Former Congressman Kucinich on Trump: Deep State’s Aim is to Foment Profitable Cold War with Russia

Dennis Kucinich may be a liberal, but he tells the truth as he sees it, rather than sticking to the New World Order narrative. He’s a former Congressman from Ohio, if you’re not familiar with him. He’s also often politically incorrect.

I rate this video very highly. If you can spare 8 minutes, you’ll understand better the crisis that America is experiencing now.

Published on Feb 15, 2017

“Whether you’re for Trump or against Trump, the White House is under attack from elements inside the intelligence community, which are trying to elevate tensions between Russia and the US! At the bottom of that is money & an agenda to cash-in on conflict! There’s a game going on inside the intelligence community where there are those who want to separate the US from Russia in a way that would re-ignite the cold war…Wake up America!”

Pat Buchanan: Trump Must Break Judicial Tyranny

The Drudge Report on Thursday featured Pat Buchanan’s outburst against judicial tyranny. The balance of power between the elected Congress, the elected president, and the unelected judiciary has come into focus with the federal court’s refusals to validate President Trump’s travel ban. Here’s all of Pat’s thinking on the subject.

Lew Rockwell

“Disheartening and demoralizing,” wailed Judge Neil Gorsuch of President Trump’s comments about the judges seeking to overturn his 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from the Greater Middle East war zones.

What a wimp. Did our future justice break down crying like Sen. Chuck Schumer? Sorry, this is not Antonin Scalia. And just what horrible thing had our president said?

A “so-called judge” blocked the travel ban, said, Trump. And the arguments in court, where 9th Circuit appellate judges were hearing the government’s appeal, were “disgraceful.” “A bad student in high school would have understood the arguments better.”Did the president disparage a couple of judges? Yep.

Yet compare his remarks to the tweeted screeds of Elizabeth Warren after her Senate colleague, Jeff Sessions, was confirmed as attorney general.

Sessions, said Warren, represents “radical hatred.” And if he makes “the tiniest attempt to bring his racism, sexism & bigotry” into the Department of Justice, “all of us” will pile on.

Now, this is hate speech. And it validates Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision to use Senate rules to shut her down.

These episodes reveal much about America 2017.

They reflect, first, the poisoned character of our politics. The language of Warren — that Sessions is stepped in “racism, sexism & bigotry” echoes the ugliest slander of the Hillary Clinton campaign, where she used similar words to describe Trump’s “deplorables.”

Such language, reflecting as it does the beliefs of one-half of America about the other, rules out any rapprochement in America’s social or political life. This is pre-civil war language.

For how do you sit down and work alongside people you believe to be crypto-Nazis, Klansmen, and fascists? Apparently, you don’t. Rather, you vilify them, riot against them, deny them the right to speak or to be heard.

Continue reading

Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Efforts to Make America Safe Again

At least as far as the ninth circuit appeals court is concerned, the law is trumped by ideology. In this case the ideology of inclusion, diversity, and multiculturalism. As long as at least some Muslims aren’t going to commit mass murder, then we have to admit them all and let it shake out later.

The blood of your families is on the hands of the leftist/anarchist politically correct judges who have stopped the president from using the powers granted him by the Constitution.

Exerpt from The Guardian

Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban suffered a major setback on Thursday after a panel of three judges upheld a temporary ruling which had halted the president’s limit on people arriving from seven Muslim majority countries.

In its unanimous ruling, the three judges on the ninth circuit court of appeals upheld the temporary restraining order, which was issued by Judge James Robart, a federal district court judge in Washington state, and has blocked the enforcement of many key parts of the executive order.

The court found that “the government has not shown a stay is necessary to avoid irreparable injury.” In particular, its ruling noted “the government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States. Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the executive order, the government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all.”

Almost immediately, Trump tweeted his response: “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!”

Speaking to reporters in the West Wing shortly after that the ruling, he characterized it as “a political decision” and said that “the safety of the nation is at stake”. Trump added that he “looks forward to seeing them in court”.

Thursday’s ruling does not end all litigation over the executive order, which sparked international outcry when it was first issued. Instead, it simply means that its provisions – which include a 90-day travel ban from seven Muslim-majority countries, a 120-day freeze on admission of any refugees into the United States, as well as indefinite halt to admitting any refugees from Syria – cannot be enforced again as the legal battle moves forward. There are roughly 20 lawsuits against the travel ban currently making their way through courts in various states.

On Robart’s injunction, the federal government can now ask the supreme court to review the ninth circuit’s ruling. But the unanimous ruling suggests that the Trump administration will struggle to make a convincing argument.

The supreme court could also sidestep controversy and defer an appeal, leaving the ruling in place as the case works its way through other courts.

The appeals court decision follows a hearing Tuesday night, where lawyers for the state of Washington, which was challenging the ban, argued with attorneys for the justice department.

The selection from the Guardian’s report on this afternoon’s decision offers the basics of the story. I encourage you to click on the link and read all of it because as part of its decision the court has ruled that Trump’s Tweets can be used as evidence that he’s a bigot who hates Muslims. In other words, his mindset can be used against the president’s ability to write laws.

I’m not a legal scholar, but I think I’ve hit on an extremely dangerous new legal precedent.

Also in the opinion, the judges wrote that “it is well established that evidence of purpose” from a case’s context can be used in court – meaning that the states can cite Trump’s claims and tweets, for instance about his preference for Christians and call for a “complete and total shutdown of Muslims”, as admissible evidence.

Trump’s long history of controversial statements, the court suggested, can therefore be used as legal weapons against him.

There is no evidence that Trump hates Muslims. He’s repeatedly said that he seeks the public’s safety. But now the left can argue that he’s a Muslim hater, a woman hater, Mexican hater, etc. and possibly get otherwise lawful orders overturned. In other words, to keep it simple, if Obama does it, it’s legal. If Trump does it, it’s illegal.

This is not the rule of law. It’s a recipe for the assassination of judges and a civil war.

What’s happened is that we’ve had a judicial coup d’etat in the United States. The balance of power is such that a handful of judges, unelected, rule the country now.

Link to Ninth Circuit Site: State of Washington & State of Minnesota v. Trump

Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch Stabs Trump in the Back

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP ANNOUNCING HIS SUPREME COURT PICK, NEIL GORSUCH.

Liberals have short memories. FDR, when he didn’t get his way, attempted to increase the number of judges on the Supreme Court, filling the new slots with his puppets. His failed attempt was called “packing” the Supreme Court.

Obama also criticized the federal courts, which I noted in an earlier post this week, complete with a link. (Sorry, I’ve forgotten which post.)

Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s choice for the open seat on the Supreme Court, has now stabbed him in the back once. Will he be willing to do it again, once sitting on the Court, or was today’s criticism of Trump a political ploy to win confirmation?

Boston Globe

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump lashed out Wednesday at federal judges considering a challenge to his executive order banning travel from seven predominantly Muslim countries, as his Supreme Court nominee called Trump’s attacks on the independent judiciary “demoralizing” and “disheartening.”

Trump escalated his public feud with the courts over his immigration order, saying that he had found a federal appeals court hearing on his executive order Tuesday night “disgraceful,” and that the judges had failed to grasp concepts even “a bad high school student would understand.”

The comments were a remarkable show of disdain by a sitting president for an independent judiciary, and they came at an awkward time for Trump, just as his newly selected nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch of the federal appeals court in Denver, was meeting with senators on Capitol Hill in the hopes of gaining support for his confirmation.

Gorsuch told Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., that he objected to Trump’s harsh criticism of the courts, including his attack over the weekend on a Seattle district court judge who temporarily blocked his immigration order.

In a Twitter post Saturday, the president called Judge James L. Robart, a “so-called judge” whose ruling was “ridiculous” and would be overturned.

Trump’s invective toward judges is a jarring break from a tradition observed by presidents of both parties. Presidents have usually tried to refrain from even appearing to intervene in court cases that concern them or their policies, or from impugning the jurists charged with deciding them, according to judges and legal experts from across the political spectrum.

“I don’t ever want to call a court biased, so I won’t call it biased,” Trump told a gathering of sheriffs and police chiefs Wednesday in Washington. “But courts seem to be so political, and it would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what’s right.”

Trump, who opened his remarks reciting the passage of the U.S. code that gives the president the power to restrict immigration whenever he deems the influx of foreigners detrimental to the country, said he had watched “in amazement” Tuesday night as a three-judge federal appeals panel heard arguments on his executive order and the limits of presidential power in cases of national security.

“I listened to a bunch of stuff last night on television that was disgraceful,” Trump said. “I think it’s sad. I think it’s a sad day. I think our security is at risk today.”

“This is highly unusual,” said Michael W. McConnell, a former federal judge who directs the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford University. “Mr. Trump is shredding long-standing norms of etiquette and interbranch comity.”

“It’s partly good manners, but more importantly, the separation of powers works better when the branches aren’t in a spitting match,” added McConnell, who was nominated to his judicial post by President George W. Bush.

Trump appears bent on engaging in just such a confrontation with independent judges who hold the fate of his travel ban in their hands.

Continue reading

Refuse To Celebrate July 4th Militarism

HE AND HIS PREDECESSORS ARE AMERICA’S BIGGEST ENEMY.
Barack_Obama,_official_photo_portrait,_111th_Congress

Paul Craig Roberts fears World World 3, the war to end life on earth. Arrogant fools will make it happen in the pursuit of American Empire, a (((neo-con))) construct.

Excerpt from Paul Craig Roberts

In the United States patriotism and militarism have become synonyms. This July 4th find the courage to remind the militarists that Independence Day celebrates the Declaration of Independence, not the American Empire. The Declaration of Independence was not only a declaration of independence from King George III but also a declaration of independence from unaccountable tyrannical government. The oath of office commits the US officeholder to the defense of the US Constitution from enemies ”foreign and domestic.”

In the 21st century Americans’ worst enemies are not al Qaeda, Iran, Russia, and China. America’s worst enemies are our own presidents who have declared repeatedly that the orchestrated “war on terror” gives them the right to set aside the civil liberties guaranteed to every citizen by the US Constitution. Presidential disrespect for the US Constitution is so extreme that Obama has nominated David Barron to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Barron is the Justice (sic) Department official who wrote the memos fabricating a legal justification for the Office of President to murder US citizens without due process of law. http://www.credomobilize.com/petitions/tell-the-senate-keep-assassination-memo-nominee-david-barron-off-the-federal-bench?akid=10688.1090360.wP_x-8&rd=1&suppress_one_click=true&t=3

Having stripped US citizens of their civil liberties, executive branch agencies are now stocking up vast amounts of ammunition, and the Department of Agriculture has placed an order for submachine guns. The Department for Homeland Security has acquired 2,717 mine-resistant armored personnel carriers. Congress and the media are not interested in why the executive branch is arming itself so heavily against the American people.

During the entirely of the 21st century–indeed, dating from the Clinton regime at the end of the 20th century–the executive branch has declared its independence from law (both domestic and international) and from the Constitution, Congress, and the Judiciary. The executive branch, with the help of the Republican Federalist Society, has established that the office of the executive is a tyranny unaccountable to law, domestic or international, as long as the executive declares a state of war, even a war that is not conducted against another country or countries but a vague, undefined or ill-defined war against a vague stateless enemy such as al Qaeda, with which the US is currently allied against Syria.

Al Qaeda now has a dual role. Al Qaeda is Washington’s agent for overthrowing the elected Assad government in Syria and al Qaeda is the evil force against which US civil liberties must be sacrificed.

The illegitimate power asserted by the Office of the President is not only a threat to every American but also to every living being on planet earth. As the article cited above reports: “Approximately 17,300 nuclear weapons are presently deployed in at least 9 countries, many of which can be launched and reach their targets within 45 minutes.”

It only takes one fool–and Washington has thousands of fools–and all life on earth terminates in 45 minutes. The neoconservative belief that the United States is the exceptional, indispensable country chosen by history to rule the earth is a belief full of the arrogance and hubris that lead to war.

obamasdestruction

Hussein Obama, 50; America,0: More Adventures in Multiculturalism

obama finger

Fred Reed speaks the truth about that Muslim-loving piece of sh*t in the White House. Hillary comes in as a sidenote. Tranny Michelle is left out.

You’ve heard it all before, but here it is, gathered in one place, expressed concisely. I assume the number 50 in Fred’s title refers to the 50 dead in the Muslim terror attack in the Pulse gay club in Orlando.

Excerpt from The Unz Review

We know Muslims kill Christians. We know they stone adulteresses to death. We know they drive airplanes into buildings. We know they mutilate women. We know they bomb airliners. We know they destroy historic monuments. We know they kill their daughters for losing their virginity. We know they kill homosexuals. We know they make coordinated mass attacks on cities. We know they are incompatible with societies of the First World. We know they have no respect for our laws. We know they hate us.

Knowing all of this, what do we do? Why…of course! What else? We import more of them. Nothing could make more sense. Ten thousand Syrians, coming to your neighborhood. Thank you, Obama. Thank you in advance, Hillary.

More precisely, Hussein Obama imports them. A black President with Islamic roots, barely American, who dislikes white people and recruits immigrants of his two ethnicities as hard as he can. We get utterly unassimilable Somalis in Minnesota, and all the Muslims he can find. Fifty gay men have just paid the price.

For Hussein’s policy.

The man fascinates me. The two worst actors that America has suffered since Lincoln are Osama bin Laden and Hussein Obama. They easily fit into any list of history’s most effective and influential men, being true geniuses. For a few hundred thousand dollars and an army of a couple of dozen, bin Laden stunningly humiliated America on international television, turned the country into a police state frightened of everything, inspired abrogation of its Constitution, and sucked the country into unending wars. On a cost-benefit basis, it was astonishing. He up-throttled national decline and has Americans hopping barefoot in airports while recordings on subways tell us to watch each other and report “suspicious behavior.”

Hussein Obama is in the same majestic league. He has said that he wants to “transform” America, and he has, has he ever, by simply doing what he wants. He found and exploited the hidden weakness in American government, which is that nobody has the balls to tell him “No.” He has won by sheer force of will. You’ve got to hand it to the guy: he’s good.

He has set the stage for, at least, unending divisiveness and very possibly for civil war. He will bring in as many more incompatible savages as he can before leaving office, and Hillary, if elected, will be Obama continued by other means. Amazing. The combined militaries of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany could not do as much lasting harm as this one man.

obama grin gif

The left has sold “Diversity is our strength” as the national creed. Somehow, it worked better when it was “In God we trust.” And that God was NOT Allah.