Friday, June 22

Leading Mexican prez candidate says anyone should be able to enter the U.S.--"basic human right"


Mexico has a presidential election scheduled for July 1.  The leading candidate is a communist, warmongering piece of shit named "Andrés Manuel López Obrador."

Those words were not chosen casually.  Obrador is a POS because, among other thing, in a speech Tuesday he called for mass emigration of Mexicans to the United States, declaring that a “human right” for all North Americans.

Obrador said Mexicans “must leave their towns and find a life in the United States.”  He declared that anyone should be able to go to the U.S. at any time, calling that “a human right we will defend,”

“Very soon — after the victory of our movement — we will defend all the migrants in the American continent and all the migrants in the world,” he said.

The Mexican press reports that Obrador is by far the favorite to win.  If he does, things should get even more interesting.

Thursday, June 21

The Curious Case of Ilhan Omar

Minnesota politics is essentially controlled by the "Democratic Farmer-Labor" party (DFL), and its U.S. congresscritters vote with the Democrat party.  Whoever wins the DFL primary usually wins the general election.

Rep. Keith Ellison was the first Muslim elected to Congress, from far-Left Minnesota.  Two weeks ago Ellison abruptly announced his intent to resign from congress and instead run for attorney-general of that state.

Five DFL candidates are vying for the seat Ellison's anouncement leaves open. Four days ago the DFL endorsed one of those five--Ilhan Omar--who won 68% .  The actual primary election is in August.  Again, whoever wins the party primary is virtually guaranteed to win the election.

Ilhan Omar is a woman from Somalia who came to the U.S. in the late 1990s.  She's in her first term as a state legislator, and her district is heavily Somali-Muslim.  Local residents call it "little Mogadishu."

As many Americans are (belatedly) beginning to realize, the amount of corruption in all levels of government--but especially the federal government--is staggering.  Thus it would seem to be a bad idea to elect anyone to congress who seemed to be lying about their background, and refused to answer questions asking for clarification.

Finally, any candidate whose response to pointed questions was to scream "racist!" is probably hiding something.  And voters should know, since that would seem to bear on the question of whether the candidate was honest.

In Omar's case, attorney Scott Johnson found she is not legally married to the man she advertises as the husband and the father of her three children.  Instead, she is legally married to another man—who may be her brother. 

The local leftist newspaper--the miserably socialist "Minneapolis Star-Tribune"--which adoringly covers her campaign, has shown no interest in getting her campaign to clarify questions about this.

Specifically, a post on a Somali discussion board claimed Omar married Ahmed Hirsi, the man her website claims is her husband, in 2002, and then seven years later married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, a man the poster claimed was actually her brother, for fraudulent purposes in 2009.

The post, which seems to have been written by someone from Minneapolis’s Somali community, was quickly deleted.  By the time Johnson learned about it, someone had deleted it.  The post was only available via a Google cache, and now the cache has also been deleted--which is odd.  If the post is accurate, not only would the second marriage would be illegal, but would suggests that Omar had done it to get her brother into the U.S. by fraud.

Johnson checked out the discussion-board post by searching through the Minnesota Official Marriage System.  He says those records did indeed show the two marriages cited in the discussion board post, the first, in 2002, to the man she now claims as her husband, Ahmed Aden (later Ahmed Hirsi), and then a 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, who the Somali poster claimed is Omar’s brother.

Almost two years ago, attorney Johnson submitted written questions to the Omar campaign, citing the SomaliSpot post and asking if the two records in the state system were accurate.

The campaign itself didn't respond.  Instead Johnson got a letter from a Minneapolis attorney.  And instead of answering Johnson's question, the letter implied that Johnson had asked the questions because of racial prejudice against Omar running for public office.  Here's the letter:

Dear Mr. Johnson:
I have been contacted by the Ilhan Omar campaign. Their response to your email from this morning is as follows:
“There are people who do not want an East African, Muslim woman elected to office and who will follow Donald Trump’s playbook to prevent it. [Clearly implyling Johnson is a racist.] Ilhan Omar’s campaign sees your superfluous contentions as one more in a series of attempts to discredit her candidacy.
Ilhan Omar’s campaign will not be distracted by negative forces and will continue to focus its energy on creating positive engagement with community members to make the district and state more prosperous and equitable for everyone.”
If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please direct them to me in writing so we have a record of any further communications.
Johnson  posted an account of all this on his blog.  Amazingly, a young reporter for The Star Tribune--who hadn't grasped that no one was to question Omar about this--tried to get the campaign to clear this up the following week.  But the candidate--usually eager for press coverage--wouldn't agree to be interviewed.

Instead, a Democratic operative (Ben Goldfarb) contacted the Star Tribune on Omar’s behalf: “Allegations that she married her brother and is legally married to two people are categorically ridiculous and false.”  The operative explained that Omar had never legally married Ahmed Hirsi, and flatly denied that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi--a man state records show her as having married--is her brother.

The campaign issued a statement that all questions about her marital status were prompted by “Trump-style misogyny, racism, anti-immigration rhetoric and Islamophobic division.”  When Star Tribune reporter Patrick Coolican requested a comment from Johnson for his story that day, Johnson asked him who Elmi is.  The reporter replied, “They won’t tell me.”

The next day Omar issued a formal written statement explaining that she had requested a marriage license for her first marriage, the one her campaign has publicly touted, to the man her website touted as her husband and the father of her children--—but never formally married him in the U.S.  She says she married him in an Islamic ceremony in 2002 but never filed an executed marriage license with the state.

Information Johnson found on official Minnesota records confirmed that Omar had in fact applied for a license to marry Aden/Hirsi.  But strangely, the entry on the Minnesota Official Marriage System has since been scrubbed.

The statement further explained that Omar had married her current legal husband—Ahmed Nur Said Elmi—in 2009. Though they split in 2011, with Elmi returning to the United Kingdom, Omar never got around to dissolving the marriage. The statement described her 2002 husband, Aden/Hirsi, as “the love of [her] life.” Campaign spokesman Michael Howard then declared that the statement would be Omar’s last word on the matter.

One specific, simple question Omar has never answered is: Does she have a brother named Ahmed Nur Said Elmi?

The above facts suggest that Omar married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009 to get him admitted to the U.S.  If she was already married, that's polygamy and illegal here.  If she wasn't, and he's her brother, it's similarly illegal.  Her website features husband #1 (Aden/Hirsi) and their three children.  By stark contrast, her campaign website doesn't mention husband #2.  Yet #2 is, according to her own statements, her current legal husband.

The mainstream media have no interest in questioning a minority Muslim female about...well, about anything, because they don't want to be accused of being raaacist, anti-Muslim or anti-female.  Johnson says local Somalis who have contacted him have said they're worried about their physical safety.

Only one local reporter is unintimidated by these tactics. Preya Samsundar writes for the Minnesota-based site Alpha News.  Using social media Samsundar has found information suggesting that Elmi, the man Omar married in Minnesota in 2009, is indeed her brother. Omar’s own Instagram photos from the summer of 2015 place her in London with relatives, and with a man later identified as Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. Soon after her marital history became an issue, however, Omar closed her Instagram account to the public. When the account became public again, Samsundar found that the original photo collage of Omar and Elmi was no longer included. Samsundar also discovered that accounts once connected to Elmi have disappeared since the controversy began. Even LinkedIn pages and Elmi’s professional portfolio pages have vanished. New accounts for Elmi have appeared under a different name, and without his identifying photo.

Samsundar emailed Ahmed Nur Said Elmi and asked if he'd been married to Omar.  Elmi replied  “[N]o way am I affiliated with anyone in your articles. Nor do I recall being married to anyone. At least, from what I remember. :)”

Omar fills every checkbox for Minnesota's ultra-liberal Democrats.  If a white married Republican candidate for congress had married a second woman to get her into the U.S., and then refused to answer any questions at all about it, the Dem-loving media would be screaming bloody murder.   By stark contrast,  no Democrat-run media is willing to demand that Omar answer questions about her past, since she holds a triple-preference card (female, Muslim, Somali immigrant).

Is it any wonder we get thieves and liars in D.C.? 

It seems to me to be an absolutely horrible idea for voters to elect a congresscritter who seems to lie so brazenly, and then who refuses to take questions that might clear up any "misunderstanding."

But then Omar is a Democrat, and Dems don't seem to have any trouble at all electing people who lie like a rug:  Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Hilliary Clinton, and John Edwards, to name just a few.

Wednesday, June 20

U. of Missouri continues to bleed students and cash after 2015 protests rocked the campus

If you're a college student, 2015 is, like, a century ago.  And unless you're a political junkie you probably didn't hear about the anti-white protests at the University of Missouri that year that caused utter chaos on that campus.

The cause wasn't police violence.  No one was shot.  Basically, black students were angry that Mizzou didn't have more courses in African studies, and there were threats of violence.  One student went on a hunger strike that lasted an entire week.  Naturally that made national news, which fired up the activists to increase their demands.

And they did, demanding that both the school's president and chancellor resign.  And both did.

White social justice warriors helped the demonstrators.   The creature with the glasses in the pic below is Melissa Click, who was some type of journalism professor.  When she saw a student photographer working as a stringer for a national paper taking pics, she DEMANDED that he cease.  He said "This is public property.  You have no authority to tell me not to take photos."  She totally freaked out (shocker, since she looks so calm and rational, eh?) and tried to smash his camera.  When she couldn't accomplish that she screamed to the demonstrators "Can we get some muscle over here?"  So the student photographer left.

Short answer: Mizzou hired a "diversity vice president"--huge salary, does nothing useful, since all faculties have been social justice snowflakes for at least 15 years.  And they've been trying to make a "diversity course" a requirement to graduate.  Ah.



But there was also one other effect that absolutely no one could have predicted--well, at least no liberal or academic would have:  Students about to choose a college, who saw what was happening at Mizzou, said "No, don't think I'll apply there."  And parents who were scouting colleges with their kids agreed. 

And can you guess the result?   Between the fall 2015 and 2017 semesters, freshman enrollment dropped 35%, resulting in a drop in tuition income of $29 million.  Even for a state school, that's a serious hit, and the school was forced to cut a few staff positions last year, as well as not re-hiring many non-tenured professors.

"A few" is actually 308.  And last week the school said it will have to eliminate another 185 positions. They've eliminated low-demand courses.

So what we have here should have been a great learning opportunity.  But it's doubtful any of the administrators at Mizzou did, as they're now inventing wild excuses to hide the real reason for the massive drop in enrollment.  As an example, they're now claiming the drop in enrollment is due to "more-aggressive recruiting by universities in adjoining states."  Ah.

Among whites, more deaths than births in 26 states


The NY Times piece at this link is badly written, in the sense that the most significant information is buried far down in it.   What matters isn't the number of states, but how the whole U.S. is doing.  And it turns out white deaths are now exceeding births for the U.S. as a whole for the first time in our history.

That crossing point was actually reached--with very little publicity--two years ago.  But now, just two years later, according to the author of the report “It’s happening a lot faster than we thought.”

One reason is that the median age for Hispanics in the United States is 29--prime childbearing age--compared to a median age of 43 for whites.  And yes, part of that is due to the young age of illegal-alien immigrants.  But another part is the choice of how many children to have, if any.

Most foreigners--especially from relatively primitive nations--have far more children than non-Hispanic Americans do.  More non-Hispanic Americans are either delaying marriage or deciding not to have children, or just one.  Part of this trend seems to be that increasing numbers of men under about 30 have noticed that men who marry run a huge risk of losing everything in a divorce, so choose not to marry.

On the other side, due to a combination of more working women, and the government now providing a safety net for everyone, women don't need to marry to have at least a reasonably good standard of living.  So from the female side too, the impetus to marry--and to have two or more children--is dropping fast.

If you're white and love the country you know and grew up in, the idea of whites becoming a minority--predicted for around 2045--may be unsettling.  By stark contrast, Democrats, socialists, communists, La Raza, and whites fatally afflicted with "white guilt" will cheer this as a great milestone.

And if you doubt that last part...read the comments at the link above.  But don't do it if you have a weak stomach, because they are absolutely hateful.  Ghastly.  Spilling over with anti-white hate.

May God help your children and grandchildren.

ABC lies again, runs graphic saying "Manafort pleads guilty to 5 charges of..."

ABC, like all the nets, hates Trump and is doing its worst to sabotage him.  One of the ways to do that is to convince Americans that people who worked on his campaign are bad.

And if you click this link you'll see one of the infinite number of ways they do that.  While broadcasting a clip of president Trump talking about "this immigration problem," ABC put a large graphic at the bottom of the screen saying "Special report:  Manafort pleads guilty to 5 charges of manslaughter."



"Gosh," says the low-info voter, "Five counts of manslaughter!  Wow, I'm glad the investigators kept after the guy and finally got him to plead guilty!"

Of course Low-Info Voter doesn't ever see or hear ABC's apology.  And two days later he's forgotten about seeing the graphic.  All he remembers is that Trump hired a guy who killed five people.  He can't recall who it was, but he's absolutely sure he saw that somewhere.

Now it's not a shock to learn that people make mistakes.  But consider two things:  First, it's quite a coincidence that ABC aired this particular graphic as the president was speaking.

Second:  That graphic obviously didn't just write itself.  Some shit-head at ABC took the time to type it in, knowing it was total horse-shit.  And then hit the button to display it.

This was not innocent.  They hate Trump and will stop at nothing to get rid of him.  The apology is worthless.

Oprah Winfrey on why she said nothing about Obama doing the same: "I wasn't aware then."

"I wasn't aware then," sez Oprah.  If that's true, do ya know why? Cuz the Lying Mainstream Media didn't say a word.

So do ya think the Lying Media didn't know about the practice?  Of course they knew.  They just didn't want to bring any heat on their hero Obozo.

But now that he's out and a Republican is prez, suddenly it's the most awful thing ever!  Dems are seriously comparing it to the Holocaust.  (Really.  And more than one or two Dems doing that.)


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DgFIxJmUYAAnKLP?format=jpg

Cartoon

Now before anyone gets their knickers in a twist: I'm an unequivocal fan of legal immigrants, whether from Mexico or anywhere else.  You did it the right way, and good on ya'.  But for the whiners who are here illegally and have the gall to bitch about it...I think the cartoon below is spot-on:

Embedded

Twatter hides a pic under the warning "May contain sensitive material." You won't believe what it was

Just stumbled on a tweet by a guy named Blair Cottrell titled "Toxic masculinity."

There was a pic, but Twatter had hidden it under their ridiculous snowflake warning, "The following media may contain sensitive material."

Naturally I was curious as to what Twatter had deemed so dangerous or triggering or whatever, so I clicked on "View anyway."

And it was two pics of men doing good things:  One was wading thru floodwaters towing a boat with two rescued children, the other was a man fighting a wildfire.

And I thought:  Holy shit, this is what the Leftist-run social media have come to, putting warnings on pics of men doing good, calling it "sensitive material."

Okay, trigger warning for any snowflakes:  I'm about to unload with both barrels.  So if you're easily triggered, you need to stop reading right here.

Fuck Twatter, and Fakebook, and the Lying Mainstream Media, and Antifa, and all the ghastly socialists in the U.S. government.  Go burn in hell.  Die in a fire.  You are doing your best to destroy this country--and you may well succeed.  But the odds are equal that you will only summon a rain of fire down on your heads.  And not some metaphorical heavenly fire.

So according to Twatter, pics of men doing good are to be hidden behind the warning "Sensitive material."  Amazing.  But predictable.



The Left's playbook summarized in one cartoon

The Left's playbook summarized:

Embedded

Head of the House Democrat caucus calls ICE a "fascist organization"

For the entire time Trump has been in office, Democrat "leaders" have been fanning the flames of insane anger in their base.  Latest example:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the agency charged with deporting foreigners who are in the U.S. illegally.

In a televised debate, the head of the Democratic caucus--congressman Joe Crowley--confirmed that he'd called ICE a "fascist organization."

The Democrats and the Left are spiraling toward violent acts, just like that leftist nut who tried to kill members of the Republican congressional baseball team, gravely wounding congressman Steve Scalise and three others.

Democrats at all levels--from the leadership down to Hollywood idiots--are gleefully spurring their base to amp up their hate for Trump, and it seems to be getting worse.  It's only a matter of time until another left-wing nut starts shooting.

Obviously nuts are randomly distributed across parties.  The problem here is Democrats deliberately inciting their base by calling federal agencies fascist.  Of course when another nut shoots a Republican congresscritter, or an ICE agent, the Dems will instantly bleat that they NEVER encouraged any follower to commit a violent act.

And sure enough, a fascist named Arielle (@ArielleSwernoff) got on Twatter and laid down her favored tactic:
"Members of ICE should be outed and ostracized. Hassled at restaurants, malls, when they pick their kids up from school, etc. You should not be able to be a part of the machine separating children from their families and clock out for a peaceful evening."
Other leftists suggested surrounding the children of ICE agents at their schools and scaring them with threats.  See a trend yet?

Then after "Democratic Socialist" fascists made enough disruption to cause DHS secretary Nielsen to leave a DC restaurant, someone named Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) picked it up:
DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was confronted at a DC restaurant by DSA protesters and it's VERY satisfying to watch. She should never be able to show her face in public again.
The Left is ramping this up exponentially.  (If you're a highschool student that translates "at warp speed.")


Seattle has a great idea for how to "solve" their drug problem


As the media have been telling us for a year or more, the U.S.is in the middle of an "opioid crisis."  The media tell you it's caused by doctors too eager to write prescriptions for pain pills, but that's only a tiny factor.

A far bigger factor is heroin and fentanyl, both of which are flooding into this country from Mexico and China.  Both are much cheaper than buying prescription drugs on the street.

Seattle is a liberal-run city with a big drug problem.  So, being liberals (and thus way smarter than those of us in flyover country) they decided to take Action to fix the problem.  The first step was to create a Regional Task Force on opiate addiction.

The Task Force--totally staffed by liberals--studied the problem and concluded that there was nothing really wrong with using heroin.  Rather, the problem was that users sometimes died from an overdose.  And because liberals are very compassionate, they came up with what seemed to them a faaabulous solution:  They recommended that Seattle create a city-run facility where heroin addicts could shoot up under medical supervision.  With nurses and antidotes ready to go, drug addicts could shoot up without fear of overdosing.  Voila.

Seriously, this is what they proposed.

Of course the official documents avoid using the graphic but honest terms "addicts" and "shoot up," instead preferring the euphemisms "users" and "consume narcotics."  Ah, those sound LOTS better, eh citizen?  After all, we're all "consumers" of various products, right?  And if some people want to consume different...um... products, who are we to deny them that right, eh?

Well, except for guns, obviously.

Seattle's liberal city council agreed that this was a faaaabulous idea, and voted $1.3 million for the project.  But now the city has hit on what they say is a more cost-effective option: outfitting a small bus as a shooting gallery to enable people to "consume narcotics" safely.

The plan is to park the bus in a leased lot.  But some "consumers" were concerned that only having one location would make it inconvenient for "consumers" to access.   But Jeff Sakuma, a "health integration strategist" in Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan’s office, is confident they can work out any problems.  The point is they've got a solution for the drug problem.

Isn't that cool?  Oh sure, some ol' tight-ass conservatives will complain that this doesn't reduce the problem of how heavy "consumers of narcotics" get enough cash to fund a $200 per day habit, nor does it address the less-than-stellar business practices of drug sellers.  And some right-wing nutjobs are even claiming that operating the bus might even encourage more heroin use.  What a crazy idea!  It just shows you what a crazy fantasy world conservatives live in, eh?

The only substantive complaint about the proposal came from junkies "consumers of narcotics," who said one bus wouldn't be nearly enough to keep all of Seattle's consumers happy.  So the council is working on finding money for a second bus if demand is high.

So remember: Liberals can find solutions for even the toughest problems.  You just have to be smart.  And not listen to any whining from right-wingers.  And vote Democrat in November.

Media imply Trump has lower approval rating than Obama did. Wrong again.


During Obama's reign the lying media constantly told you how wildly popular he was.  Talking heads like Chrissy Matthews said--literally, in these words--that seeing Obama gave him a "tingle up his leg." The media were shameless in their adoration, and that led them to praise him for his popularity.

In other words, because the media liked him, voters must also have been thrilled.

By contrast, the media hate Trump, and 90 percent of the media's stories have been negative.  So of course the media is eager to imply that Trump is unpopular with the public.  It's what their Democrat buddies want the public to believe.

So it may surprise you to learn that the latest Gallup poll shows Trump's approval rating tied with Obama's at this point in the presidency of each.

Tuesday, June 19

"A parent's worst nightmare"

Lately the people pushing for open borders have been getting a lot of press coverage by wailing “What about the children?!?!” as illegal alien invaders have been temporarily separated from kids they claim are their offspring.

Y' know, that's a really good question. What about the children?
Nine days ago, in what is every parent’s nightmare, a family in eastern Pennsylvania awoke in the middle of the night to find their front door unlocked and their four-year-old girl missing.

It happened early on June 10 in Avondale, Chester County, Pa , And now a 35-year-old Mexican national has been charged in the case.

Humberto Guzman-Garcia is accused of kidnapping and sexually assaulting the 4-year-old.

You know what will make things better, citizen?   Open borders, citizen.  Yes, that's exactly what we need.  Things will be much better then.  You can trust us on that, because we're a lot smarter than you are.  Plus, have we ever lied to you before?  So get out in November and vote Democrat.

Because only haters want to control who can enter this country.  You don't want people to think you're a...hater...do you?

NYC high school to allow students to get diploma without showing up for class

The drive toward the erasing all standards in New York City schools just achieved another goal. 

This one goes beyond moonbat mayor Bill de Blasio wanting to eliminate entrance exams for the city's elite public schools.  Now at DeWitt Clinton High School, students can get a passing grade even if they never show up for class:
Insisting that students can pass “regardless of absence,” Principal Pierre Orbe has ordered English, science, social studies and math teachers to give makeup work to hundreds of kids who didn’t show up or failed the courses, whistleblowers said.
Like many NYC schools, this one is heavily "hooded" and has been getting horrible results for the $23,000 per student per year that the city spends.  For example, last year only half of seniors graduated, and almost three-quarters of those who did graduate needed remedial help to enroll in CUNY.

So how to improve graduation numbers?  Simple: Instead of forcing the poor students to actually show up for class, allow students to pass courses by completing — or haveingsomeone else complete — “mastery packets” at home, making cheating easy and inevitable.

Astonishingly, Obama holdovers in the federal Department of "Education" made it federal policy that schools could get away with this, saying students “may not be denied credit based on lack of seat time alone.”   The clear inference is that students who didn't come to class would still be able to pass if they passed some sort of competency test.  But of course since this isn't explicitly demanded, it leaves the door open for schools to get credit for "graduates" who can't spell "cat."

Social justice warriors and moonbat allies won't be happy until all standards have been erased--when the only qualification for having a college degree will be the ability to say the word "college."

The moonbats will joyfully call this "education equity" and will celebrate.

"Scripted outrage"

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e8a7b4a28bf6d281402de4909690aea8008a7ccf5f0fe2a7135c4a6ca1442fc4.jpg

Shrieks and lies of the "Trump treating children inhumanely" brigade continue

The outrage!  by Democrats over separating children from arrested illegal aliens at the border continues to build, as part of a carefully-orchestrated campaign by the Left and their allies in the  Lying Media.  The tweet below is typical.  (For those not familiar with national politics, Kamala Harris is a U.S. senator from California and a hard-Left Democrat):

https://www.weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Screen-Shot-2018-06-18-at-10.20.34-PM.png
Another Democrat senator, this time from Connecticut, compared the policy to the Holocaust (Hitler's Nazi's sending Jews to concentration camps).


https://www.weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Screen-Shot-2018-06-18-at-8.12.36-PM.png
Insane bitch Kathy Griffin screamed her anger at (amazingly) innocent First Lady Melania Trump, (calling her "Melanie" as a swipe at the president making a type in a tweet of his own):




Not surprisingly, Hilliary Clinton chimed in, lying that
This is not happening because of the “Democrats’ law,” as the White House has claimed. Separating families is not mandated by law at all. That is an outright lie. And it is incumbent on all of us, journalists and citizens alike, to call it just that. …
Again not surprisingly, Clinton's statement was so weasel-worded as to be a lie:  the policy of arresting illegal aliens who sneak across the border is in accord with U.S. law.  And a ruling by a federal judge several years ago bars the government from putting children in adult prisons.  So the only way the government can avoid separating children from illegal-alien border crossers (who may not even be their parents) is by simply releasing the adults with the children.  Meaning we would have de=facto open borders, which is what the Democrats want.

Even former first lady Laura Bush joined the Dem critics, writing a piece for the Washington Post  attacking the separation policy as if it started under Trump's administration, when in fact it's been U.S. policy under Obama and Bush.

Interestingly, Mrs. Bush never said a word of criticism about the policy during the entire 8 years of Obama's reign, but has criticized Trump often, including women who voted for him.

It's also interesting that in many cases when immigration officials question the so-called parents of the children they claim are their offspring, the adults claiming to be the parents can't answer basic questions about their alleged children, like birthdates.  The kids are similarly ignorant of the details of the people claiming to be their parents.

As one official said, instead of answering the questions, both adults and children spout the same identical, scripted phrases, as if they've been coached.

This won't end well, because the Democrats and the Left and their media allies know they have an emotional issue here.  If they keep wailing and moaning about the "cruel, inhumane" conditions forced on these "poor, unfortunate children," they'll win sympathy and votes.

And of course low-information voters (the Dem base) believe none of this ever happened under Obama--which is flatly false, as demonstrated by the pics from 2014 that unwitting leftists claimed were taken after Trump took office.  It captured the news cycle for two days, but the Dems aren't likely to make that mistake again.

They'll make different ones.   And the media will shriek for two days, then cover for them.

Meanwhile, separating children from their actual parents continues to happen, but this time the blame rests with Obama and Democrats, since the separation is due to illegal aliens separating American kids from their parents permanently, by murdering them.  But the mainstream media isn't a bit interested in telling you about that sort of separation, because it hurts the Democrat narrative.

Illegal-alien invader murders two women; another murder you won't see on your evening news

A week ago a woman was murdered in Miami and her body left on a sidewalk.  Now an illegal alien invader--which the Lying Media charmingly, cunningly call an "undocumented immigrant"--has confessed to murdering both this victim and another woman months earlier.

Juan Carlos Hernandez-Caseres, 37, is facing two first-degree murder charges in the deaths of Ann Farrin, 41, and Neidy Roche, 39, after investigators used DNA evidence to connect him to both killings, the Miami Herald reports.  He confessed to both murders.
 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have placed an immigration detainer on Hernandez-Caseres, meaning Miami cops would notify ICE in the unlikely event they planned to release him.

It's absolutely crucial to note here that in Nueva York and California and all other so-called "sanctuary states" or cities, state or local politicians have ordered their cops to release illegal aliens without notifying ICE of their intent to do so--which allows the illegal alien to vanish back into the general population and commit more crime.

Hell of a deal, eh?

"Sanctuary."  Has a nice ring to it, no?  Gives the listener or reader visions of a poor, innocent victim being sheltered from the cruelty of an eeeeevil power, eh?  So once again...control the labels and you control the emotional battle-space.

The only way the "sanctuary" policy will start to lose trendiness is if a pretty, non-drug-addict daughter of a political "leader" in a "sanctuary" city or state is killed by an illegal.  And the odds of that happening are so close to zero as to be useless.  Not because illegals don't rape thousands of Americans every year, and kill hundreds, but simply because the probability of a victim being the child of a political "leader" is small.

But eventually, ordinary citizens will get tired of this shit.  And will make their anger known, at 1500 fps.

Comey and Loretta Lynch refuse to appear before senate; McCabe appears but refuses to testify

The Constitution--which the Founders apparently considered "the supreme law of the land"--says Congress is supposed to oversee the operation of the federal government.  So the U.S. senate's Judiciary Committee held a hearing on possible illegal acts by Obama's FBI and Department of "Justice" in the year leading up to the last presidential election.

Specifically, the head of the committee wanted to know how the FBI and DOJ decided to clear Hilliary of any wrongdoing regarding her sending and receiving Top Seccret emails to her private, email account on an unsecured server in her New York home.  So the chairman of the committee wanted to subpoena Obama's Attorney-General, Loretta Lynch, Obama's FBI director James Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe to testify.

For young readers, a subpoena is a legal demand that you appear.

Democrat senator Diane Feinstein blocked the committee from issuing a subpoena.  Turns out the senate has a rule that a committee can only issue a subpoena if the ranking minority member agrees with the committee chair.  Feinstein is the ranking Democrat, so was able to block.

With Feinstein blocking a command to appear and testify, all the committee could do was invite the witnesses to appear.

FBI Director James B. Comey and former A-G Loretta Lynch refused to appear.

"But...but...but we're, like, totally transparent, peons!  We dindoo nuffin wrong!  We just don't wanna testify cuz, um...we're busy people.  Got lots more important things to do, eh citizen?  So fuck off."

"But remember, citizens:  we Democrats are all about government being totally transparent!  At least when the Rethuglicans are in charge."

But don't worry, folks:  Fired deputy FBI director McCabe bravely showed up, so we'll learn whatever he's willing to tell us--provided Feinstein and the other Dem members don't spend the whole day blowing smoke.

Ooooh, wait:  McCabe refused to answer any questions, "taking the Fifth" on everything.

But other than that, he was totally forthright and honest.

And by the way, Democrats admit that the rule that says the senate can only subpoena someone to appear if the ranking minority member agrees might...uh...make it harder for the senate to uncover wrongdoing.  They say they're truly aggrieved by this and actually want to eliminate that rule--and will do so as soon as the Democrats regain majority control again.

Oh, and do, do remember to vote Democrat in November, so we can have more blocking and less testimony by guilty, corrupt rat-bastards.

Sunday, June 17

Another baby ripped from the arms of...wait, illegal alien fatally shoots mom, steals her baby


Yesenia Sesmas, 36, is a female illegal-alien.  At one time she lived in Wichita, Kansas, were she met a 27-year-old co-worker, who became pregnant.  Sesmas then moved to Dallas.

On Nov. 17 of 2016, just six days after the former co-worker had her baby, Sesmas drove to Wichita, fatally shot the 27-year-old and took her 6-day-old baby back to Dallas, intending to say the child was hers. 

Last week Sesmas was found guilty of the murder.

Months before the killing Sesmas--who again, was in the country illegally--was arrested for threatening another woman and holding the woman’s two daughters for ransom.  She should have gotten years in prison for the kidnapping, but was mistakenly released from custody because of what was termed a "bureaucratic mix-up."

Now, it takes about six hours to drive from Dallas to Wichita, so Sesmas had lots of time to reconsider her plan.  Obviously she didn't, and now an innocent woman is dead.  And the idiot who released Sesmas from jail should pay some penalty, but won't.

And the morons who didn't check to see if Sesmas was an illegal when she was jailed for the prior kidnapping, because an illegal who commits a felony is immediately deportation-eligible,

Oh wait--this was during the reign of emperor Obama, who ordered ICE not to deport illegal-aliens.  Ah.  Now if there was just some way to keep the crazy illegals out and only let people in who've been thoroughly vetted for sanity and skills.

71% of leftist "comedian's" audience hoping for no peace with Norks to avoid Trump getting credit!

The smug-looking, malevolent creature on the left bills herself as a "comedienne."  Her name is Michelle Wolf, and you may recognize that name because she was the vile, nasty "entertainment" at the White House Press Corps dinner a couple of months ago.

Well you may be amazed to learn that this creature actually has a show on cable TV--on Netflix, the same network that just signed the emperor and his wife to a $100 million deal to produce shows for 'em.  Rumor is the first one will be "How we fundamentally transformed this awful country."

Anyway, Wolf asked her all-leftist audience "Are you sort of hoping we don't get peace with North Korea so you wouldn't have to give Trump credit?"  And as you can see in the pic below, 71 percent of her totally-Left audience said yes.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/140618wolf.jpg?itok=2WlBvgxj

I'll say it again:  These people are nasty and they hate the America you love.  They'd rather make it look like Zimbabwe, or Venezuela, or...Baltimore.  Charming snakes.