Ladies and Gentlemen, I admit, I wasn’t really “keeping up” with the news the last few months as this “memo” thing began, nor did I pay much attention to the “Russian Collusion” story based solely on the fact I have no television and rarely see much news.
I read things on FB or the Internet and get interested and start digging. It’s how I get all my news. By getting interested in a story and then reading all side of the coin, not just one news agency, ALL OF THEM. Right, Left, Middle, Russian, German, French, makes no difference to me. I READ IT ALL.
After poring over that memo release and all the various news sources associated with it, I have come to a rather scary conclusion. Following are my thoughts only:
1) The memo details a lot of corruption. But, it’s only the surface. There is more to come, a LOT more. Names will get named, and connections will be made.
2) The corruption went all the way up the chain of command back to Obama himself, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, James Comey and many others.
3) This makes Watergate look like a “speeding ticket”.
4) The Democratic Party is in absolute MELTDOWN right now and you can judge that for yourselves by simply reading the screeching going on just on Facebook. They are self-destructing, and the lies keep coming, in droves.
5) I predict – and I rarely do this because I’m usually wrong – that there will be major protests in the next few weeks over this as more details are revealed. They will turn violent, to the point of destruction, turning over cars, “Antifa” will suddenly reappear, as will the “New Black Panthers” and other “Democrat support groups”… and the violence will get very, very large in major cities.
6) The Civil War is ON. This is no joke any more. It has been on-going now since before the elections (See a previous article I posted about How Civil War Happens) and understand that the violence will be directed at the cities at first, then at Right Wingers, Conservatives, White men and women, and children because they wil use Alinsky tactics to “pick a target, freeze it and attack it”. Mark my works on this.
7) The violence will get worse as the Spring and Summer drag on.
Be prepared. Keep your powder dry. Stock up on food and water and be ready for anything – or nothing at all. But always be Prepared for the worst. If you are a conceal carry license hold (and I don’t care if you are) don’t go OUT without your weapons any more and be trained and prepared to defend yourself. No one else is going to do it for you.
Before long, I’m afraid, we’re going to have to remove the Communists from America and take it back from them. They’ve had a grip for too long. It’s time to clean house.
The arrogance of the these Left wing kooks never ceases to amaze and astound me.
At the bottom of this editorial is a link. I urge you to read it. But. pease, do not feed the trolls. Read it, understand what this fool is saying, and then comment here or on the American Patriot Reality Check Facebook Page. (https://www.facebook.com/AmericanPatriotRealityCheck/)
Here’s a guy who out and out says exactly what we’ve been saying all along. That the “State” will “come take out guns” through the use of “militarized police”.
He goes on to state how he coolly handles those of us who say “You can have my guns when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers”. He says, “Oh, they will, and you’ll be dead in a pool of your own blood”.
Where his arrogance ends however is that we aren’t in this to play dead, or get dead, or to be the first to fire the “next shot heard ’round the world”.
We are in this for our Rights. Yes, that “Second Amendment” Right, and his blithering idiot “First Amendment” right. And all of the other of the first ten in the Bill of Rights.
The government, and it’s minions have NO rights to come take the guns “For the common good”. This is not a “Commonwealth”. America is neither a Monarchy where we are all “subjects” to a king, nor a Socialist State (Although so many of them like to THINK we are).
America is a Representative Constitutional Republic. We are not ruled by theocrats, autocrats, kings, emperors or the people we send to Washington, to the Capitols or the County Seats. We rule OURSELVES through those we place in office.
If, at this point the Left, Politicians and political appointees wish to test this theory, then Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s first “Bad Asses” said it first and I’ll repeat it for emphasis…. and I quote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Please, JIM KARGER, please understand that you too will be one of the masses lying there in a pool of your own blood, shot dead by the other side because you chose the wrong side to stand. And truthfully, you may fall victim to your beloved “State” because the second that most-hated “Second Amendment” goes away, you have nothing left to protect your “First Amendment” from the “State” masters.
Be the American Public so misguided, so ill-informed and so uneducated that they believe only that which is fed them by the media, the so-called Fourth Estate? The Media, the Press, the people who stood toe-to-toe with corrupt politicians in the past now stand behind them and take whatever they are fed, and then in turn feed that to a populous of sheep?
Another thing Mr. Jefferson said was, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Right he was. Until the future came upon men and women mindlessly caught up in the Battle of the Stars, Television and all sorts of other distraction.
I leave you with these thoughts my friends… be you a wise man, or poor, rich or idiot, none can do better for their country than to stand by it in tough times. That you stand by your country does NOT mean you follow all the laws, corrupt as they may be, or orders from on high, placed upon you as if you were a subject to a King. None of us are by birth slaves. No one in this country living today is a slave and none of shall be slaves again. But if, like Mr. Karger, one chooses such a path then Sam Adams said it best.
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams
‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’ to be Prosecuted – US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch
U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Thursday defended Muslims after the San Bernardino, California, shooting on Wednesday that killed 14 people and wounded 17 others, adding that federal officials would take action in case of anti muslim rhetoric and activity.
“When we see the potential for someone to lift, lifting that mantle of anti muslim rhetoric or as we saw after 9/11 violence directed at individuals who may not even be Muslims but may be perceived to be Muslims and they will suffer just as well, just as much, and when we see that we will take action,” -US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch.
Many community members said they were concerned about a backlash against the Muslim community in view of the rise of Islamic State and some opposition among politicians and the public in the United States over U.S. plans to accept Syrian war refugees.
The couple suspected of killing 14 people at a holiday party in California amassed thousands of rounds of ammunition and a dozen pipe bombs, authorities said on Thursday as they sought clues to the pair’s motives and whether they had links to Islamist militants.
Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27, were killed in a shootout with police five hours after Wednesday’s massacre at the Inland Regional Center social services agency in the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles (100 km) east of Los Angeles.
Farook, a U.S. citizen born in Illinois, was the son of Pakistani immigrants, according to Hussam Ayloush, who heads the Los Angeles area chapter of the Muslim advocacy group Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Malik, who had a 6-month-old daughter with Farook, was a Pakistani native living in Saudi Arabia when they married, Ayloush said.
The director of the Islamic Center of Riverside, a mosque Farook attended regularly for two years, described him as a devout Muslim who made the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia a few years ago and celebrated his wedding reception at the mosque.
Loretta Lynch, a Muslim Lover and an Islamic bitch.
Fuck you Loretta Lynch.
Fuck the Muslims.
That friends is what is commonly called “Freedom of Speech”.
I DARE anyone to try to take it from me. I will kill you dead before you do. And while I might die in the process, I will die a Free Man, not a Muslim convert or a slave in a prison of this fucking dictator.
On November 2, The Daily Beast pointed to recent statements from President Obama and Hillary Clinton regarding the implementation of Australian-style gun confiscation and suggested “civil war could erupt on American soil” if any administration actually tried to confiscate privately owned firearms.
The Daily Beast theoretically agreed that “confiscation on a massive scale” may be “the only way to solve American gun violence,” but they pointed out that it was not realistic and suggested Hillary risks causing irreparable divisions by talking about confiscation then mocking gun owners as conspiracy theorists waiting for “black helicopters” to come take their guns away.
According to The Daily Beast, confiscation was workable in Australia because there was no Second Amendment and the government only had to take 650,000 guns. That is a far cry from the “350 million” believed to be in Americans’ hands.
Yes, “350 million.”
But even more important than the number of guns is the depth of American “devotion” to them. And The Daily Beast observes that it is this devotion–this dedication to the philosophy and tradition underlying the right to keep and bear arms–that turns the mere mention of confiscation into something that could literally rip the country apart.
The Daily Beast put it thus, “The prospect of confiscation—as much as it might, theoretically, reduce drastically or even eliminate gun crime altogether—is simply impossible in the United States.” They pointed to statements by Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson, who stressed that Jews could have curtailed the Holocaust had they retained their guns. The Daily Beast suggests Carson hit on something “Second Amendment enthusiasts are fond of arguing,” namely, “that gun rights are enshrined in the Constitution not only for the sake of hunters or people who want to protect their homes and businesses from criminals, but also to allow the population to resist an overreaching government.”
Breitbart News previously reported that Founding Father James Madison used Federalist 46 to make that very point–that armed citizens could band together and resist their government, should it tend toward tyranny. And he pointed out that this demonstrated American exceptionalism inasmuch as citizens of other nations, lacking arms, also lacked the ability to resist.
The Daily Beast addressed the way Hillary mentioned confiscation only later to mock gun owners for fearing the government might come after their guns:
Clinton can joke all she likes about Americans fearing “black helicopters” taking their guns away, but it is no exaggeration to suggest that civil war could erupt on American soil were the U.S. government to attempt anything remotely resembling what was done in Australia.
The column in The Daily Beast is aptly titled, “Yes, They Want to Take Your Guns Away.”
From right to left, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Three leading Republican senators are calling on the Obama administration to identify who briefed former U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice in advance of her Sunday show appearances where she blamed a video for the Benghazi attack.
Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and John McCain, R-Ariz., wrote to leaders on the House and Senate Foreign Relations committees asking them to compel the administration to explain the “taking points.”
In the letter first obtained by Fox News, the senators cite the recent testimony of former CIA acting and deputy director Michael Morell before the House Intelligence Committee, where he said it was Rice, not the CIA, who connected the obscure Internet video to the deadly Sept. 11, 2012 attack.
“How could former Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, during the five Sunday talk shows on Sept. 16, 2012, claim that the attacks on our compounds were caused by a hateful video when Mr. Morell testified that the CIA never mentioned the video as a casual factor and made no reference to the video in any of the multiple versions of the talking points?” the senators wrote.
Given the CIA was not the source of the video explanation, according to Morell, lawmakers want to know whether State Department or White House personnel were involved in the Rice briefings in advance of the 2012 talk shows.
Rice is now the president’s national security adviser. Some lawmakers believe it would be difficult for Rice to now assert executive privilege because her previous job as U.N. ambassador required Senate confirmation.
In the letter, the lawmakers also questioned Rice’s statements about security at the Benghazi compound that were “clearly misrepresentations of the facts.”
“Ambassador Rice also falsely asserted that Al Qaeda was decimated. Who briefed her about Al Qaeda’s activities in Libya?” the lawmakers wrote.
“If we are to avoid future terrorist attacks like the one in Benghazi, we must answer these and many other unanswered questions,” the senators added.
At the behest of the director of national intelligence, US senators have removed a provision from a major intelligence bill that would require the president to publicly disclose information about drone strikes and their victims.
The bill authorizing intelligence operations in fiscal 2014 passed out of the Senate intelligence committee in November, and it originally required the president to issue an annual public report clarifying the total number of “combatants” and “noncombatant civilians” killed or injured by drone strikes in the previous year. It did not require the White House to disclose the total number of strikes worldwide.
But the Guardian has confirmed that Senate leaders have removed the language as they prepare to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, after the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, assured them in a recent letter that the Obama administration was looking for its own ways to disclose more about its highly controversial drone strikes.
“The executive branch is currently exploring ways in which it can provide the American people more information about the United States’ use of force outside areas of active hostilities,” Clapper wrote to the leaders of the Senate committee, Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California and Republican Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, on 18 April.
“To be meaningful to the public, any report including the information described above would require context and be drafted carefully so as to protect against the disclosure of intelligence sources and methods or other classified information. … We are confident we can find a reporting structure that provides the American people additional information to inform their understanding of important government operations to protect our nation, while preserving the ability to continue those operations,” Clapper continued.
Another provision, which would require alternative intelligence analysis, as well as commensurate congressional notification should an intelligence agency consider legal action against a US citizen, has been moved to a classified annex of the bill.
Lawmakers were said to remove the provision in hopes of passing the full bill in the coming weeks.
The removal of the drone transparency requirement is the latest in a pattern by legislators to preserve the status quo surrounding the strikes.
In January, the Senate obstructed an effort by the Obama administration that would have removed the CIA from drone operations and given responsibility for them to the Defense Department, which conducts parallel and occasionally complementary drone strikes.
Feinstein, the chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, has recently been locked in a different sort of declassification battle: an effort to compel the Obama administration to declassify aspects of a major report into the CIA’s post-9/11 torture of terrorism detainees, completed by her committee.
Senate intelligence committee chair Senator Dianne Feinstein. Photograph: Molly Riley/AP
But Feinstein has long been a defender of the CIA’s drone strikes. During a February 2013 confirmation hearing for CIA Director John Brennan, Feinstein stated that the CIA’s targeting procedures kills only “single digits” of civilians annually, an assertion that cannot be independently confirmed because of the official secrecy surrounding the strikes.
The sharing of even basic information about drone strikes has run into a wall of official secrecy. Several independent groups attempt to track the numbers of people killed in the strikes, but no official US confirmation has been possible. Word of the strikes usually arises from news accounts in their places of occurrence, such as Yemen or Pakistan.
Independent observers, including the United Nations special rapporteur on counterterrorism, have repeatedly called on Washington to increase transparency around the lethal operations. An April paper by Larry Lewis of the CNA Corporation, who has close ties with the US military, urged the administration to conduct and appropriately disclose assessments of civilian casualties from drone strikes, to help “ensure that official US statements reflect operational realities, helping to guard the credibility and reputation of the US”.
Thus far those efforts have largely floundered. In May 2013, Obama announced that he wanted to restrict but not eliminate drone strikes, whose use he defended as a necessary component of counterterrorism. Obama confirmed that civilians have died from drone strikes, an effect that he said “will haunt us as long as we live”, but he did not disclose how many cases of errant missile or mistaken targeting strikes have occurred.
In public testimony, leaders of the intelligence agencies have not rejected the transparency provisions. During a February House hearing, Brennan called a proposal from congressman Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, to disclose the annual numbers of fighters and civilians killed by drones “certainly a worthwhile recommendation”.
Schiff and a North Carolina Republican, Walter Jones, introduced a bill this month to compel the drone casualty totals and combatant breakdowns, which Schiff termed a “modest, but important, measure of transparency and oversight regarding the use of drones”.
The previous February, Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and member of the armed services committee, was quoted tallying the deaths caused by drone strikes over the past decade at 4,700 people. Graham did not disclose either the basis for his estimate or a breakdown of how many civilians the total includes.
US drones strikes are declining worldwide, according to statistics gathered and analyzed by the Council on Foreign Relations. In 2013, there were approximately 55 strikes in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, killing as many as 271 people, down from the 92 strikes that killed up to 532 people in 2012. While drone strikes in Pakistan are sharply down in 2014, a recent offensive aimed at Yemen’s al-Qaida affiliate and including US drone strikes left about 55 people dead last week.
Human rights activists reacted with disappointment to the removal of the transparency requirement.
“How many people have to die for Congress to take even a small step toward transparency? It’s stunning that after all these years we still don’t know how many people the Obama administration has killed with drones,” said Zeke Johnson, the director of Amnesty International’s security and human rights program.
Speaking at a Las Vegas Review-Journal event, Harry Reid was clear: “They’re nothing more than domestic terrorists. I repeat: what happened there was domestic terrorism.”
As Harry Reid stated last week – “This isn’t over”. It appears now that those of you who went there, those of us who blog about it and support Cliven Bundy, those of us against Government Overreach – well, the fear mongering about all of us being labeled as “terrorists” was not “fear mongering”, it was fact.
You’re all terrorists now.
Harry Reid Labels Supporters of Rancher Cliven Bundy ‘Domestic Terrorists’, Reveals Federal Task Force Being Assembled
Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) claimed on Thursday that armed supporters of rancher Cliven Bundy are “domestic terrorists” and reckless individuals who put their families in danger.
Speaking at a Las Vegas Review-Journal event, Reid was clear: “They’re nothing more than domestic terrorists. I repeat: what happened there was domestic terrorism.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. talks about the gender pay gap as the Senate begins debate on wage equity, Tuesday, April 8, 2014, during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
The rhetoric certainly will do nothing to ease already-high tensions after the Bureau of Land Management prematurely shut down its operation to round up Bundy’s “trespass cattle” on Saturday. The federal agency cited fears of public safety after having run-ins with armed militia members who traveled to Bunkerville, Nev., to support the rancher.
Bundy reportedly owes the federal government roughly $1 million in grazing fees, an amount he accumulated after he “fired” the Bureau of Land Management in 1993 over its decision to turn public land into a protective habitat for the state’s desert tortoise.
There are two court orders that permit BLM to execute a roundup of 500 to 900 of Bundy’s “trespass cattle,” Reid reportedly said.
Reid, who recently said the situation is “not over,” revealed on Thursday there is a federal task force being assembled to handle to the tense situation. Click here to view the original image of 620x362px. Cliven Bundy, right, sits in the back of a vehicle near Bunkerville, Nev., Friday, April 11, 2014. The area has become the center of a protest against the Bureau of Land Management’s roundup of cattle owned by Bundy. Bundy claims ancestral rights to graze his cattle on lands his Mormon family settled in the 19th century. (AP Photo/Las Vegas Review-Journal, John Locher)
“Clive Bundy does not recognize the United States,” Reid said. “The United States, he says, is a foreign government. He doesn’t pay his taxes. He doesn’t pay his fees. And he doesn’t follow the law. He continues to thumb his nose at authority.”
“It is an issue we cannot let go, just walk away from,” he added.