israel has a multi-billion dollar contract with Jordan according to which it sells gas extracted from Israel’s Mediterranean gas fields to Jordan’s electricity company; b. Israel recognized “Qualified Industrial Zones” in which Israeli funds are invested, Jordanians are employed and Americans are the buyers, providing employment for thousands of Jordanian families; c. cooperative ventures such as the Water Canal, tourism, flights, trade, and academia – thousands of Israeli Arab students attend Jordanian Universities and their degrees are recognized in Israel. In exchange for recognition, Israel granted the Hashemite Kingdom, and especially its king, special status in the Jerusalem sites considered holy by Islam, mainly the al Aqsa Mosque, giving Hussein and his son Abdullah today, a significant stamp of approval in the Islamic world. This stamp of approval is especially important in granting much-needed legitimacy to the Hashemite Kingdom. The Palestinian majority and even some Bedouin groups question that legitimacy, since the Hashemites are not originally Jordanian, having come from the western section of the Arabian Peninsula, Hijaz, where the two Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina are located. The British gave the Transjordan Emirate to Abdullah I, great grandfather of today’s Abdullah. He is considered a foreign transplant, giving rise to questions of legitimate rule, and the special status at al Aqsa is intended to give him a shot of legitimacy, stabilizing his regime. The king pays the salaries of hundreds of Jerusalem Waqf officials. Another payment Israel took upon itself is the handing over of 50 million cubic meters of drinkable water to Jordan every year. The plan was to bring this water from the Sea of Galilee, but the drought of the last few years has lowered the level of the water in the lake, so Israel has substituted expensive desalinated water instead. Jordanian agriculture in the Jordan Valley is made possible in part because of this Israeli water. All the points raised here give Israel the feeling that the peace agreement with Jordan is successful, certainly more successful than the one with Egypt, with whom there is much less cooperation on non-security related issues. Israel’s payment for this by handing over water and securing Jordan’s status in Jerusalem is one Israel can handle in exchange for the premise that peace with Jordan serves Israeli interests. All the parties to Israel’s government are united in supporting the maintenance of peace with Jordan at all costs. Where did we go wrong? The first and main point is that Israel ignores the fact that the peace agreement is totally dependent on the continuation of the illegitimate Hashemite dynasty. In 1994 that meant Hussein, today it is Abdullah II, but the future is unclear because there are quite a few people in Jordan and outside it who see Abdullah as the last Hashemite monarch. What comes next? There are several possible answers to that query, ranging from a military junta made up of local Bedouin ruling the various populations, on to a civil war that leads to the country splitting in two, with a Palestinian state rising in the northwestern part of the country where there is a Palestinian Arab majority. It is no secret that the Palestinian majority in Jordan is opposed to the peace treaty with Israel. One reason is the recognition a treaty grants Israel and another is the fact that it does not include the so-called “right of return” of the 1948 refugees to within Israeli borders, including compensation for the possessions they left behind them and the years of suffering they underwent in refugee camps. The Palestinian majority in Jordan feels no commitment to the peace agreement; it was signed by King Hussein, not by them. For this reason, most of the professional associations in Jordan – lawyers, journalists, doctors and others – do not allow their members to partner with Israelis. Most of their members are Palestinian Arabs who see the peace agreement as the result of the king’s betrayal of their cause. The peace agreement upon which Israel and Jordan are signed and everything Israel has paid, is paying and is willing to pay to preserve and guard that peace will be utterly worthless the day a rebellion breaks out against the king, or some assassin or suicide bomber, G-d forbid, succeeds in killing him. The house of cards Israel built around him will collapse instantaneously, the peace agreement and any others signed in its wake will become fond memories. Whoever takes the king’s place will restart the process and expect Israel to pay even more than it had originally paid – that is, if the country remains united. If that new leader is a Palestinian Arab, the price will entail the return of a significant number of 1948 refugees to the state of Israel, not to the Palestinian State that may exist by then. The king knows full well that the possibility that he could be assassinated by a Palestinian Arab, as his great grandfather was in 1951 in Jerusalem, is not far-fetched. That is the reason his armed bodyguards are not Arabs, but members of the Circassian ethnic minority who stem from the Caucasian Mountain region and do not have their eyes on the throne, meaning that they are not suspected of planning to murder the king or poison his food. The king’s mistrust of the Palestinian Arabs, who make up the majority of his subjects, has led him to keep them out of the armed forces, police, foreign ministry and especially from internal security organizations and intelligence. There are several Palestinian Arabs in the government and parliament who serve as token representatives, but the majority of them know exactly what the Hashemites think of the majority of Jordan’s citizenry, those who define themselves as Palestinians – never calling themselves Jordanians because that is used for Bedouin, viewed as lower class by the Palestinians, who are farmers and city dwellers. The Palestinian Arabs in Jordan are the economic engine of the country. They make up most of the merchants, manufacturers, businessmen, lawyers, accountants, academics, journalists, arts and media personalities, and they generally avoid contact with Israel and Israelis. They conduct a consistent and strict boycott of Israel. The king respects their position for two reasons: One, he has no way to force the peace agreement upon them, and two, he is quite content to show Israel that the peace agreement is not secure because of Palestinian opposition, allowing him to demand more and more from Israel in order to guard its interests and keep the king in power. The cost of the peace agreement with Israel is prohibitive. First, Israel respects the status it granted the kingdom in Jerusalem, even though there is no precedent in the entire world for a sovereign state granting another country special rights in its capital city on that state’s most holy site. In 1994, when this was decided during the peace talks, Israel wasn’t worried about Hussein who hated Arafat and agreed with Israel that there must never be a Palestinian state. The status Israel granted him on the Temple Mount was in order to prevent Arafat and the Islamic Movement from taking over the site. King Abdullah II has turned Jordanian policy around and is an ardent supporter of the establishment of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria., one that will be able to look over at Israel and threaten it with missiles and short range mortars that hit from Dimona and Beer Sheva in the south, up along the coastal plain from Ashkelon, the Ashdod port, greater Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion airport, to Haifa and its port and all the way to Afula and Beit She’an. Long range weapons will threaten all the rest of Israel. Abdullah is actively creating a strategic threat to the state of Israel that will most probably be ruled by Hamas, which won most of the seats in the Palestinian legislature in 2006 and led a violent takeover of Gaza in 2007. Abdullah would like to see these scenarios repeat themselves, a most realistic possibility. King Abdullah displayed his hostility towards Israel poverty in two recent events. This past March he freed the Jordanian soldier who, in cold blood, murdered seven school girls from Beit Shemesh in 1997 as they took part in a class trip to the “Peace Island” (!!!) in Naharayim. His father, King Hussein, came to pay a condolence visit to the families in Beit Shemesh, while his son lets the murderer go free. What price did he pay for this slap in the face to Israel? Zilch. Nothing. Jordan acts against Israel as a matter of course in international circles, especially UNESCO and the UN Human Rights Council, two places that constantly attempt to delegitimize Israel. Jordan encourages and pushes for the decisions that deny Jewish tradition in Jerusalem, undermining the historical and religious foundations for the existence of the Jewish State. This is meant to spread the feeling to the world that Israel’s establishment is a result of British colonialism, one that must be canceled so that “Falestin” is restored to its “historical owners” – the Palestinians. Abdullah, like the Palestinian Arabs, thinks that if he succeeds in removing Jerusalem from the State of Israel, the resulting demoralization will send the Jews packing. Establishing a Palestinian Arab state that will threaten Israel’s security and destroy the Jewish state, is the strategic objective of King Abdullah because it will prevent a Palestinian State from arising in Jordan. If a Palestinian state is created in the hills of Judea and Samaria, the king intends to get rid of all the Palestinian refugees who entered Jordan in the 1948 war, about one and a half million people, plus several hundred thousand who entered Jordan over the last seventy years. A demographic pressure in the Palestinian state will become terrorist pressure that turns life in Israel into Hell – exactly what Abdullah wants. He coordinates his activities with Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas, seeing eye to eye with them on the main goal – destroying Israel in order to save the Hashemite Kingdom from becoming a nation of Palestinians. We would do well to remember what most of us have long forgotten: The clueless group of irresponsible Israeli politicians who gave Jordan its unconditional and unlimited special status in Jerusalem is the same group whose idiotic policies brought terrorist Arafat back from the garbage bin of politicians in Tunisia and granted him the closest thing to a state, The stars of this stellar group included Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin, and Alon Liel, who dragged Yitzchak Rabin into the most dangerous political trap, endangering the continued existence of the State of Israel. Jordan today, it must be concluded, is working non-stop on the cover of its peace treaty with Israel to destroy the Jewish State and create a Palestinian one instead. What is worse is that Israel refuses to admit to the situation and continues most carefully to keep the agreement, hoping calm will prevail along the border until the next elections. Every politician knows that if during his term, relations with Jordan deteriorate, the media – our shallow, slanted and agenda-ridden media – will accuse him of being the cause of the agreement’s nullification, making him pay the price for the next round of elections. That is why politicians bolster up the temporary tactical quiet, ignoring the strategic threat to the very existence of the state posed by the peace agreement. If Israel’s leaders felt endangered by the actions of Abdullah, they would do something to prevent his destructive activities, cleverly disguised as military and economic cooperation. The problem is that in their view, short term tactical advantages are preferable to attending to strategic problems that affect the long term. We are all going to pay a high price for this way of running things on the part of Israel’s decision makers – as can be seen by the security equipment crisis last month in Jerusalem. King Hussein was all for Israel’s continued existence and did not question Jerusalem ‘s status. That’s why peace with him was positive in general. His son Abdullah changed his father’s strategy and works tirelessly to create a Palestinian state on the ruins of the destroyed Jewish one. Now that King Abdullah’s nefarious scheme has been revealed, Israel must rethink its Jordanian route and work to create a Palestinian Arab state in all or part of Jordan, since the majority of the people there are Palestinian Arabs. The alternative is establishing a Palestinian state on Israeli territory with its capital in Eastern Jerusalem, a strategic danger to Israel. There is no reason that the Jewish people, who returned to its land after 2000 years of exile, should pay with its very existence for the survival of the Hashemites brought by the British from Hijaz to rule the most artificial country in the world – Jordan. Reprinted with author’s permission from Israel National News


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, thinks “much too much” has been made of Hillary Clinton’s statement to the FBI that she did did not know that the “(C)“ markings on her emails meant and speculated that they referred to “paragraphs marked in alphabetical order.” Pelosi was asked by CBS News’ Josh Elliott whether Americans should be concerned that Clinton said she didn’t know what the markings meant. “I think they shouldn’t be that concerned,” she said on “CBS This Morning.” “I think that the secretary of state deals with a large number of issues -- 30,000 emails -- we’re talking about a few that may have been marked ‘confidential.’ ‘Classified...’ and ‘secret’ and ‘highly sensitive’ is where it becomes more problematic.” “The fact is that whatever it was that Hillary Clinton dealt with in that manner had no threat to our security,” Pelosi continued, “and I think that too much has been made of this.” The attention being paid to the issue, she called “a distraction” from Congress’ unfinished business. Congress returns this week for a brief session before the November elections. There are two things it must get done -- prevent the government from shutting down on Oct. 1 by passing a short-term spending bill and provide funding for the fight against the Zika virus. The House minority leader complained that the president had asked for the resources to fight Zika in February, but “not one cent has been appropriated by Congress.” Zika funding has been held up because Democrats and Republicans have been fighting over how much to allocate to stop the virus, whether the money should be taken from anti-Ebola efforts, and they’re also arguing about funding for contraceptive measures. Pelosi said Republicans were rejecting anything that has to do with reproduction in the bill. Zika, which has been linked to birth defects, is transmitted by mosquitoes, and by sexual contact.


Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, has hired a lawyer as he prepares to appear before the House Intelligence Committee as part of its investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, according to a report. Bannon hired Bill Burck, a co-managing partner of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP’s Washington, D.C., office, according to The Daily Beast. White House counsel Don McGahn and former White House chief of staff Reince Priebus hired Burck in September to represent them in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Bannon is scheduled to testify before the House Intelligence Committee next week. Sources told The Daily Beast the former chief strategist intends to “fully cooperate.” Bannon was hired as chief executive of the Trump campaign in August 2016 and was tapped by President Trump to serve as White House chief strategist. He left his post there in August 2017 and returned to Breitbart News as its executive chairman. But, Bannon and Breitbart parted ways earlier this week amid a spat between President Trump and his former chief strategist. Bannon made derogatory comments about the president and his family in a new tell-all book, prompting a fiery condemnation from Trump. Though Bannon had previously avoided being swept up in the Russia probe—until the House Intelligence Committee asked last month for him to appear before lawmakers—he had been discussing the probe with Trump behind the scenes.


Former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama have enlisted Chance the Rapper for their first-ever Obama Foundation Summit in Chicago. Taking place Oct. 31 and Nov. 1, the inaugural event is set to bring “hundreds of leaders from around the world” together to “exchange ideas, explore creative solutions to common problems and experience civic art, technology and music from around the world,” according to Billboard. In addition to performing, Chano will serve as curator alongside some all-star musical guests, including Gloria Estefan and the National, who will headline. I’m curating a concert on Nov. 1 for the #ObamaSummit. Follow @ObamaFoundation so you don’t miss it. That’d be a terrible thing. — Lil Chano From 79th (@chancetherapper) October 13, 2017 Chance has a rich history with the Obamas. His father once worked for President Obama, while Michelle has publicly praised his $1 million donation to Chicago Public Schools. “Chance, I am grateful for everything you’ve done on behalf of our young people back home,” said the former POTUS during a recent concert. “I’m hopeful that everyone who is at the concert today, everybody who is getting involved, everybody who’s been part of the parade, all of you are of the mindset that you can do anything that you want to do, as long as you put your mind to it.” Last year, Chance beamed while discussing his famous supporters, who still resided in the White House at the time. “If you go up there, you’ll probably hear Coloring Book,” he said. “This is not a joke at all…Malia [Obama] listens to Coloring Book. And I send them stuff sometimes…Barack was talking about it. Or, uh, President Obama was talking about it.”


Dumbfounded that Donald Trump beat his hand-picked successor, Hillary Clinton, as president, former President Barack Obama and a top aide began plotting to “destroy” the president-elect around Christmas, according to a new book on Democrat efforts to undermine President Trump. What’s more, the goal was to not just damage the Trump presidency but set the Republican president up for impeachment, according to Ed Klein’s latest from Regnery Publishing, All Out War: The Plot to Destroy Trump. It goes on sale tomorrow. In an exclusive excerpt provided to Secrets, Klein described a "Christmastime" dinner during which national security adviser Susan Rice pushed plans to “unmask, or disclose, the names of several Trump campaign associates who were mentioned or whose conversations were captured in intelligence intercepts of Russian officials.” Klein, a former New York Times editor who has written several insider accounts critical of the Clintons and Obamas, said that Obama knew of Rice’s efforts to disclose the names in hopes they would leak to the media and spark an investigation. “He knew Rice wanted to encourage leaks to the Washington Post and the New York Times accusing Trump and his campaign of colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the American presidential election,” Klein wrote. “If Rice’s plot succeeded — that is, if it could be proved that Trump had colluded with Putin during the campaign or, later, if it could be proved that he had tried to prevent an investigation into such collusion — Trump would likely face charges of impeachment,” said the new Klein book. But, he added, Obama didn’t know that his closest aide, Valerie Jarrett, was behind the plot. Rice eventually had to testify to Congress about her actions, and denied leaking Trump campaign and associate names. Klein does not reveal his source other than offering the source as Jarrett’s “friend.” During the dinner, wrote Klein, first lady Michelle Obama raised concerns that the effort was clearly a political plot to “sandbag” Trump. Rice, however, is quoted saying she was worried about national security and she referenced the leaks of Democratic National Committee emails, embarrassing to the Clinton campaign, by Russian sources. She wanted, said the book, to make sure that the alleged links to the Trump campaign and Russia became public before Trump came to office. “She said she was afraid that once Trump got into the White House, the evidence of collusion would be covered up or destroyed,” wrote Klein. At that point during the dinner, the former first lady, said the book, cautioned that the plot could “bite us in the ass.” As her husband mulled Rice’s plea to unmask the names by lowering security clearances, Jarrett’s “friend” told Klein, “Most of the time he had to choose between the lesser of two evils. This was an example of such a dilemma. It was clearly unethical to use illegal leaks to sabotage Trump. But Barack could argue that it was his patriotic to duty to draw attention to the possibility that the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians to influence the outcome of an American election.” At point, his source said, “Valerie piped up. ‘Well,’ she said, ‘[FBI Director James] Comey thinks Susan’s on to something. He’s investigating whether the Trump campaign cooperated with the Russians. There must be something there.’” Klein concluded, “Valerie has a sixth sense how to handle Barack and Michelle. She understood Michelle’s reservations and her desire to protect her husband, and she wanted to give Michelle a chance to vent. But Valerie left no doubt that she was in favor of Barack going along with Susan’s scheme.” Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com


"There’s something happening here." — Buffalo Springfield, 1967 Every major leftist movement the world has seen has been totalitarian by nature. Occasionally this brand of extremism arises elsewhere along the ideological spectrum, such as Islamo-fascism, but Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany remain the archetypes of the socialist genre of dictatorship among many incarnations which clearly include today’s “liberal Democrats” in the United States. Contemporary liberal Democrats reveal their totalitarian proclivities in many subtle ways, such as support for single-payer healthcare and all other forms of big government, and some that are not so subtle. Recent years have seen a surge in the latter variety. Shouting down conservative speakers on college campuses to silence their views has been ongoing, but now the practice has graduated to violent attacks on speakers and audiences. There is no record of comparable suppression of speech by conservatives. And why is it only the left that abides no dissent from its preferred orthodoxy? The adherents expose through their own behavior that they fear a fair debate of ideas, so they attempt to quell intellectual challenge through brute force—just as all autocrats do. America’s so-called liberal Democrats resort to the most aggressive tactics out of the Saul Alinsky manual, i.e., destroy any threat to the radical agenda. Truth is beside the point to them. To substantiate via illustration of such Stalinist “politics of personal destruction,” here are a few examples: (1) Mitt Romney, as 2012 presidential candidate, was Mr. Nice Guy until Democrats got ahold of him. Then the public found out that he had abused his dog, caused an employee to die of cancer, and sadistically imprisoned women in a torture device known as a binder! All this derived from the Obama campaign’s suitably-named “ kill Romney” strategy. Of course, candidate Obama’s own personal history was deemed off-limits. Hypocrisy is a familiar trait of leftist totalitarians. (2) Poor George W. Bush. Investigations by three different governmental commissions concluded that he did not lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If anything, he received the same information worldwide intelligence agencies did about Saddam’s WMD arsenal. Yet “Bush lied” was burned into the national consciousness through liberal Democrat propaganda, paving the way for election of a true leftist president. (3) Barack Obama advanced the practice of despotic repression by weaponizing every office of his government for domestic political use. The IRS campaign of terror against conservative groups was only one of the most obnoxious. Richard Nixon received an article of impeachment for much less. (4) The grand master of personal destruction politics was Bill Clinton, who slimed anyone seen as a threat whether James McDougal, Ken Starr, or Juanita Broaddrick. This m.o. was the whole point of the “war room” of Clinton’s permanent campaign, not to mention Hillary’s “bimbo eruption" squad. A colorful couple, those Clintons. Hillary, in particular, was a disciple of leftist Saul Alinsky. (5) Currently we have liberal Democrat rioters, following the Occupy Wall Street slow-motion riot. Black Lives Matter extremists demand the murder of police, and the misnamed Antifa ironically lives the fascist ideal of causing mayhem whenever someone utters a thought contrary to liberal Democrat political correctness. After the first violent act by a right-wing fringe fanatic in many years, in Charlottesville, the fake news narrative is that conservatives are the violent ones. In reality, almost all political violence in this country is committed by the far left (for example, a Bernie Sanders-supporting maniac actually attempting to assassinate Republican members of Congress). (6) A telling symptom of the left’s nascent despotism is the public shaming of any entity that disagrees with them, e.g., organizing against businesses that violate leftist dogma by supporting a traditional position. For instance, dare to agree with the view on homosexual marriage held until a few years ago by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and you become a target. (Recall Alinsky’s “isolate it, freeze it, personalize it.”) Likewise, the revelations about leftist groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center demonizing those they disagree with. The left decided long ago to downplay debate over ideas—their ideology having failed empirically all over the world—and to simply use neo-McCarthyist tactics instead. (7) In Animal Farm, some pigs really are more equal than others. Hillary Clinton was found to have committed numerous email felonies, and then the gutless James Comey said “never mind.” Clinton’s Benghazi malfeasance with Barack Obama also has gone unpunished. The political elite elevating itself above the law is a hallmark of leftist dictatorship. (8) One of the liberal Democrats’ favorite slander devices is the accusation of racism, which has become the supreme insult in our society. White-on-black racism, in particular, has become socially unacceptable, which actually is a measure of how anti-racist America has become in overcoming vestiges of its more primitive state. Recognize, however, that for the past 45 years, the only legally permissible, sometimes legally mandated, racial discrimination in the U.S. is that which is committed in favor of minorities against Caucasians. This is the extreme state of our social law, for better or worse, yet many on the left trot out “white supremacist” allegations more often than we can count. There is a more substantive reason for the liberal Democrat amalgam’s resort to this odious tactic, beyond findings of its marketing effectiveness: Liberal Democrats cannot permit the mass healing of race relations in our country. They need to aggravate those relations so their side is better able to exploit the issue. Is there no limit to their neo-McCarthyist cynicism? Politics is everything to liberal Democrats, because government power is everything to them. (9) Perhaps the worst of the Big Lies was “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” designed to give liberal Democrat government absolute life-and-death power over all citizens through the enactment of Obamacare. What better way to achieve totalitarian rule than mortal power over all the ruled people? See why socialized medicine is the liberal Democrats' Holy Grail? A broader explanation for the liberal Democrats’ current hysteria: Their camp had some very sinister plans for the country, and was oh-so-close to ultimate success. With the election of President Hillary Clinton, a prospective second straight subversive in the office, Democrats could have finally amnestied 11 million illegal aliens, i.e., new Democrat voters, thereby ensuring that no Republican could ever again be elected president. This outcome would establish their goal of a one-party dictatorship, in effect―if only it had happened. The dream scenario having been snatched away is what has driven the liberal Democrats over the edge. So, in their delirium, they lash out. It is all understandable for a group of closet totalitarians in the throes of catastrophic disappointment. And if they tear the nation apart as they act out, so much the better, in their warped view. They always despised the country anyway. Now the plan is for arch-socialist Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren (who misrepresented her own race for financial gain), to win the presidency in 2020 for a slightly postponed takeover. Pleasant dreams, America. There is something happening here. John Gaski is an associate professor at the Mendoza College of Business at the University of Notre Dame. He is a long-time registered Democrat and long-time registered Republican—intermittently, not simultaneously. If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.


U.S. President-elect Donald Trump speaks at his election night rally in New York early on Nov. 9, 2016. Trump stunned America and the world Wednesday, riding a wave of populist resentment to defeat Hillary Clinton in the race to become the 45th president of the United States.


Yet again we see more evidence that the media and leftist government officials are lying to the American public. What is the agenda? What reality are they try to protect? Why are they risking violence when it is unnecessary? Watch this video posted on Facebook by Will Johnson, a common sense conservative, who intends to be a part of a free speech rally this weekend in San Francisco. As he states it is intended to be a pro Trump rally, however it is clearly being painted by politicians and the media as a white supremacist rally with a call for the presence of Antifa. How is it possible to have a white supremacy rally when the rally barely has any white people attending? I’ll let you figure that one out! Watch the video below. https://www.facebook.com/newlypress/videos/1875854002678972/


Considering over 60 percent of United States citizens support going to war with North Korea, one would hope the majority would be able to, at the very least, locate the country on a map. Unfortunately, no such luck. The laughable discovery was made when Jimmy Kimmel and his team visited Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, and asked passersby to locate North Korea on a map. Many citizens were upfront about their lack of geographic knowledge but guessed anyway. Their estimates ranged from Canada to the Middle East to Australia. Only the minority actually knew where North Korea is located. Though the political situation in the United States is less than ideal at present, at least the people interviewed aren’t in charge of firing any missiles. What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!


WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Friday called allegations of Russian election meddling a “hoax,” and insisted the media was the “greatest influence” on the 2016 campaign. Trump’s tweets early Friday appeared to respond to Facebook’s announcement that the social media giant will provide to congressional investigators the contents of 3,000 ads bought by a Russian agency. “The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads on Facebook. What about the totally biased and dishonest Media coverage in favour of Crooked Hillary?” He later added: “The greatest influence over our election was the Fake News Media ‘screaming’ for Crooked Hillary Clinton. Next, she was a bad candidate!” The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads on Facebook. What about the totally biased and dishonest Media coverage in favor of Crooked Hillary? The greatest influence over our election was the Fake News Media "screaming" for Crooked Hillary Clinton. Next, she was a bad candidate! Facebook has faced growing pressure from members of Congress to release the content of the ads. The company has already handed over the ads to the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Facebook also says it will now require political ads to disclose both who is paying for them and all ad campaigns those individuals or groups are running on Facebook.


Nelly has been arrested for allegedly raping a woman, TMZ reports. According to Law enforcement sources, a woman has accused the rapper of raping her on his tour bus in Washington. The alleged rape is reported to have occurred at approximately 3:45 AM Saturday, with Nelly being arrested on second degree rape charges around 7:00 AM. Nelly is currently on tour with country act Florida Georgia Line. He was set to take the stage in Ridgefield, Washington Saturday night. Friday night's show took place at the White River Amphitheatre in Auburn, WA. Q13 FOX correspondent and anchor Brandi Kruse reports that Nelly met the alleged victim in Seattle after the show. There has been no official word from Nelly's representatives at this time. Further coverage to come as information arrives. UPDATE: Nelly's attorney has released a statement to Page Six, among other publications. Read it below. Nelly is the victim of a completely fabricated allegation. Our initial investigation, clearly establishes, this allegation is devoid of credibility and is motivated by greed and vindictiveness. I am confident, once this scurrilous accusation is thoroughly investigated, there will be no charges. Nelly is prepared to address and pursue all legal avenues to redress any damage caused by this clearly false allegation. Nelly's last tweet was at 3:23 AM EST or 12:23 AM PDT (local Washington time) Saturday. It reads, "Anytime you feel like the whole world is against you you need to scratch that shit its really you against the whole world because the whole world don't know you exist." TMZ has posted a video of the rapper that was reportedly filmed earlier in the night. Watch it below.


A lot of Californians are mad as hell. Some even say they’re not going to take it anymore. "It" is the result of November’s presidential election. What these Californians are doing is organizing a secessionist movement — as in, taking California out of the United States. Their movement is called Calexit, as in Brexit. Their inspiration is the growing gulf that separates them — politically, culturally, demographically — from the rest of the union. Hillary Clinton outpolled Donald Trump by a two-to-one margin here. "Without California, Trump would have won the popular vote," tweeted conservative pundit and Trump critic David Frum. The Golden State has a population of 39 million people, more than any other state in the union, and more people than in all of Canada. Metro Los Angeles alone is home to close to 19 million, a total greater than Ontario and Alberta combined. As Frum points out, those are numbers that come with economic clout, and therein lies the rub for many Californians. The U.S. without California, he writes, would be the world’s second-ranked technology power instead of the first. It’s home to Silicon Valley and companies such as Google, Apple, Cisco, Intel, Oracle, and SpaceX. California boasts the world’s sixth largest economy, greater than France, Italy, South Korea and India. California is also culturally distinct from much of the rest of the U.S. It’s synonymous with liberal causes, from environmental protection to gun control to health care, and that has other Americans judging Californians, and not in a flattering way. It’s a reality not lost on Marcus Ruiz Evans, one of the movers and shakers behind Calexit. "California," he admitted to the Washington Post, "(is) seen as weird." That weirdness extends to politics beyond the presidential variety. Gov. Jerry Brown has vowed to ensure Californians have health insurance coverage, offered through the state-run health exchange called Covered California, even if Trump Republicans repeal ObamaCare. But where the state most hears a different drummer is on immigration. Californians are decidedly in favour of it, and it’s easy to see why. California has the largest immigrant population in the union, approximately 10 million in total, a quarter of those undocumented. If you’re not an immigrant in California, you know one. Or two. Or more. In response to Trump’s ambitions to engage in large-scale deportation of illegal immigrants, the state legislature is considering a bill that would declare the state a "sanctuary." Lawmakers have even hired former Obama attorney general Eric Holder to battle the Trump administration on the issue. That step earned the enmity of the new president. "Trump claims California is ‘out of control,’ " writes columnist George Skelton in the Los Angeles Times, though the irony is undoubtedly lost on the president. Trump has threatened to cut off federal funds to California. "We’ll defund," Trump told Fox News. "We give tremendous amounts of money to California." The problem is that, like residents of Canada’s "have" provinces, Californians contribute more money to the federal treasury than what comes back. There has been much grousing about the Trump administration ever since the threats were levelled, fertile ground for Calexit. The secessionists even have the support of Silicon Valley billionaires Peter Thiel and Shervin Pishevar. Companies like Google have expressed concern about their ability in an anti-immigrant climate to recruit foreigners for jobs not enough Americans are qualified to fill. In January, the group Yes California was given permission to circulate a petition with the intention of putting the sovereignty question on the 2018 ballot. If the petition is successful — close to 600,000 signatures are required — a special vote to decide the state’s future would follow in 2019. Calexit does have its skeptics. "Canadians know you don’t escape the shadow of your giant neighbour by drawing a border," wrote Prof. Timothy William Waters in the Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said he believes secession is a bad idea. Such opinions are far from universal. According to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll taken in California, one-third of respondents support "peaceful withdrawal from the union." As one tweeter wrote: "We’ll just take our avocados and legal weed and go." Terry McConnell is a former Edmonton Journal columnist, editorial writer and copy editor now living in California


TAMPA BAY, Fla. - Americans around the country are being urged to donate blood at their local blood center in order to assist victims of Hurricane Irma. OneBlood, a Florida based blood center, resumed blood collections on Tuesday. All blood types are needed, however, there is an urgent need for platelet donors and people with O negative blood. Hurricane Irma forced OneBlood to suspend operations for three days and as a result, there is an urgent need to replenish the blood supply in Florida. Donors should visit www.oneblood.org for donor center hours and blood drive locations. OneBlood, in coordination with America’s Blood Centers and Blood Centers of America, has been actively arranging for shipments of blood to be brought in to Florida by blood centers from around the country. OneBlood is urging people living outside of Irma’s path to visit their local blood center and donate blood as soon as possible to assist those desperately in need in Florida. Those interested in donating blood may contact the following organizations to find a local blood drive and to schedule an appointment:


Facebook has set up a crisis response page so people who are in Las Vegas can let people know they are safe. More than 50 people died in the shooting and at least 400 people have been injured in the shooting, according to Las Vegas police. The shooting started around 10:08 p.m. local time. Those numbers would make this the deadliest mass shooting in United States history. The suspect has been identified as local man Stephen Paddock, 64. Paddock was shooting from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay, Sheriff Joe Lombardo said. Lombardo said the shooter is dead. Police believe Paddock killed himself before law enforcement entered the room, Lombardo said. People can check in to let Facebook friends now they are in Las Vegas and that they are safe. Police also advise people to call 1-866-535-5654 to check in on loved ones.


Ninety-two percent of Muslims in the U.S. are proud to be American, even though 75 percent say there is "a lot" of discrimination against Muslims in the U.S. Nine-in-ten Muslims reported having a positive feeling about living in the U.S., even though 75 percent believe it has become harder to be Muslim in the U.S. in recent years. The survey found that Muslims feel that the main problems they face in the U.S. are negative media coverage about the religion (60 percent), misconceptions about Islam (9 percent) and President Trump’s attitudes and/or policies towards Muslims (9 percent). The survey was conducted Jan. 23 to May 2, and 1,001 U.S. Muslim adults participated. Nearly 48 percent have experienced some type of discrimination. Researchers at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) found that the number of hate groups specifically targeting Muslims in the U.S. has nearly tripled in the past year. SPLC reported that there were 34 hate groups in 2015 and the figure has risen to 101. The SPLC attributed the increase in hate groups in part to Trump's campaign rhetoric. "The growth has been accompanied by a rash of crimes targeting Muslims, including an arson that destroyed a mosque in Victoria, Texas, just hours after the Trump administration announced an executive order suspending travel from some predominantly Muslim countries," SPLC said in a statement. But despite the backlash Muslims have received from Trump's presidency, participants said they have experienced support in the past few months from non-Muslims


It is a rich if tragic irony that the same progressives denouncing Richard Spencer and demanding that municipal statues be torn down for their alleged white supremacist qualities are themselves closely aligned with a white supremacist-tied group. I am speaking, of course, of Planned Parenthood, which is to the abortion-loving Left what Adolf Hitler’s bunker would have become to fascists had Germany not demolished it in the late 1980s: a sort of holy shrine upon which adulation and adoration can be fixated. Read Full Article »


Donald Trump ran on many braggadocios and largely unrealistic campaign promises. One of those promises was to be the best, the hugest, the most competent infrastructure president the United States has ever seen. Trump was going to fix every infrastructure problem in the country and Make America Great Again in the process. That is, unless you’re a brown American. In that case, you’re on your own, even after a massive natural disaster like Hurricane Maria. Puerto Rico’s debt, which the Puerto Rican citizens not in government would have no responsibility for, has nothing to do with using federal emergency disaster funds to save the lives of American citizens there. The infrastructure is certainly a mess at this point after a Category 5 hurricane ripped through the island, and 84 percent of Puerto Rican people are currently without electricity. Emergency efforts after Hurricanes Irma and Harvey reportedly went very well and Trump praised himself as well and even saw his disastrous approval ratings tick up slightly as a result. However, the insufficient response in Puerto Rico has nothing to do with Trump, in his mind, and can only be blamed on the people there who do not live in a red state and have no electoral college votes to offer the new president for 2020. They’re on their own. Twitter responded with sheer incredulity at Trump’s vicious attack on an already suffering people. YouTube


The following statements were posted to the verified Twitter accounts of U.S. President Donald Trump, @realDonaldTrump and @POTUS. The opinions expressed are his own. Reuters has not edited the statements or confirmed their accuracy. @realDonaldTrump : - HAPPY EASTER! [0827 EDT] - Border Patrol Agents are not allowed to properly do their job at the Border because of ridiculous liberal (Democrat) laws like Catch & Release. Getting more dangerous. "Caravans" coming. Republicans must go to Nuclear Option to pass tough laws NOW. NO MORE DACA DEAL! [0956 EDT] - Mexico is doing very little, if not NOTHING, at stopping people from flowing into Mexico through their Southern Border, and then into the U.S. They laugh at our dumb immigration laws. They must stop the big drug and people flows, or I will stop their cash cow, NAFTA. NEED WALL! [1025 EDT] - These big flows of people are all trying to take advantage of DACA. They want in on the act! [1028 EDT] -- Source link: (http://bit.ly/2jBh4LU) (http://bit.ly/2jpEXYR) (Compiled by Bengaluru bureau)


Plastic is plaguing the environment left and right and one of the single biggest contributors is the use of single-use plastic bottles. This includes water bottles and those used for other beverages, like sodas and sugary sports drinks, and the demand for them is only increasing despite global efforts to stem plastic usage in the bud. Plastic bags and bottles ravage the Earth from production to disposal, and yet humans buy approximately one million bottles per minute, according to Euromonitor, a market research group. Those numbers are expected to increase by another 20% by 2021, which will devastate climate, beaches, oceans, and all of the animals that reside in these areas. According to figures from Euromonitor, humans bought 480 billion plastic bottles in the year 2016, which is 300 billion more than the numbers from a decade ago. To make matters worse, less than half of those bottles was collected for recycling and only about 7% of those collected were turned into new bottles. Manufacturers complain that using recycled plastic ruins the appeal of the bottles and that it costs more to use these materials, which will fall on the consumer. Experts speculate that this demand for 20,000 bottles per second has been exacerbated by the on-the-go, urban culture that has taken over in cities in China and the Asia Pacific region. With an increased population comes a rise in the demand for PET (polyethylene terephthalate) bottles, which is why Chinese citizens bought 73.8 billion bottles last year, up more than 5 billion since the year before it. “[China] is a critical country to understand when examining global sales of plastic PET bottles, and China’s requirement for plastic bottles continues to expand,” said Euromonitor’s head of packaging, Rosemary Downey. It’s not enough that reusable water bottles are trending right now because that doesn’t help the nations who can’t trust the cleanliness of their tap water. This surge in buying plastic bottles is also largely driven by developing countries, where disposability is more important than sustainability and being eco-friendly. “This increase is being driven by increased urbanization,” Downey said. “There is a desire for healthy living and there are ongoing concerns about groundwater contamination and the quality of tap water, which all contribute to the increase in bottle water use.” If municipalities would clean up their water or work to provide safe drinking water to certain regions for the first time, it’s likely that plastic pollution, especially when it comes to bottles, would decline dramatically and slow the environmental health crisisthat is building every day. Sadly, it’s estimated that approximately 5 to 13 million tons of plastic leak into the ocean every single year, ultimately to be worn down into fragments that float in the water column and can sometimes become a part of one of the many garbage patches. Fish, sea birds, and other marine life will eat the specks of plastic or even consume larger pieces, which can eventually kill them. Since humans consume a variety of fish from the ocean, these plastics can also make their way onto our dinner plates. “The plastic pollution crisis rivals the threat of climate change as it pollutes every natural system and an increasing number of organisms on planet Earth,” said Hugo Tagholm, the CEO of Surfers Against Sewage. “Current science shows that plastics cannot be usefully assimilated into the food chain. Where they are ingested they carry toxins that work their way on to our dinner plates.” There are several solutions that groups and experts have suggested to reduce the number of plastic bottle usage, ranging from cutting bottles out cold turkey to encouraging a payment system to use plastic bottles. While some places, like San Francisco, banned the sale of plastic bottles, other groups advocate for what’s called a circular economy. In the circular economy, plastic bottles would be used, recycled, refilled, and reused, effectively reducing waste. Surfers Against Sewage is currently campaigning for a deposit return system to be implemented in the UK, which the equivalent of CRV that is collected in the U.S. that can be returned to people that recycle their bottles or cans. If you aren’t compelled by these reasons to stop using plastic bottles, consider what your beaches will look like once plastic dominates the world even more. Remote islands with little to no beach clean-ups have shown evidence of extreme pollution along their coast and upwards of 18 tons on their beaches, revealing what the future of even the nicest beaches will be. Consider purchasing a reusable water bottle today and making a huge difference for the environment.


In Washington, the ostensible story is rarely the real story. We know, for example, that former President Clinton engineered a meeting with President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch, on the tarmac of the Phoenix Airport on June 27, 2016. That’s the official story, replete with the charming and intentionally disarming detail that all they talked about was their grandchildren. It was just coincidental, don’t you know, that at the time the FBI was looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a “personal” email server to send, receive and store classified information. And it was also simply coincidental that just a few days later, the director of the FBI – who served under Attorney General Lynch – announced that he wouldn’t recommend a prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Richard Nixon must be rolling over in his grave. What we haven’t known, until now, is that a frantic scramble erupted in the halls of the FBI to cover up this meeting. What we haven’t known, until now, is that a frantic scramble erupted in the halls of the FBI to cover up this meeting. In fact, the FBI turned its sharp light not on the scandalous meeting between the attorney general and Bill Clinton – but rather on one of the whistleblowers who got the word out. The organization I head, Judicial Watch, asked the FBI on July 7, 2016, for any records that might pertain to the infamous tarmac meeting. We had to sue after we were ignored by the agency. Then the FBI told us flat-out that it couldn’t find any records. And we now know that was flat-out untrue. Because, in responding to another one of our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits, the Justice Department gave us heavily redacted documents that showed there were additional documents tucked away at the FBI headquarters. If not for Judicial Watch's lawsuits these documents would still be hidden today. Because of the revelation in our other lawsuit, the FBI – without our knowledge—"reopened" our FOIA request. The agency supposedly found about 30 pages of information, which it needed six weeks to review. The FBI finally gave them to us late Thursday. Now we know why the FBI played shell games. The documents show that FBI officials were concerned solely about the leaking of details of the tarmac meeting. None of the documents show top agency officials cared one whit about the propriety of the meeting itself, but only about who blew the whistle on the covert tête-à-tête. In one email, an FBI official writes “we need to find that guy.” And in another we learn that the Phoenix FBI office was contacted “in an attempt to stem any further damage.” An FBI official working on Lynch’s security detail even goes so far as to suggest non-disclosure agreements to keep the full facts from coming forth. No wonder the FBI didn’t turn these documents over until we caught it red-handed, hiding and lying about them. Simply put, the FBI appears to be fully complicit in a cover-up that attempted to influence a presidential election for a favored candidate – Hillary Clinton. And the truth was trampled on a Phoenix tarmac. Tom Fitton is president of Judicial Watch. Founded in 1994, Judicial Watch Inc. is a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.


Ever since a 2015 poll revealed that a certain slice of Americana supported bombing Agrabah, the fictional city Disney's Aladdin calls home, it's been interesting to consider what other fictional countries have actually messed with the United States and totally gotten a pass. Agrabah didn't actually damage its relations with the U.S., presumably because the U.S. either doesn't exist yet in that world, or because they don't have oil. Meanwhile, a number of other countries have attacked America and/or its American heroes and haven't yet met the full-on retaliation they deserve. These guys have been sending special agents to try and kill American heroes FOR YEARS. Pottsylvania is populated entirely by special agents and saboteurs. Their children are taught assassination techniques and espionage practices from an early age, their highest medal is the Double Cross and their mysterious dictator (known only as "Fearless Leader") makes Kim Jong-Un look like a teddy bear. Their two most active agents are skilled infiltrators and have never been captured. Bilya is supposed to be a fictional Arab state in the Middle East. These guys had the balls to shoot down an American F-16, capture its pilot, and then sentence him to hang in a show trial. Luckily, the pilot's 16-year-old son Doug (an Air Force Academy reject) and Chappie, an Air Force Reserve pilot, steal two F-16s of their own and fly off to Bilya to rescue him. What should have happened was America launching an all-out raid on Bilyan infrastructure and military targets. Then, after they released the American they took for no reason, the Bilyans would pay us back the $18 million they owe us for shooting down our F-16. This nondescript South American country has more coups than a flock of pigeons (say that sentence aloud for the full effect). For some reason, all of their worst representatives seem to end up in the United States, ready to coerce American heroes to do their bidding. Fortunately, John Matrix lives inside an unlimited ammo cheat code world. In "Commando," a deposed dictator named Arius kidnaps John Matrix' daughter to force him to kill the current president (of Val Verde). Spoiler Alert: he doesn't even make it to Val Verde. Instead, he ices every single person who came near his daughter. In "Die Hard 2," terrorists hit an airport to free another captured dictator, ruining John McClane's Christmas, everyone's flight schedules, and never taking any blame for what they do. In "Predator," Dutch Schaeffer's commando team has to mount a hostage rescue from guerrillas in Val Verde. You might know what happens next (hint: it has something to do with an invisible alien). Seriously, how many times do they get to mess with America before we do something about this? Who is the President in this movie universe? And I am dying to know more about this place – what are the exports, other than terrorism and contras? Latveria is an Eastern European nation tucked back into the Carpathian Mountains, led by a guy whose name is freaking Dr. Victor von Doom. Even George W. Bush could convince the world that this guy needed to be ousted, and he wouldn't have to throw Colin Powell under a bus to do it. Dr. Doom is obviously a state sponsor of terrorism. Doom is responsible for the proliferation of chemical weapons, attempted assassinations of allied heads of state, and oh so many crimes against humanity. The Fantastic Four can bring down Hitler, a being who eats planets, and the Prince of Darkness, but can't seem to overthrow this tiny country and oust its metal-faced dictator? It's time to send in the Marines.


Donald Trump has responded to the emotional speech given by the father of a fallen Muslim U.S. Army soldier at the Democratic National Convention this week. In an interview with ABC News‘ George Stephanopoulos on Saturday, Trump fired back at Khizr Khan’s statement that he has “sacrificed nothing” for his country. “I’ve made a lot of sacrifices,” Trump said. “I work very, very hard. I’ve created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs, built great structures. I’ve had tremendous success. I think I’ve done a lot.” Khan addressed Trump directly in his Thursday speech at the DNC, challenging the Republican presidential nominee’s proposed ban on Muslim immigrants to the U.S. “Have you ever been to Arlington Cemetery? Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities,” Khan said. “You have sacrificed nothing and no one.” In his interview with Stephanopoulos, Trump also took a jab at Khan’s wife Ghazala, who stood silently next to her husband at the DNC as he spoke about their son Capt. Humayun Khan, who was killed by a car bomb in Iraq in 2004 and posthumously awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star for his heroism. “If you look at his wife, she was standing there,” Trump said. “She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say. You tell me.” Trump echoed this sentiment in an interview Friday with the New York Times‘ Maureen Dowd. When Dowd asked him about Khan’s heartfelt speech, Trump’s only response was, “I’d like to hear his wife say something.” Ghazala told MSNBC in an interview on Friday that she was too emotional to speak about her son at the DNC, but opened up to MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell about her son’s bravery.


You cannot vote for Donald Trump and pretend that this is just another election, and he is just another candidate. Evan Vucci/AP It’s easy to make fun of the hats. It’s not so easy to contemplate what makes so many people think America’s greatness is in desperate need of reformation, or what would make them turn to someone like Donald Trump to make it a reality. America has flaws as deep as its founding, when the men who laid down basic principles of human rights – principles that have endured 240 years – were fed and clothed by human beings they owned. That paradox still defines the fault lines of our nation, and it’s along those lines we are drawing the ugliest election in modern history. It isn’t just economic anxiety or trade deals or the opioid epidemic driving the mostly white, mostly male movement behind Trump’s campaign. It is the existential fear of displacement from a world that has slowly – too slowly, for too long – been chipping away at white male supremacy. The “grab ’em by the pussy” moment was disastrous for Trump’s campaign; it reinforced the defining narrative of his sexism. But it drew his strongest supporters even closer to him, because it reminded them of the world they’re losing. They want to live in an America where they can grab women by the pussy and brag about it to their friends. They want to casually use the n-word – just for the bad ones; they’re not racist! – without being set upon by the PC police. They want what’s coming to them, what’s owed them. And they are willing to burn down the world to get it. Donald Trump is the worst major-party candidate for president in American history. This is not a close call. By virtually any measure, he is unfit to lead a Cub Scout troop, let alone the nation with the world’s most powerful military. It’s worth going back and reading the transcripts of his debates with Hillary Clinton just to remember how he speaks when he’s answering questions off the cuff. It’s breathtaking how incapable he is of forming a single coherent thought. The expectations for him were so low that there was little to no coverage of his failure over four-and-a-half hours to say anything intelligent about any issue important to the American people. He meanders, he interrupts, and he whines. He is uninformed and unprepared. Trump’s values are, in a word, deplorable. He launched his campaign calling Mexican immigrants rapists, issued a call for a ban on immigration by Muslims, and said women should be punished for getting an abortion. He lies, constantly, about everything. He stokes anger and fear and even violence among his supporters. He nurtures their very worst instincts. He brags he has the best temperament, but that’s nonsense. He’s lashed out and punched down, attacking the parents of a dead soldier, a former beauty pageant winner who gained weight, countless reporters and anyone he perceives as insulting him. It is impossible to predict exactly how deep a disaster Donald Trump’s presidency would be, but there’s no limit to the potential for horror. Think how much we still don’t know about Trump – how he hasn’t released his taxes, how many women there likely are who haven’t come forward – and you can imagine the scandals and corruption that lie in wait. Consider how thin his policy knowledge is and how impulsively he reacts to insults, and imagine his twitchy little fingers on the nuclear button. Donald Trump cannot be president of the United States. And while Trump has a considerable movement of supporters who see him as a great conquering hero, who believe every word of his lies, no matter how outlandish and easily disproven, there are many people, even at this late hour, who are torn about whether they can support him. Maybe they’re deeply conservative Republicans who despise what they believe Clinton would do to the country. Maybe they’re independents who see constant stories about her emails and have genuine fears about her judgment. But now is the moment for every last American to decide what it truly means to be a citizen. You can be reluctant about Hillary Clinton. You don’t even have to vote for her (though I did, without doubt or hesitation). What you cannot do is vote for Donald Trump and pretend that this is just another election, and he is just another candidate. It is your minimum duty as a citizen not to support a racist, sexist, unqualified, dishonest, corrupt manchild who celebrates everything that’s ugly about America and not a single thing that’s great about it. No matter how left out or left behind you feel, voting for Trump is nothing short of a moral failure. It’s a vicious act against the human beings, mostly women and people of color, who would suffer miserably under his presidency. It’s an act of violence against America itself, whose greatness has always been about progressing from more oppression to less – slowly, sometimes haltingly, but forward. The promise on those red hats is to turn back in the other direction. The greatness they sell is a lie. Watch Donald Trump’s acceptance speech after becoming the new President-elect of the United States.


The NFL plans to allow the FBI and IRS investigations into the businesses run by new Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam to sort itself out before it decides whether it will take any action. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said a report that Haslam might be asked to step down as the investigation into Pilot Flying J continues is inaccurate. "There are no such plans," Aiello said. Haslam told the Associated Press on Friday that he will continue to run the Browns. "No change," Haslam said. "I look forward to the draft next week." Haslam said earlier Friday he won't resign from his position as CEO of Pilot Flying J. "Why would I step down? I haven't done anything wrong," Haslam said Friday while speaking at his company's headquarters in Knoxville, Tenn. "It still appears to us that this investigation is focused on a very narrow band of a very large company -- questions about how rebates were handled to a very small percentage of our trucking company customers." An FBI agent's affidavit, which was unsealed Thursday alleges that Pilot Flying J -- the truck stop operator owned by the Haslam family -- engaged in a fraud scheme designed to keep money owed to its customers. According to the documents, multiple current and former employees of the company told authorities that Haslam, who purchased the Browns for $1.05 billion last October, knew of the fraud and was present at meetings where it was discussed. The NFL declined to comment on the matter. Haslam released the following statement Thursday: "I've read the affidavits. I now understand more clearly the questions the federal investigators are exploring. I maintain that the foundation of this company is built on its integrity and that any willful wrongdoing by any employee of this company at any time is intolerable. We will continue to cooperate with the federal investigation and continue our own investigation in these allegations. I value the relationships we have with our customers, our vendors and our team members across this country and regret that they have to go through this with us, but I trust and believe their faith in this company and its principles has never been misplaced." According to The Associated Press, Haslam arrived in Cleveland on Thursday, three days after FBI and IRS agents executed four search warrants at Pilot Flying J company headquarters. The AP reported that at a Tuesday news conference in Knoxville, Haslam revealed the government is investigating rebates offered by the truck stop chain, but said, "We believe we did nothing wrong." His family -- including his brother, Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam -- owns 59 percent of the business. The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Earlier this morning, President Trump took to Twitter to announce his decision to ban transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military. After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow…… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017 ….Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming….. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017 ….victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017 “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military,” Trump announced via Twitter. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you.” The announcement drew swift responses on the social media platform. “No American, no matter their sexual orientation or gender identity, should be prohibited from honor + privilege of serving our nation #LGBT,” tweeted Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL). “Pleased to hear that @realDonaldTrump shares my readiness and cost concerns, & will be changing this costly and damaging policy #readiness,” tweeted Rep. Vicky Jo Hartzler (R-MO). Just spoke to a Trump administration official about the transgender military decision. Here's what they said… pic.twitter.com/eOWdvlxTfd — Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) July 26, 2017 Trump’s decision will roll back military policy after the Obama administration lifted the ban last year, allowing transgender soldiers to openly serve in the United States Military. The Department of Defense policy drew sharp criticism, as it supported service members looking to change their gender, making them eligible to receive coverage for “medically necessary care and treatment.” “This is the right thing to do for our people and for the force,” former Defense Secretary Ash Carter said in announcing the policy. “We’re talking about talented Americans who are serving with distinction or who want the opportunity to serve. We can’t allow barriers unrelated to a person’s qualifications prevent us from recruiting and retaining those who can best accomplish the mission.” It is not yet clear what effect this decision will have on the roughly 250 transgender individuals currently serving openly in the armed forces. SOUND OFF: Do you support Trump’s decision to ban transgender citizens from serving in our armed forces?


As the New Year 5778 begins, 88% of Israeli Jews say that they are happy and satisfied with their lives. This makes sense. Israel’s relative security, its prosperity, freedom, and spiritual blossoming make Israeli Jews the most successful Jewish community in 3,500 years of Jewish history. The same cannot be said for the Jews of the Diaspora. In Western Europe, Jewish communities that just a generation ago were considered safe and prosperous are now besieged. Synagogues and Jewish schools look like army barracks. And the severe security cordons Jews need to pass through to pray and study are entirely justified. For where they are absent, as they were at the Hyper Cacher Jewish supermarket in Paris in 2015, assailants strike. Western European Jewry’s crisis is exogenous to the Jewish communities. It isn’t the Jews who caused the crisis, which may in time cause the wholesale exodus of the Jews from Europe. The crisis is a function of growing levels of popular antisemitism spurred by mass immigration from the Islamic world and the resurgence of indigenous European Jew-hatred, particularly on the far Left. This is not the situation among American Jewry, which at the dawn of 5778 also finds itself steeped in an ever-deepening crisis. And while antisemitism is a growing problem in America, particularly on university campuses, unlike their European counterparts, American Jews could mount and win a battle against the growing anti-Jewish forces. But in large part, they have chosen not to. And they have chosen not to fight the anti-Semites because they are in the midst of a self-induced identity crisis. First, there is the problem of demographic collapse. According to the Pew Research Center’s 2013 study of American Jewry, nearly 60% of American Jews intermarry. Based on the Pew data, the Jewish People Policy Institute published a report in June that noted that not only are 60% of American Jews who get married marrying non-Jews, only half of American Jews are getting married at all. And among those who are getting married, less than a third are raising their children as Jewish in some way. Earlier this month, a study of American Jews was published by the Public Religion Research Institute. It found that not only hasn’t the situation improved since the Pew survey was published, the trend toward assimilation and loss of Jewish identity among American Jews has accelerated. In 2013, 32% of American Jews under 30 said that they were not Jews by religion. Today the proportion of Jews under 30 who say they have no relation to the Jewish faith has ballooned to 47%. Not surprisingly, the wholesale abandonment of Jewish faith by nearly half of young American Jews has taken a toll on the two liberal streams of American Judaism. According to the study, the percentage of American Jews who identify as Reform or Conservative Jews is in free fall. Whereas in 2013, 35% of American Jews identified as Reform, today, a mere four years later, only 28% identify as Reform. The situation among Conservatives is even worse. In 2013, 18% of American Jews identified as Conservatives. Today, only 14% do. Among Jews, under 30 the situation is even starker. Only 20% of American Jews under 30 identify as Reform. Only 8% identify as Conservative. To be sure, the trend toward secularism and assimilation among US Jewry is not new. And over the years, Reform and Conservative leaders have adopted varying strategies to deal with it. In 1999 the Reform movement tried to deal with the problem by strengthening the movement’s religious practices. Although the effort failed, the impulse that drove the strategy was rational. American Jews who seek spiritual and religious meaning likely want more than a sermon about Tikkun Olam. The problem is that they also want more than a rabbi donning a kippa and a synagogue choosing to keep kosher. This is why, as the number of Reform and Conservative Jews is contracting, the number of American Jews who associate with the Orthodox movement is growing. Between 2013 and 2017, the proportion of young American Jews who identify as Orthodox grew from 10% to 15%. Moreover, more and more American Jews are finding their spiritual home with Chabad. Today there are more Chabad houses in the US than Reform synagogues. Unable to compete for Jews seeking religious fulfillment, the Reform and Conservative movements have struck out for new means of rallying their bases and attracting members. Over the past year, two new strategies are dominating the public actions of both movements. First, there is a selective fight against antisemitism. While antisemitism is experiencing a growth spurt in the US progressive movement, and antisemitism is becoming increasingly overt in US Muslim communities, neither the Reform nor Conservative movements have taken significant institutional steps to fight them. Instead, both movements, and a large swath of the Jewish institutional world, led in large part by Reform and Conservative Jews, have either turned a blind eye to this antisemitism or supported it. Take for instance the case of Davis, California, imam Amman Shahin. On July 21 Shahin gave a sermon calling for the Jewish people to be annihilated. His Jewish neighbors in the progressive Jewish communities of Davis and Sacramento didn’t call the police and demand that he be investigated for terrorist ties. They didn’t demand that his mosque fire him. Instead, led by the Oakland Jewish Federation, local rabbi Seth Castleman, and the JCRC, they embraced Shahin. They appeared with him at a public “apology” ceremony, where he failed to apologize for calling for his Jewish colleagues, and every other Jew, to be murdered. All Shahin did express regret that his call for genocide caused offense. On the other hand, the same leaders stand as one against allegations of antisemitic violence stemming from the political Right. In the face of an utter lack of evidence, when Jewish institutions were subjected to a rash of bomb threats last winter, Reform and Conservative leaders led the charge insisting that far-right antisemites were behind them and insinuated that the perpetrators supported President Donald Trump. When it worked out that all of the threats were carried out by a mentally ill Israeli Jew, they never issued an apology. So, too, the Reform and Conservative movements, like the rest of the American Jewish community, treated the Charlottesville riot last month like a new Reichstag fire. They entirely ignored the violence of the far-left, antisemitic Antifa protesters and behaved as though tomorrow neo-Nazis would take control of the federal government. They jumped on the bandwagon insisting that Trump’s initial condemnation of both groups was proof that he has a soft spot for neo-Nazis. The problem with the strategy of selective outrage over antisemitism is that it isn’t at all clear who the target audience is. Survey data shows that the more active Jews are in the synagogue, the less politically radical they are and the more devoted to Jewish causes they are. So it is hard to see how turning a blind eye to leftist and Muslim antisemitism will rally their current membership more than they already have been rallied. Moreover, the more radicalized Jews become politically, the more outlets they have for their political activism both as Jews and as leftists. No matter how anti-Trump Conservative and Reform leaders become, they can never rival the progressive forces in the Democratic Party. Prospects for success of the second strategy are arguably even lower. The second strategy involves cultivating animosity toward Israel over the issue of egalitarian prayer at the Kotel. Last June, the government overturned an earlier decision to build a passageway connecting the Western Wall Plaza with Robinson’s Arch, along with the Southern Wall, where egalitarian prayer services are held. The government also rescinded a previous decision to have representatives of the Conservative and Reform movements receive membership in the committee that manages the Western Wall Plaza. The government’s first decision was non-political. The Antiquities Authority nixed the construction of the passage due to the adverse impact construction would have on the antiquities below the surface. As to the second decision, it is far from a matter of life and death. The committee has no power to influence egalitarian prayers for better or for worse. And yet, rather than acknowledge that the decision was a setback but it didn’t harm the status of egalitarian prayer at the Wall, the Reform and Conservative movements declared war against the government and dragged much of the organized Jewish establishment behind them. The Reform leadership canceled a scheduled meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Jewish Agency Board followed suit. Six hundred Conservative rabbis signed a letter to Netanyahu accusing him of betraying Diaspora Jewry and announcing they would be forced to reconsider their support for Israel. Ambassador David Friedman, who had just taken residence in Israel a month before the explosion, used his first public remarks as ambassador to call his fellow American Jews to order. Friedman said, “Yesterday, I heard something that I thought I’d never heard before. And I understand the source of the frustration and the source of the anger. But I heard a major Jewish organization say that they needed to rethink their support for the State of Israel. “That’s something unthinkable in my lifetime, up until yesterday. We have to do better. We must do better,” he said. But in the intervening months, the Conservative and Reform movements have not relented in their attacks. They have ratcheted them up. The thinking appears to be that if they can make this problem look like a life or death struggle between Israel and progressive Jewry, they can both keep their dwindling bases engaged and attract members of the increasingly anti-Israel Jewish far Left. The problem with this is that just as they cannot outdo the Democratic Party in their hostility toward Trump, so the Conservative and Reform movements cannot be more anti-Israel than Jewish Voices for Peace and other anti-Israel Jewish groups. The question for Israelis is what this failure of the mainstream American Jewish leadership means for the future of Israel’s relationship with American Jewry. Jewish survival and continuity through the ages have been predicated and dependent on our ability as Jews to uphold the commandment of the sages that all Jews are responsible for one another. As the most successful Jewish community in history, Israel has a special responsibility for our brethren in the Diaspora. The first step toward fulfilling our duty is to recognize the basic fact that while it is true that the American Jewish community is in crisis, the leaders of that community are in an even deeper crisis. And the key to strengthening and supporting the community is to bypass its failed leadership and speak and interact directly with American Jews. Reprinted with author’s permission from Caroline Glick


We have made great strides in the policing of thought in this country. Just ask Brendan Eich, one of the founders of Mozilla, developers of the web browser Firefox. Eich had just landed a promotion to the big chair as Mozilla’s CEO. He lasted all of nine days. The reason? Back in 2008 Eich donated a thousand dollars to support Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage. The unearthing of this donation led to protests from gay rights activists and the h igh profile call for a boycott of Firefox by dating site OkCupid.com. Eich, as many people in circumstances such as his, was stricken with the sudden desire to “spend more time with his family” and quietly resigned. Regardless of your position on same sex marriage, those activists who led to Eich’s resignation should be ashamed. Their basic message? “You’d better be tolerant. Or else we will show you a display of true tolerance. By crushing you.” In fact, it is no longer enough to be tolerant. Prior to his resignation, Eich told tech site CNET “[i]f Mozilla cannot continue to operate according to its principles of inclusiveness, where you can work on the mission no matter what your background or other beliefs, I think we’ll probably fail.” In the same interview, he said that he wished for those who were calling for his ouster to know that “without getting into my personal beliefs, which I separate from my Mozilla work — when people learned of the donation, they felt pain. I saw that in friends’ eyes, [friends] who are LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered]. I saw that in 2012. I am sorry for causing that pain.” Wow. Eich sounds like an intolerant jerk! No, strike that. He sounds like a dedicated and thoughtful professional who was able to separate his work and personal lives–as well he should have been. But to the activist crowd, it’s not enough that people are tolerant. They must offer affirmation of the LGBT agenda or pay the price. Their much vaunted toleration doesn’t extend to those who might have opposing viewpoints, like Eich. Of course, gay rights activists claim that Eich’s views are not deserving of toleration because he sought to strip them of their rights. This may or may not be the case, but I’d wager that many of them aren’t such dogged defenders of rights when asked about, say, the Second Amendment. And I’m hearing curiously little from these champions of freedom about the fact that 70 percent of California’s African Americans and over 50 percent of Hispanics voted for Prop 8. The uncomfortable fact for the left is that 2008 was the same election in which minority voters pulled the levers in droves for President Obama. Even more uncomfortable? President Obama himself was opposed to same sex marriage in 2008. But, then, it’s not about principle. It’s about ramming through the “right” outcomes. An Associated Press piece about Eich’s resignation asks “whether the episode undercuts the well-groomed image of Silicon Valley as a marketplace of ideas and diversity of thought, and whether, in this case, the tech world surrendered to political correctness enforced through a public shaming on social media.” Geez, ya think? Andrew Sullivan, the unreliably conservative columnist had this to say: Will [Eich] now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us. The trite knock at the religious right is to be expected from a regular guest on Bill Maher’s show, but Sullivan is right to call the gay rights activists out on their bullying tactics. And the man has skin in the game, as an openly gay man who has long supported same sex marriage. Kudos to Sullivan for recognizing that support for an issue doesn’t require the squashing of all dissenting viewpoints. Liberals like to mock those who speak of the “gay agenda.” The real agenda, they claim, is for homosexuals to be able to live out their lives in dignity with their loved ones. Such efforts at destroying opposition unfortunately make that more difficult to believe. And activists forget that perhaps next time, they won’t be the ones to define which thought crimes should be prosecuted. In a society which encourages the personal destruction of dissenters, any one of us can develop the desire to “spend more time with family” at any time.


Internet censorship is hurting conservative websites like DC Clothesline. If you enjoy our articles please consider making a small donation today. Thank YOU! ******************************************************************************** Earlier this week, CNN published a story titled “ White supremacists by default’: How ordinary people made Charlottesville possible,” which basically said that every single person that voted for Donald Trump to be president was a White Supremacist by Default. John Blake, CNN Enterprise writer/producer, is the article’s author. Blake blamed Trump voters for helping to advance white supremacy. How, you may ask? Because even the ordinary, non-racist Trump supporter was giving space for white supremacists to operate and are ultimately the reason for what took place in Charlottesville, Virginia. “It’s easy to focus on the angry white men in paramilitary gear who looked like they were mobilizing for a race war in the Virginia college town,” Blake wrote. “But it’s the ordinary people — the voters who elected a reality TV star with a record of making racially insensitive comments, the people who move out of the neighborhood when people of color move in, the family members who ignore a relative’s anti-Semitism — who give these type of men room to operate.” Now, Blake is a Black man. Given the fact he is writing at CNN, would it be safe to assume he supported Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah? If so, would it also, given the fact of his warped logic here, be fair to use his logic against him and say that he is responsible for the violence of the knockout game, Black Lives Matter and the advancement of Black Power movements like the New Black Panthers and Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam? Yeah, it makes a point, but it wouldn’t be fair to say, would it? Blake was not alone in putting this piece together. He cited Mark Naison, a political activist and history professor at Fordham University in New York City, who compared Trump supporters to the “nice people” in Nazi Germany and Rwanda. “That was the twisted formula that made the Holocaust and Rwanda possible and allowed Jim Crow segregation to survive: Nice people looked the other way while those with an appetite for violence did the dirty work,” Naison said. “You have to have millions of people who are willing to be bystanders, who push aside evidence of racism, Islamophobia or sexism. You can’t have one without the other.” Blake then went on to say that there are four groups of people who play a part in racial divisions in the country, based on Ms. Naison and others. “Many of the white racists who marched in Charlottesville were condemned because they openly said they don’t believe in integration or racial equality,” Blake wrote about Trump supporters. “But millions of ordinary white Americans have been sending that message to black and brown people for at least a half a century. They send it with their actions: They don’t want to live next to or send their children to school with black or brown people, historians say.” Then there are those who thought Trump’s comments about both sides having issues when it comes to racial hatred. “Trump’s ‘many sides’ response, though, wasn’t that abnormal in the context of US history,” wrote Blake. “It used to be the norm for white political leaders to draw a moral equivalence between racists and those who suffered from their acts of brutality, historians say. It’s the “yes, but” rhetorical maneuver — condemn racism but add a qualifier to diminish the sincerity of what you just said.” Trump’s comments were spot on for anyone paying attention. Obama had stirred up racial tensions in America to the point that even Black people were saying he was doing it. Then Blake decided to list a third group. This group is those who “choose chaos.” “Many voters knew Trump would bring something else to the Oval Office — chaos,” Blake wrote. “That’s why they chose him. He’s their first reality TV president, one writer says.” “Many voted for Trump because they liked the persona he cultivated as the star of ‘The Apprentice,'” he continued. “Reality TV rewards characters who say rude and reprehensible things, characters are often cast as racial stereotypes, and those who provoke the most chaos get the most attention, says Joy Lanzendorfer, author of the Vice article, ‘How Reality TV Made Donald Trump President.'” Again, he never mentions the chaos we saw across the country that was sparked by the Black Lives Matter crowds. To do that would demonstrate the hypocrisy of his article. Finally, there are those that Blake says “look the other way.” “If you want to know why those white racists now feel so emboldened, it may help to look at all the ordinary people around you, your neighbors, your family members, your leaders,” Blake wrote. “But first, start by looking at yourself.” Well, turn about is fair play. Perhaps, Mr. Blake should look in the mirror and then take a look at the lying, manipulative and deceitful propaganda outlet he is working for, then maybe, he might get a clue at just how badly he has been indoctrinated before he points the finger at people who have light skin and labels them all racist because of some delusional logic that he possesses. Mr. Blake might also wonder how he is emboldening the racism of those in his own community. Courtesy of Freedom Outpost Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his “more precious than rubies” wife, father of 10 “mighty arrows”, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. Tim is also an affiliate for the Joshua Mark 5 AR/AK hybrid semi-automatic rifle. Follow Tim on Twitter.


President Donald Trump once left his son, Donald Trump Jr., stranded on a tarmac after he was five minutes late for a flight, the president's first wife Ivana Trump wrote in her new book "Raising Trump." Ivana referenced the anecdote when describing a key feature of Donald and the rest of the Trump family that she learned when she and the future president first began dating. "The entire Trump clan arrived exactly on time," she wrote. "I learned early on that they were punctual to an extreme. For them, 'on time' meant five minutes early." "When Donald arrived in a boardroom, or took his seat on an airplane and the door closed, that was that," she continued. "If you weren't on the inside, the meeting or the flight would start without you. Donald once left Don Jr. standing on the tarmac for being five minutes late to the airport." Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Roger Stone explains what Trump has in common with Richard Nixon See Also: SEE ALSO: McConnell gives strongest hint yet that GOP should gut the biggest weapon Democrats have to halt Trump's judicial nominees


Vice President Biden defended Hillary Clinton’s decision to use a private email server as secretary of state in an interview Thursday with “Face the Nation” moderator John Dickerson. Dickerson asked Biden about a lesson from his Grandfather Finnegan: “Public servants are obliged to level with everybody, whether or not they’ll like what he, the public servant, has to say.” He asked the vice president, “Do you think that applies to Hillary Clinton’s dealing with this private server that she set up?” “Well, I think it’s a combination of a couple of things,” Biden replied. “One, I don’t think she understood the gravity of setting it up. She thought it was, ‘This is okay to do.’” Clinton has said she set up her private server for the sake of convenience, but she has since acknowledged that it was a mistake and that she would use the government system if she had to do it over again. Biden further suggested that Clinton may be a bit battle-scarred from her long time in the public eye, and he said that may have contributed to her initial clumsy response to the email controversy. “This woman has been so battered over 30 years,” Biden explained. “I think then when faced with, ‘This is a problem,’ I think instead of just cutting it and dealing with it immediately, there’s always an inclination to overthink it.” The vice president also weighed in on his own future after his time in the Obama administration. “I’m not going away,” he began. “Everything from this issue of violence against women, to income inequality, to the cancer ‘moonshot,’ I’m gonna devote the rest of my life to this.” “I have been so proud of being involved in public service that I’m not sure exactly how I’m gonna do it,” he added, “other than the structure of [the] American political system.” When Dickerson asked Biden what he’ll do on his final day in office, the vice president replied, “What I’m going to do is go home and begin to figure out what I do for the rest of my life.” More of Dickerson’s interview with the vice president will air Sunday. Check your local listings for airtimes.


Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and his wife, Jane Sanders have hired prominent defense attorneys amid an FBI investigation concerning possible bank fraud, according to CBS News and Politico Magazine. The investigation centers on a loan that Jane Sanders secured to expand Burlington College when she was its president. Jane Sanders allegedly distorted school donor levels in a 2010 loan application for $10 million from People's United Bank to buy 33 acres of land for the school, which shut down in 2016. Bernie Sanders told the Washington Post that the investigation would clear his wife of any wrongdoing. Rich Cassidy has reportedly been hired to represent Bernie Sanders, while high-profile Washington defense attorney Larry Robbins is reportedly representing Jane Sanders.