Thursday, May 17, 2018
When Peaceful Monks Cannot Coexist With Muslims...
Buddhist Monks Are Attacking Muslims In Self Defense. There Is No Coexistence With Muslims. Their Death Cult Does Not Allow It.
An Unaccountable FBI Got Away with Covering Up a Mass Shooting
For nine minutes, about two dozen Republicans, who had been preparing for a bipartisan baseball game, dodged the bullets of a madman trying to shoot them down. The fact that no one was killed, was due to a series of miracles including the efforts of some brave Capitol Police. It was clear from the beginning that the shooter was a politically-motivated Democrat, a Bernie supporter in fact.
The prosecutor knew right away:
At around 7:06 a.m., a man in a blue T-shirt approached the field and fired 62 7.62x39mm rounds through a lawfully purchased Century International Arms SKS-style semiautomatic assault rifle, according to Alexandria’s elected prosecutor. The shooting, he concluded, was “an act of terrorism” that was “fueled by rage against Republican legislators.” The day was one in a continuum of violent, surreal days over the past year, from mass shootings to Charlottesville.But then the massive FBI cover up began:
But many lawmakers are mad, or frustrated, or saddened, at how quickly the story disappeared from the headlines given that the shooter, James T. Hodgkinson, targeted Republicans. The FBI concluded the shooting wasn’t politically motivated — suicide by cop, they told members after an investigation.
The shooter carried a list of lawmakers names. It was his hit list. He had been watching the filed for some time from the local Y that overlooked the field.
But Hodgkinson carried a list of names of lawmakers in his pocket: Mo Brooks, Jim Jordan, Trent Franks, Scott DesJarlais, Jeff Duncan, and Morgan Griffith. The list included their office numbers and short physical descriptions. He’d recorded video of the field in April of that year — a sign, the prosecutor wrote in his official report, that Hodgkinson “had already selected Simpson field as a potential target as early as April 2017.” Rep. Gary Palmer says he had noticed Hodgkinson on the bleachers the day before the shooting; he’d even thought about walking over to him because he looked like he was having “a hard time.”
There is no question James Hodgkinson was a Democrat who hated Trump and the GOP. He left a paper trail.
His social media posts show that he hated Trump, and supported Bernie Sanders, whose 2016 campaign he even volunteered for. (“I am sickened by this despicable act,” Sanders said the day of the shooting.) He once routinely wrote letters to the local paper, criticizing Republicans.
There was no end to the evidence. He made certain Republicans were on...
Happy Ramadan!
More critical issues about bacon:
Bacon - This Blog's Radical Muslim Repellent
Let’s not forget, former CIA head John Brennan has a history of lying… and spying
Pointing to Brennan’s testimony before Congress that the unverified Trump dossier paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign had no influence on allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, Tucker detailed how Mike Rogers, the former head of the National Security Agency, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper have now admitted that it did have influence.
“We have a problem with multiple heads of intelligence agencies and that does include Brennan, who has a history of lying, specifically about spying on American citizens,” Hemingway said.
(Think back to Clapper telling Congress the NSA does not collect data on millions of Americans.)
But the senior editor of The Federalist stressed that it’s not just Brennan, who is now a paid MSNBC contributor, who has had problems with falsehoods.
“It’s difficult to hold him, take him seriously,” Hemingway said. “But we have also had problems with falsehoods being said also by James Clapper, who gave inconsistent testimony about his leaking to...
When Did America Stop Being Great?
He Was The Final Straw In A Long Line Of Leftist Victories Over America...
President Trump Should Ignore the DACA Ruling
–U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1
This is the oath President Trump and every president of the United States took prior to becoming the chief executive. Every member of Congress swears to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." When a president or a legislature is directed to perform a duty that is unconstitutional, he or it must refuse or else he or it would, thereby, break this oath.
Due to recent unconstitutional actions taken by the judiciary, this scenario needs be examined as more than a theoretical exercise. A U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. has ordered President Trump to continue President Obama's DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program. According to the court, President Trump must not only keep the program in place, but also continue accepting new applicants. A federal court is now ordering the president to perform an executive order that even President Obama stated was illegal before later issuing it.
Does a district court have the power to order the chief executive of the United States to take an illegal executive action? Does President Trump simply abide by this order, thus violating his oath of office to defend the Constitution? Or does he have another option?
Court Immigration Case Abuses
While abuses by the court have been well documented, there has been a change in the tyranny unleashed by the courts in the past few years. As Daniel Horowitz lays out in Stolen Sovereignty. How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America, the courts have now shifted their attack to America's national sovereignty. By overturning the Legislature's precedent of plenary power over immigration policy, the courts are prepared to take away the American people's ability to determine our immigration policy.
For two centuries, the courts viewed immigration policy as a political decision to be decided by...
BOMBSHELL: FBI Used Secret Program To Gather Information On Trump Campaign, No Judge Needed, Report Says
The report also revealed that a government informant met several times with Trump campaign officials, which validates a March 8, 2018 report from The Washington Post. The New York Times reports:
The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.
National security letters (NSL) are secret orders that the FBI uses on a regular basis to obtain sensitive electronic data and phone records. The Intercept reports:
They are controversial in part because they carry the force of law but are created entirely outside the judicial system: To issue one, an FBI official just needs to attest that the information sought is relevant to a national security investigation. The letters have also been criticized because they are shrouded in secrecy. Companies that receive them are for the most part forbidden from notifying their customers or the public. The government has fought to keep even basic rules governing them secret.
Companies that receive NSLs might not be legally required to hand over the information demanded by the FBI. The Intercept continues:
The most recent document on national security letter policy was made public on January 31, 2017, by The Intercept and reveals which FBI officials have the authority to sign NSLs. The Director has delegated the authority to sign NSLs and to certify the nondisclosure requirement to the following FBI officials:
The FBI’s internal guidelines suggest that the bureau uses the letters to demand sensitive information on email transactions — even though the Justice Department has specifically advised the FBI that it does not have the authority to use the letters this way. The documents also indicate that the FBI can use national security letters to surveil a “community of interest” by obtaining information from a business about a customer and every person that customer has contacted. This is a controversial practice that the bureau once halted amid scrutiny. But the documents reveal that a secretive unit that mines phone records can still initiate such requests.
The most recent document on national security letter policy was made public on January 31, 2017, by The Intercept and reveals which FBI officials have the authority to sign NSLs. The Director has delegated the authority to sign NSLs and to certify the nondisclosure requirement to the following FBI officials:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)