Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Clinton and top Dems proposed Flag Protection Act of 2005

The Flag Protection Act of 2005 was a proposed United States federal law introduced by Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah), with original co-sponsor Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.). Additional co-sponsors include Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Thomas Carper (D-Del.). The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism. It called for a punishment of no more than one year in prison and a fine of no more than $100,000; unless that flag was property of the United States Government, in which case the penalty would be a fine of not more than $250,000, not more than two years in prison, or both.

Betcha only heard about Donald Trump's comments on the flag today, though...

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

How Chuck Schumer Caused the Second Largest Bank Failure in US History

During the big New York Times interview with President Elect Donald Trump today (whom I support), political correspondent Maggie Haberman tweeted: "Paul Ryan, right now, loves me. Mitch McConnell loves me," Trump says. Then says, "I've liked Chuck Schumer for a long time."

My family had money at IndyMac, and so I have NEVER liked Chuck Schumer!
Federal officials aren’t supposed to cause bank runs. In fact, much of the New Deal bank regulatory apparatus was set up for the purpose of eliminating such panics. When FDR was hit with a massive set of bank runs shortly after taking office, he gave an address in order to calm terrified depositors, assuring them that the banks would reopen shortly, and that everything would be fine. But Chuck Schumer is no FDR. He doesn’t stop bank runs; he starts them. Or, at least, has started one.

Sunday, November 20, 2016


PS: Last week a friend mentioned that he passed on a comment (which he rarely does) because it went into the "science" area and he didn't have the resources handy...he didn't know that Real Clear Politics (which we all follow at one time or another for polls, but were most helpful for election results November 8th if you didn't want to stay up two more hours waiting for FOX NEWS) was only one of many "REAL CLEAR" sites that are fascinating!! RCP posts left AND right articles...not sure how this works out on these other sites exactly but probably follows along with that approach I would think.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Steve Bannon -- soon to be Donald Trump's Chief Strategist in the White House -- is NOT an "anti-Semite"!

Stephen Bannon, whose appointment to serve as President-elect Donald Trump’s chief strategist and senior counselor has drawn controversy in recent days over allegations of antisemitism, will attend the Zionist Organization of America’s annual awards gala in New York City on Sunday.

“All administration officials are welcome to come to the ZOA dinner,” ZOA National President Morton A. Klein told The Algemeiner on Tuesday. “Any Democrat is welcome, as is any Republican. If you’re a government official and you want to come to the ZOA dinner — unless you’re extremely hostile to Israel or a Jew-hater — you’re welcome to come.”

Furthermore, Klein emphasized, “Bannon is not an antisemite at all. He’s never said or written anything that is antisemitic. If he was an antisemite in any way, shape or form, I’d be screaming.”
Amid Antisemitism Controversy, Senior Trump Adviser Stephen Bannon to Attend Major Pro-Israel Group’s Gala Dinner

I can’t think of anything stupider than the charge coming from all quarters of the left–including a headline in the pathetically wretched Huffington Post–that Bannon is an anti-Semite. The source? A one sentence claim from an angry ex-wife in divorce court no less, that Bannon didn’t want their kids to go to school with Jews. I find that particularly amusing since Bannon wanted to make a film to celebrate this Jew’s life.

Not to be outdone, CNN, which has been particularly vicious, did a nasty attack on Bannon using another of the thinnest reeds available: This was a headline at Breitbart.com calling Bill Kristol a “renegade Jew.” In fact, neither Breitbart nor Bannon is responsible for that statement. A Jew is. I wrote the article, which was neither requested nor commissioned by Breitbart. And I wrote the headline: “Bill Kristol, Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew.”

I wrote the article when Kristol set out to lead the “Never Trump” movement, after Trump had secured the Republican nomination. I would write it again in a heartbeat. I would write it the same way and with the same headline. Bill Kristol and his friends betrayed the Republican Party, betrayed the American people, and betrayed the Jews when he set out to undermine Trump and elect the criminal Hillary Clinton. Obama and Hillary are supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that launched the Arab drive to destroy Israel and push its Jews into the sea (that was their slogan).

If Obama and Hillary had their way, Egypt’s leader al-Sisi would be overthrown, the Brotherhood would be back in power, and Israel would be facing a threat from the biggest military power in the Middle East and almost certainly at war with Islamic terrorists who openly call for the extermination of the Jews.

TEL AVIV – Alan Dershowitz, a staunch Democrat and emeritus law professor at Harvard University, is hitting back against the smears claiming White House appointee Steve Bannon is anti-Semitic, arguing it is “not legitimate to call somebody an anti-Semite because you might disagree with their policies.”
EXCLUSIVE – Alan Dershowitz Defends Steve Bannon: ‘Not Legitimate To Call Somebody An Anti-Semite Because You Disagree With Their Policies’

Saturday, November 12, 2016


Thanks to author Tom Del Beccaro for posting this:
My friend Jennifer Spruce wrote the following . . . I think you should read it:
To anyone who says they will "move to Canada" now, let me show you the beautiful irony of what you are saying.

To move to Canada you have to do a couple things...
  1. Determine if you are eligible. They screen for criminal records, financial situations, health, even check if you have a non-admissible family member.

  2. Determine what type of visa to apply for. If you're just the 'average Joe' you have to have 12 months full time managerial, professional, or skilled trade work. (Sorry whiny college students.)

    If you want to be an entrepreneur or bring your start-up to Canada, better have 10 million Canadian Dollars. Price to entry.

    There's a couple of other types that are rare and restrictive to certain provinces - not likely to happen for you.

  3. Appy. Yes you actually have to go through a process to show your language skills, work skills etc.

  4. Pay a fee. Wait, what?

  5. Wait for your Visa. Even Express can take 6-12 months.
So...anyone see the irony here??

The people who hate Trump because he wants to stop illegal immigration and make sure people follow the process to get in this country want to move to a country where they will have to go through the exact type of process to protest. Can't even make this stuff up!!
Note from lgstarr: "Emmigration" is the act of leaving one's country...we're so used to talking about "immigration" I just wanted to make that point.

Friday, November 11, 2016

God Bless our veterans!

Wednesday, November 09, 2016

And now: The healthcare plan that we should have had in the first place!

Republicans will say to Democrats, "Help us create the new insurance system or be responsible for the consequences." Some are saying the Democrats won't cooperate. Here is why they will. In 2018, there are 23 Democratic and two Independent Senators (who caucus with the Dems) that will be up for reelection––a great many in states that Donald Trump won last night! There is a clear mandate here to replace Obamacare. If these Democrats fight it and that arguably results in millions of people thrown off their coverage they will do so at their peril.

The best news here is that defunding and then replacement of Obamacare could ironically set the table for the first real bipartisan legislative effort in a very long time. The one we should have had in the first place.


Wednesday, November 02, 2016


Hillary, as Secretary of State, would sell terrorist nations large weapons deals only after they gave her a very generous donation to her “foundation.” These weapons, provided by Hillary and her State Department, then filtered down from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, and so on to create, supply, and bolster terrorist groups.

That is exactly how ISIS was created. But instead of blowing them up with an air assault, Hillary and Obama decided to leave ISIS alone. Why? Because ISIS being in the Middle East allows the Obama/Clinton machine to make millions in personal profits from these nations in a repetitive cycle of selling weapons.

They are choosing personal gain over eliminating a terrorist group. Let that sink in. Why else have they not arrested Hillary for all of these crimes? The FBI would arrest you in a heartbeat if you went to Facebook right now to praise Allah and ISIS. It also speaks volumes as to why they are trying so hard to silence Julian Assange.

Tuesday, November 01, 2016

Don't Be Fooled: Hillarygate Probe Is Now a Formal Federal Criminal Investigation

November 1, 2016:
The NY Times and the Wall Street Journal both reported on Monday morning that an FBI warrant application to a federal judge over the weekend for permission to search Huma Abedin's emails and laptop had been granted. The application was made on the basis of the Clinton email investigation. Necessarily, that application (as required by the Constitution's Fourth Amendment) would have been supported by FBI affidavits.

This new fact is a development of immense potential significance – both for Mrs. Clinton personally and for us as American citizens. It is also unprecedented in American history.

At a minimum, it enables us to pierce the thick cloud of black ink and disinformation released over the weekend by Team Hillary and which is being widely misreported in the current news cycle.