Stories about
Nancy Pelosi


Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi (/pəˈloʊsi/; born March 26, 1940) is an American politician serving as the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives since 2011, representing most of San Francisco, California. She previously served as the 52nd House Speaker from 2007 to 2011, the only woman to do so. As Speaker, she attained the highest political office of any female politician in American history.

Breitbart

Published  4 weeks ago

Hundreds of protesters gathered across the street from the Hilton hotel in Woodland Hills, California — and some unfurled banners from hotel balconies — to oppose Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), who addressed a fundraiser for the local branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

CAIR claims to speak for American Muslims, but is an extremist group.

As Breitbart news has noted:

In 2007-8, CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. That case, in turn, led the FBI to discontinue its work with the organization. In 2009, a federal judge ruled that the government “produced ample evidence to establish” the ties of CAIR with Hamas, the Palestinian terror organization. The United Arab Emirates labeled CAIR a terrorist organization in 2014 (a decision that the Obama administration opposed).

In addition:

The political action committee of CAIR in California donated the maximum of $5,000 to Omar’s 2018 campaign.

In 2015, CAIR’s Los Angeles director suggested that the U.S. was partly to blame for the San Bernardino terror attack, in which 14 people were killed, due to American foreign policy. CAIR also offered legal assistance to the family of the terrorists who carried out the attack.

Omar spoke at the fundraiser after several weeks of controversy over her use of antisemitic rhetoric to attack Israel and American supporters of Israel. She was appointed by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, despite having claimed that Israel had “hypnotized the world,” among other antisemitic statements. In February, she claimed, falsely, that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) bribed members of Congress to support Israel. She was forced to apologize, but then claimed Americans who support Israel owe “allegiance to a foreign country,” and refused to apologize. House Democrats passed a weak resolution that condemned all forms of hatred, without mentioning her name or singling out antisemitism.

The protesters at Saturday’s event waved American and Israeli flags. At one stage, banners, placed by activist Laura Loomer, were unfurled from two balconies, reading “Ilhan Hates Israel” and “CAIR Hates Jews.”

Hundreds outside the Woodland Hills Hilton right now protesting Rep. Ilhan Omar’s appearance at a CAIR fundraiser tonight. Crowd’s going wild for a bride walking out of the hotel pic.twitter.com/bJgOsdrrLE

Los Angelenos rally against the hatred, racism, bigotry and #AntiSemitism promoted by @IlhanMN and #CAIR in Woodland Hills where the Council of American Islamic Relationship (CAIR) is fundraising for the legal American Muslim Brotherhood organization pic.twitter.com/p9qYZ37XS0

Guests @HiltonHotels⁩ taking part in the Pro-American and pro #Israel rally against @IlhanMN and #CAIR taking place in Los Angeles where #IlhanOmar is fundraising for the American Muslim Brotherhood organization known as the Council of American Islamic Relationship (CAIR) pic.twitter.com/eLVgJz0FaM

Though some journalists who had tried to gain access to the event itself complained that they had not been allowed in, video emerged Saturday night of part of Omar’s remarks, in which she claimed the protesters were prejudiced against Islam and Muslims:

.@IlhanMN to the CAIR audience: “There are very fascinating people outside who for so many years have spoken about an Islam that is oppressive, that lessens and isolates women. And today they gather outside to protest a Muslim woman who is in Congress” pic.twitter.com/QfZ7TonFmI

— Ariella Plachta (@AriPlachta) March 24, 2019

That theme was repeated by supporters of CAIR and Omar:

Today, I was upset as to what I saw. My friends and I saw people protesting @IlhanMN and shouting “terrorists go home.” It’s disheartening people still don’t accept one another. Trump supporters started to surround us a little after. As a Muslim, I felt unsafe in my own community pic.twitter.com/PEd5ATorLs

But some Muslims — including some Somali leaders in the 5th congressional district of Minnesota, which Omar represents — have condemned her rhetoric and say it does not represent them.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

frcaction

Published  1 month ago

The original U.S. Constitution can survive a bomb, a massive fire -- even a nuclear blast. But can it survive the House majority’s agenda? Based on their latest bill, no one is quite sure.

Some reporters at yesterday’s Equality Act press conference wondered if they were at a party. And in retrospect, maybe they were -- the Left’s farewell to the First Amendment. Religious liberty and free speech have had a good run, but as far as Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) concerned, they’ve stood in the Left’s way long enough. It’s time to get back to the business of controlling how every American thinks, speaks, and acts on issues of human sexuality. (How ironic that these same people accused Republicans of being fixated on America’s bedrooms!)

Most people were outraged by Barack Obama’s nationwide bathroom mandate, but that’s a conservative love pat compared to the boom Democrats are trying to lower on mainstream morality. If you can imagine a country without women’s sports, boys and girls restrooms, gender-specific pronouns, privacy, parental rights, workplace dress codes, business autonomy, Christian wedding vendors, and conscience protections -- you’ve got the Equality Act. It’s a world that hunts down and punishes anyone who thinks differently from the Left on gender or sexuality. And that includes schools, businesses, food banks, adoption agencies, homeless shelters, day cares, faith-based ministries, and government offices.

Picture walking into your child’s preschool for mandatory transgender story hour. Or think about your teenage daughter finishing gym class and being forced to shower and change with biological boys. Imagine being fired for calling someone “him.” Or maybe you’re standing over the counter of your new store, holding a subpoena because the “nonbinary” you interviewed wasn’t the best candidate for the job. These aren’t hypotheticals. This is the reality of a nation that embraces the phony “equality” liberals are selling.

But this about tolerance, the Left will say. The country is on board! Liberals will point, as so many did yesterday, to the polls. Look! Americans want to end discrimination, they argued. Well, of course they do. We all do. But how the country defines “discrimination” and how the Left does are two very different things. One man’s “intolerance” is another man’s religious freedom. The surveys Democrats trotted out yesterday didn’t ask people how they felt about transgender restrooms or slapping thousands of dollars of fines on bakers and florists. They didn’t poll small businesses to see if they could afford transgender health coverage or the money it will take to make their facilities gender-free. That’s because Democrats know, like we do, that once they start talking about the realities of the plan, they can’t win. See here, here, and here for proof.

Still, Big Business seems intent on carrying the water for a bill that would destroy the very climate that makes companies successful in the first place. Forty-four groups, including the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, sent a letter to the House and Senate urging members to “combat discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in the workplace… We look forward to working with Congress to promote and perfect the Equality Act.”

Of course, they say all of this without any acknowledgement of the crushing burden this law would force on every unwilling corner of corporate America. While they walk lock-step with the Left, do they realize they’re endorsing a proposal that would put new mandates for health care coverage on business? Mandates that could cost in the tens of millions for hormones, psychotherapy, and gender reassignment surgery? We’re talking about a price tag of $89,050 for female-to-male procedures and $110,450 for male-to-female procedures alone. Do they know the implications of these countless new regulations – or the overwhelming costs of compliance? What about the legal fees for settling workplace disputes, the higher taxes that will inevitably come from more government oversight, or the loss of competitiveness that comes with more regulation?

Big Business is desperately trying to have its cake -- and make you bake them too. They want the admiration of the Left and the favorable economic policies of conservatives. And while they embrace this miserable excuse for fairness that robs every Americans of their speech, privacy, and beliefs, where will they look to bail them out when their profits start tanking? To conservatives. But they can’t have it both ways. Big Business can either embrace the social structure that leads to growth, or they can sit and watch their revenues implode because they cared more about political correctness than the future of their corporations.

Tony Perkins' Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC Action senior writers.

Also in the March 14 Washington Update:

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

A California woman named Bambi Larson was brutally murdered by an illegal immigrant with a long, violent criminal history who’s a self-admitted gang member. Sanctuary State Protected Illegal from Deportation Shockingly, ICE wanted to take Carlos Eduardo Arevalo Carranza into custody, but Santa Jose–a sanctuary city in Sanctuary State California–said no. And now a 59-year-old woman is […]

Halsey News Network

Published  1 month ago

In 2007 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tasted power for the first time. That was the year that she became the first woman to serve as speaker in the House of Representatives. When Democrats lost control of the House and Republicans had the majority after the mid-term election in 2010 she lost that power. Her removal from power as House Speaker in 2010 was not enough to stop Nancy Pelosi. Instead of stepping to the side and allowing others a chance to rise through the ranks to become a leader Nancy Pelosi would spend the next four election cycles hoping that the Democrats would once again reclaim control of the House. Last November Democrats made the comeback that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent four election cycles fighting for and she was able to take back the seat she first held in 2007.

It took Nancy Pelosi less than three months before she lost control of her party. The new Democrat majority did not line up and come together under her vision for how she wants things to do. The first signs that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not have control of these Democrats came when House Republican Kevin McCarthy forced Democrats to take a stand and vote on tough issues. He used a maneuver that is known as a motion to recommit. McCarthy was victorious more than once when he got moderate Democrats to vote with the Republicans on important issues.

Watching her Democrats vote with the Republicans did not sit well with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. After the votes took place Pelosi would scold the Democrats who did not vote in line with their party because of the lack of the unity that their votes showed. She tried to pressure them into seeing that Congress is a “team” sport. Moderate Democrats saw through her words and realized that her arguments were insincere at best. They argued that they needed to vote to protect themselves and ran on restoring bipartisanship to Congress. They knew that bowing down to Nancy Pelosi and the other Democrats who support her meant going against the Americans who voted for them.

Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar has not made things any easier for Pelosi who is struggling to get House Democrats to unite as one voice. On more than one occasion Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar from Minnesota has made anti-Semitic comments. In one of her controversial statements Omar claimed that support for Israel was “all about the Benjamins.” We all know what she was saying when she made that tweet. Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar was claiming that American politicians had been bought and paid for by Jewish money. She offered a piss poor half-hearted apology that time. The anti-Semitism from Omar did not end there. When she claimed that Jews who support Israel aren’t loyal to the United States she didn’t even attempt to make another half-assed piss poor apology.

I’m not a fan of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but I will acknowledge she demanded a retraction on Ilhan Omar’s offensive statement and developed a resolution to rebuke Omar’s words. Republicans did the same thing against Steve King in January. The difference between Nancy Pelosi and the Republicans is that the Republicans stood tall, they stayed strong and severely punished one of their own. Nancy Pelosi, on the other hand, did just the opposite.

When a scandal arose due to statements from Omar House Speaker Nancy Pelosi turned weak. Instead of standing her ground when Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others defended Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar and challenged her authority, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hesitated. The discipline that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was originally prepared to enforce upon Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar turned into the anti-hate resolution that was passed last week. The wording of the resolution was so different from the original resolution that would have disciplined Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar that Omar laughed in Pelosi’s face when she voted for it.

The Republicans stood tall and strong against Republican Rep. Steve King who has been in the House for nine terms. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi broke and kissed the ass of a woman who has been in the House for less than six months. A leader does not break. A leader can’t allow themselves to break. A leader has to stand strong against those who are underneath them. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has clearly demonstrated that she is no leader. It takes more than a gavel, a nice office, and a title to make one a leader. Nancy Speaker may hold the title House Speaker, but that’s all she holds…an empty title.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not the one calling the shots. She is just another place holder. She is nothing more than a glorified front person and that is only until Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar and her supporters decide it’s time for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to go. If Democrats maintain the majority during the next election cycle Americans should not be surprised if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finds herself replaced by Ilhan Omar or one of her supporters.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Kevin Brady is the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. As chairman in 2017, he pushed through the tax cuts that remain President Trump's top legislative achievement. Now, he's dealing with the role that Ways and Means might play in a possible Trump impeachment. (It is the only House committee that is permitted by law to demand the president's tax returns from the Internal Revenue Service, and Democrats are currently taking steps to do just that.)

Brady and I discussed the committee's role in the Trump investigations in a conversation for a new podcast Tuesday morning, but we started off with the news that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has come out (mostly) against impeachment. Pelosi told the Washington Post that impeachment is simply too divisive for the country, unless there are grounds that are "so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan" that impeachment is justified.

Brady doesn't believe her. "Respectfully, I don't buy it," he said. The reason, he explained, is not that he doubts Pelosi's sentiments. It is that he doubts her ability to impose her will on House Democrats.

"The Speaker, while she controls the House, doesn't control her own party," Brady said. "And there is a real rush to impeachment here in the House. We're seeing that with [Judiciary Committee chairman] Jerry Nadler, we're seeing it with the investigative committees, we're seeing it in the Ways and Means Committee."

Brady pointed to recent moments when Democratic opposition forced Pelosi to back down from her personal positions. "The Speaker wasn't for term limits; her party forced her to do it. She wasn't for watering down the anti-Semitism resolution; her party forced her to do it. She's not for Medicare-for-all; she says her party is forcing her to do it."

Indeed, while no one knows the deepest feelings of each Democratic member, there is no doubt that Democratic voters, the ones who sent the current class to Congress, strongly favor impeachment. In exit polls from last November's midterm elections, 77 percent of Democrats answered "Yes" to the question, "Should Congress impeach Trump?"

"She's trying to tamp this down for political purposes, as she was before the election," Brady said. "But her conference just seems hell-bent on this rush to impeachment."

On the question of the president's tax returns, there have been reports that Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Richard Neal has directed committee staff to prepare a request for the returns. The move could come at any time, setting off what is expected to be a legal fight if the administration refuses to hand them over.

"Democrats, in my view, if they weaponize the tax code to do this, they will set a dangerous precedent where future Congresses can do the same — compile an enemies list and go after them," Brady said. "This isn't about, should a president disclose their tax returns as part of running for office. You can feel yes or no, different views on that. This is whether Congress should abuse their authority to seize the tax returns of a private citizen."

Brady conceded minority Republicans have no power to stop the move — all that is required is "a simple letter to Treasury saying, 'I want to see these tax returns,'" he noted.

Brady went on to discuss a little-known IRS policy that requires the president's and vice president's tax returns to be audited every year. (From the IRS manual: "The individual income tax returns for the president and vice president are subject to mandatory examinations.") That provision means Trump is already receiving sufficient scrutiny, Brady argued.

"The president and vice president are audited annually by the IRS," he said. "Those returns, if there is a problem, there is both a criminal investigative unit within the IRS, and of course the FBI and the special counsel have access to it as well. So I think this [the House demanding the returns] is exactly the wrong thing to do."

But that is what Democrats appear poised to do. Brady said he and Neal have talked "generally" about the tax return issue, but not about specifics. If — when — Democrats go ahead, look for Brady and his fellow Republicans to protest. But there's nothing they can do about it.

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

For two years, Democrats and their leadership have been haranguing the people of the United States with hysteria claiming that President Trump was an agent of the Russians, stole the election, is mentally disturbed or unfit and obstructed justice — among other bizarre and crazed accusations. Yet Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the Democratically-led House, has announced that impeaching Mr. Trump is “not worth it.”

In an interview for The Washington Post magazine, conducted on March 6, Mrs. Pelosi said, “I’m not for impeachment. … This is news. I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

This new revelation from Mrs. Pelosi is another example of Democrats casually admitting that everything they’ve done to this country through their obscene accusations against the president and his supporters was a sham.

After all, if you believe that the duly elected president of the United States is actually a foreign agent for a nation that has historically been an enemy of this country, you should be shocked at Mrs. Pelosi walking away from the idea of taking action.

Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept made this observation on Twitter: “Anyone who has ever believed Trump is controlled & blackmailed by Putin to the point that Putin makes Trump treasonously sacrifice America’s interests for Russia’s — and there are a lot of you — should be marching in fury in the streets over Pelosi’s refusal to impeach Trump.”

But this isn’t the only example of the fraud perpetrated by the Democrats on their own base and this country. Recently, Hillary Clinton noted that she was not going to run for president again in 2020. This on the heels of 2016 supporters telling her to not run. A CNN panel in early March, comprised of 2016 Hillary voters, made it clear her supporters want her gone.

Host Alisyn Camerota asked if Mrs. Clinton had a role in 2020. “No,” answered one male immediately. Another woman said, “No, stay away.” And another was empathic, “Look, I love you, Hillary — I love you, I love you, but stay away. We are so divided right now that anything that has Hillary on it is automatically going to separate us again.” Another piped up with: “I just think her time is done. I think it’s been — it’s done. We do need something new.”

That’s pretty harsh. We’ve been told every day since the election that she won that election in 2016. That Donald Trump stole that election. That Mr. Trump used the Russians to help him steal it from her. In fact, 2020 would simply be her re-election to her second term.

The answer to this is the same as Mrs. Pelosi’s decisions: The Democratic grass-roots have known all along the accusations against Mr. Trump have been a fraud. The 2016 election was fair. Mrs. Clinton did not lose because it was stolen; she lost because she took people and things for granted, didn’t go to Wisconsin and arrogantly wrote off blue states as guaranteed. In other words, Hillary lost because she was Hillary. And they know it.

The aftermath of then-Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing is another good example of how gaslighting the public is now a Democratic art. We were told for weeks that he was a drug-dealing pimp who organized gang rape parties. And this was just in high school.

Despite his eventual confirmation to the high court, Sens. Kamala D. Harris and Cory Booker, two of those prominently leading Democrats who attempted virtual character assassination, who strutted and preened on television with their furrowed brows during the persecution, aren’t demanding that Justice Kavanaugh be removed; they aren’t out there organizing rallies to protest the horrible man who has been put on the Supreme Court.

Instead, they’re running for president, because the Democrats think that attempting to destroy an innocent man for political gain should get you promoted.

In assessing these politicians, the American people have two options: National Democrats are either the most incompetent leaders in the history of the country, losing interest and walking away from two evil, corrupt men who hold incredible positions of power. Or the more obvious choice: All these accusations against Mr. Trump and Justice Kavanaugh (like those against the Covington Catholic High School kids and actor Jussie Smollett’s imagined “MAGA Country” attackers) were false from the start, revealing a political and media elite that see the nation as a horse to ride and abuse until it drops and dies.

At first, Democratic leadership may have been excited that someone like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was pushing Democratic support for infanticide, open borders and controversies involving blackface, Klan outfits and allegations of sexual assault, out of the headlines.

Those issues, however, are not forgotten by the American people. Neither is anti-Semitism. The American family is driven by a much longer-term outlook, which includes being concerned about what kind of country our children will be inheriting. Since at least January, the Democrats have had the very bad luck of being seen for what they are, and it is not what the American people imagine, or want, for their future.

• Tammy Bruce, president of Independent Women’s Voice, author and Fox News contributor, is a radio talk show host.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

NBC News

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump thanked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Wednesday morning for comments she made to The Washington Post about the possibility of his impeachment.

Trump said he "greatly appreciated" her remarks, adding that "everyone must remember the minor fact that I never did anything wrong."

I greatly appreciate Nancy Pelosi’s statement against impeachment, but everyone must remember the minor fact that I never did anything wrong, the Economy and Unemployment are the best ever, Military and Vets are great - and many other successes! How do you impeach....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 13, 2019

....a man who is considered by many to be the President with the most successful first two years in history, especially when he has done nothing wrong and impeachment is for “high crimes and misdemeanors”?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 13, 2019

In an interview with The Post published Monday, Pelosi said, "I'm not for impeachment," adding that Trump is "just not worth it."

"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said. "And he's just not worth it."

Pelosi added she does not believe Trump is "fit" to be president.

"I mean, ethically unfit," she said. "Intellectually unfit. Curiosity-wise unfit. No, I don't think he's fit to be president of the United States," she said.

Possible impeachment proceedings would have to begin in the House Judiciary Committee, where Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., last week made document requests of 81 people and entities tied to the president.

"Impeachment is a long way down the road," Nadler told ABC News "This Week" earlier this month. "We don’t have the facts yet, but we’re going to initiate proper investigations." He added that it's Congress' "job to protect the rule of law."

"That’s our core function," he added. "And to do that we are going to initiate investigations into abuses of power ... into corruption and into obstruction of justice."

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

Just when you think the Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., anti-Semitism fiasco has died down, one of her freshman colleagues says something that keeps the issue very much alive.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., is upset that certain members of her Democratic cohort have offered mild criticism of Omar’s frequent anti-Semitic outbursts. Tlaib is so upset, in fact, that she has accused her own party of being Islamophobic.

The moment came during an interview with the Circus' Alex Wagner, who asked, "Why do you think people in your own party reacted so strongly against what [Omar] said?"

The Michigan congresswoman responded, "You know, I'm trying to figure it out. It's just this past week, I feel, and I know this would be somewhat shocking for some, but I think Islamophobia is very much among the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party.”

She added, “And I know that's hard for people to hear, but there's only been four members of Congress that are of Muslim faith. Three of them currently serve in this institution. More of us need to get elected, but more of us need to understand as we come into this institution that I have a lot of work to do with my colleagues."

For reference, Omar claims Israel has " hypnotized the world" to its “evil.” The Minnesota lawmaker alleges wealthy Jews dictate congressional Republicans' support for Israel by paying them. Omar claims pro-Israel members of Congress and American Jews have divided loyalties. She also said last month during a town hall meeting that she wanted to talk about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country."

Tlaib defended Omar’s town hall remarks, saying she is inspired by her colleague’s "strength.” Tlaib also claimed Omar is "being targeted just like many civil rights icons before us who spoke out about oppressive policies."

The Michigan congresswoman herself is no stranger to dog-whistling on the issue of anti-Semitism. In January, as the Senate considered a bill defending the Israeli government from boycotts, Tlaib sounded the dual loyalty horn.

The senators who backed the pro-Israel bill “forgot what country they represent. This is the U.S. where boycotting is a right & part of our historical fight for freedom & equality,” her office said on social media. “Maybe a refresher on our U.S. Constitution is in order, then get back to opening up our government instead of taking our rights away.”

I have so many thoughts on the Omar issue, and not just the usual expression of shock at her casual anti-Semitism.

First, this entire ordeal has added to the shattering of my earlier perception of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as a ruthless operator with a vice-like grip on her caucus. The freshmen Democrats continue to run circles around the Speaker, publicly humiliating her, destroying utterly all earlier notions of Pelosi's cold-blooded competence.

Secondly, it’s stunning that there has not been greater pushback against the idea that it’s Islamaphobic to criticize Omar’s flagrant anti-Semitism. The obvious problem with this argument is that it suggests Islam is inherently anti-Semitic, that to object to anti-Jewish bigotry is to object to Islam. Is that really the defense they want to go with?

Finally, the idea that the Democratic Party has singled out Omar, or that it has even "reacted so strongly" to her remarks, is utter nonsense. They are cowards, yes, but not Islamophobes. Democrats have gone out of their way to excuse, defend, and downplay Omar’s tirades. They say it’s merely a matter of cultural differences. They say she doesn’t understand the words that come out of her mouth. They say she’s learning. They say she is “ living through a lot of pain." They even avoided censuring the congresswoman last week when they produced a sham resolution condemning all forms of hate, not just anti-Semitism. Omar has faced no consequences whatsoever for her remarks about Israel and American Jews. The worst she has suffered is the verbal equivalent of a mild slap on the wrist.

To look at how the Democratic Party has handled Omar's anti-Jewish rants and conclude it has an Islamophobia problem requires either an act of willful dishonesty or extreme paranoia.

Considering this is Tlaib we’re talking about, it could go either way.

NPR.org

Published  1 month ago

There's already sufficient evidence to support an indictment of President Trump even before the conclusion of the special counsel investigation, California Rep. Adam Schiff said on Tuesday.

The chairman of the House intelligence committee pointed to the case of Michael Cohen, the president's former personal lawyer, in which the government described how "Individual 1" directed and coordinated a campaign fraud scheme.

"Individual 1" is Trump and Cohen is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in part because of those crimes.

"It's very difficult to make the argument that the person who was directed and was coordinated should go to jail but the person who did the directing and did the coordinating should not," Schiff told reporters at a breakfast on Tuesday organized by the Christian Science Monitor.

The evidence therefore already in place argues "very strongly in favor of indicting the president when he is out of office," he said.

Trump says he never directed Cohen to violate the law and the actions in Cohen's case don't even amount to wrongdoing.

Trump and the White House also argue that Cohen's track record of lying means he can't be believed — that he'll say anything to save his image and try to get a lighter punishment for other crimes he's admitted.

Current Justice Department guidelines prohibit indicting a sitting president. But Schiff believes that the department should reconsider this position, or indict Trump if he loses re-election in 2020.

"The Justice Department policy against indictment is the wrong policy particularly when there is any risk that the statute of limitations may allow a president to escape justice," the chairman said.

Schiff stopped short of saying he thought the Congress should impeach Trump and remove him from office in order to prosecute what he called these offenses.

The chairman echoed the position of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from her interview on Monday and said that without buy-in from congressional Republicans — who control the Senate — embarking upon the process today would be "doomed for failure."

"I see little to be gained by putting the country through that kind of wrenching experience as I've often remarked in the past," he told reporters. "The only thing worse than putting the country through the trauma of an impeachment is putting the country through the trauma of a failed impeachment."

Democrats have been careful not to close the door entirely, however. Pelosi and others argue that Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller or other investigators could uncover evidence of wrongdoing by Trump so egregious that it may compel a bipartisan case for impeachment.

Committee priorities

As for the investigation that he is leading now in the House intelligence committee, Schiff said he'll seek new documents relating to an alleged conversation between Trump and his longtime confidant Roger Stone.

"We are going to be looking at any documentary evidence," he said, when asked by NPR whether he would be seeking phone records that could back up Cohen's allegation that Trump had a speakerphone conversation with Stone about a coming WikiLeaks dump that would be damaging to the Clinton campaign.

"That could take a number of forms, from phone records, to social media records, to other documentary evidence."

Schiff has placed great store in the past on the revelations that he said could be gleaned from phone records in the Russia investigation. He vowed to obtain phone records of Donald Trump Jr. because Democrats suspected they might entangle the elder Trump, but that did not prove to be so.

Ultimately the length of Schiff's investigation could depend on the Mueller investigation, and whether the Justice Department releases the underlying evidence that the Mueller team has gathered.

"If the Justice Department either attempts to conceal the Mueller report or the underlying evidence then requiring Mueller to testify to testify may very well be necessary," Schiff said. "A lot will be impacted ... by the degree to which the Justice Department makes us investigate everything Bob Mueller did all over again ... that will have the most direct impact on the length of our investigation."

WayneDupree.com

Published  1 month ago

Islamaphobia is an oxymoron. Fear of peanut butter is a phobia. Islam has done more damage than communism, ask anyone from Senegal. I do not fear Islam any more than I do Jehovahs Witnesses, but to caress them is wrong.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib is defending her buddy, Rep. Ilhan Omar from anti-Semitism condemnation by turning it around on Americans, claiming both political parties suffer from Islamophobia.

”Islamophobia” is a term of hate and bigotry used by hateful people to deliberately cause insult, in an attempt to silence others with a valid voice. This is because there is no such thing as ”Islamophobia”. It does not even exist. It is impossible. A ”phobia” is having an irrational and unfounded fear of something. But even people born into the Arabian cult of supremacy are terrified of its most ardent and faithful adherents.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich, defended her colleague Rep. Ilhan Omar from backlash within their own party regarding the Minnesota representative’s controversial remarks deemed by some to be anti-Semitic.

Omar suggested on Twitter that pro-Israel politicians are bought by groups like AIPAC and that those who support Israel have an “allegiance to a foreign country.” Her remarks sparked much condemnation, including several of her Democratic colleagues.

In a preview clip of an interview on Showtime’s “The Circus,” Tlaib suggested that “Islamophobia” within their party could be behind the swift condemnation for the comments.

“You know, I’m trying to figure it out. It’s just this past week, I feel, and I know this would be somewhat shocking for some, but I think Islamophobia is very much among the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party,” Tlaib answered. “And I know that’s hard for people to hear, but there’s only been four members of Congress that are of Muslim faith. Three of them currently serve in this institution. More of us need to get elected, but more of us need to understand as we come into this institution that I have a lot of work to do with my colleagues.”

Now Democrats are getting accused of Islamophobia. How does it feel? Do Democrats like being falsely accused of hate? Democrats need to show these foolish, obnoxious freshmen that their behavior is unacceptable, and yet I predict they won’t because it takes an adult to enforce rules.

If there was such a thing as Islamaphobia, I think Americans would be justified to have it.

Let’s look at it from this perspective. Take the events of 9/11, and then the news clips from the Iraq war in which they were chanting death to America. So it is alright for them to shout for our lives to end, then hijack our planes, cause death and destruction in our backyard but the moment we express our dislike of them, we are called ignorant and racist.

I know they aren’t all responsible but who do we trust how else are we supposed to show our dislike for their actions. A lot of good people lost their lives for something they had nothing to do with I guess being in the wrong spot at the wrong time. I was always taught a friend to my enemy is an enemy of mine. Next time why don’t you people just let them in with wide open arms!

These three stooges (Omar, Tlaib, and AOC) who are creating all the attention they can muster with their hate rhetoric against this President while insulting Israel and American Jews trying to divide people, which has nothing to do with color, religion or phobias. Political hate ideology is their MO that is upsetting House Democrats. That kind of agenda Nancy Pelosi can’t seem to control in her caucus makes Nancy ineffective becoming a standby puppet spewing excuses that are turning off the American people.

It is time to retire Nancy. The three stooges would like nothing better!

Please consider making a donation to WayneDupree.com

and help our mission to make the world a better place

If you find inaccurate information within this article, please use the contact form to alert us immediately.

NOTE: Facebook and Twitter are currently censoring conservative content. We hope they will reverse their policy and honor all voices shortly. Until then, please like our page on Facebook and PLEASE check the Wayne Dupree homepage for the latest stories.

Having problems finding a source for real news links in real time, click on Whatfinger.com. Visit, bookmark and share this resource and then tell your friends and family.

Raw Story

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump thanked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for signaling she would not seek impeachment, and insisted he had done nothing wrong.

The California Democrat said earlier this week that Trump was “not worth” the trouble of impeachment, saying the process would be needlessly divisive, and the president treated her remarks as a compliment.

“I greatly appreciate Nancy Pelosi’s statement against impeachment,” Trump tweeted, “but everyone must remember the minor fact that I never did anything wrong, the Economy and Unemployment are the best ever, Military and Vets are great – and many other successes!”

“How do you impeach a man who is considered by many to be the President with the most successful first two years in history,” he added, “especially when he has done nothing wrong and impeachment is for ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’?”

….a man who is considered by many to be the President with the most successful first two years in history, especially when he has done nothing wrong and impeachment is for “high crimes and misdemeanors”?

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has not learned anything from House Democrats’ weak resolution on antisemitism. In fact, she feels vindicated by it — so much so that she retweeted an attack on Meghan McCain on Thursday accusing McCain of “faux outrage” over the issue.

Instead of showing any sort of contrition whatsoever, @ilhanmn @ilhan is retweeting attacks on ⁦@MeghanMcCain⁩ for daring to criticize her antisemitic remarks pic.twitter.com/zrNIcLMihS

When Omar accused pro-Israel groups of bribing members of Congress last month, Democratic leaders forced her to apologize. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) warned of “further action” if she persisted.

Last week, when Omar claimed that pro-Israel Americans had “allegiance to a foreign country,” Rep. Eliot Engel, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, accused her of making a “vile anti-Semitic slur” and demanded that she retract and apologize, though he stopped short of saying she should be kicked off the committee (as the Republicans had kicked Rep. Steve King of Iowa off his committees after comments about white supremacy.)

The party also promised to pass a resolution condemning antisemitism on Wednesday, hoping that would solve the problem.

But under pressure from the radicals in the caucus, Democrats delayed their vote and watered down the resolution to include almost every other group that could conceivably have been a target of discrimination. The text did not even mention Omar (though a resolution rebuking King had mentioned him by name in the very first sentence).

After the vote Thursday, Omar offered no statement of contrition. Instead, she took a victory lap, celebrating what she called “the first time we have ever voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history.” (In fact, Congress voted to condemn anti-Muslim bigotry in the days after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, showing extraordinary grace after nearly 3,000 Americans had been killed in the name of radical Islam.)

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters Thursday that she would not ask Omar to apologize, saying, “I do not believe she understood the full weight of the words.”

Fellow “Justice Democrat” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said that Omar’s remarks were “part of a learning process.” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) also offered excuses: “I think this is a learning moment for her.”

Update: On Friday, Pelosi continued in that vein, saying that Omar “doesn’t understand” the meaning of words:

But Jewish Democrats in Minnesota had enough of such excuses long ago.

Last month — before the latest episode of Omar’s antisemitism — the Twin Cities Pioneer Press reported that State Sen. Ron Latz (D-St. Louis Park) had organized “an anti-Semitic intervention of Omar” late last year, out of concern over her past rhetoric on Jews and Israel, in the hope that she would be more sensitive when she took up her congressional seat in Washington.

As Latz put it, the effort was a failure. He concluded: “At some point, it becomes a little tired to hear her say she’s being ‘educated.’”

So this certainly is a learning moment — but Omar is learning the opposite lesson of the one intended. She is learning she can attack Jews with total impunity.

And perhaps Jewish Democrats are learning where their party really stands.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's decision not to impeach Donald Trump is the clearest indication possible that Democrats do not believe he colluded with Russia.

News Punch

Published  1 month ago

POTUS says Obama's surveillance abuse would be considered "treason."

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she now firmly stands against impeaching President Trump because it would be too divisive.

“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told the Washington Post in an interview published Monday. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Despite her opposition to impeaching Trump, she called the president “ethically unfit,” "intellectually unfit,” and “curiosity-wise unfit.”

Other Democrats disagree with the their leader. For months, House Democrats have tried to impeach Trump with no success.

Most recently, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., a staunch critic of the president’s who famously vowed to “impeach the motherfucker,” said she was planning to introduce an impeachment resolution within weeks.

"Later on this month, I will be joining folks and advocates across the country to file the impeachment resolution to start the impeachment proceedings," Tlaib said last week.

Tlaib’s efforts follow those of Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman of California and Al Green of Texas.

Pelosi said at the beginning of the year that Democrats would have to wait and see what happens with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation before moving on impeachment.

Mueller has yet to release his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. So far none of the known indictments and plea deals that have come out of the inquiry have anything to do with collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland hit back at some of the most visible new Democrats in Congress when asked Monday by Fox News about the push to impeach President Trump: “We’ve got 62 new (Democratic) members. Not three.”

Hoyer apparently was referring to Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who regularly have fought the Trump administration's policies since entering Congress.

TLAIB SAYS SHE’LL INTRODUCE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST TRUMP THIS MONTH

Earlier Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., revealed she’s opposed to impeachment in the absence of evidence that is “compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan.”

“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in an interview published Monday. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Ocasio-Cortez replied in a Washington Examiner interview: “I happen to disagree with that take.” The congresswoman added, “But you know, she’s the speaker. … I think we’ll see.”

Hoyer also said about Pelosi’s words: “It seems to me that she said what we’ve been saying. Maybe a little stronger.”

He also said he thought anything the House might attempt would die in the Senate, which requires 67 yeas to convict and remove the president: “Nobody thinks there is going to be a conviction in the Senate.”

Tlaib said she would introduce articles of impeachment against Trump later this month. She and Omar last month signed a “pledge” to impeach Trump.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

Frank Miles is a reporter and editor covering geopolitics, military, crime, technology and sports for FoxNews.com. His email is Frank.Miles@foxnews.com.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., rushed to the defense of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday, saying only "graphic evidence" would warrant an impeachment gamble against President Trump.

"In the absence of very graphic evidence, it would be difficult to get the support in the Senate needed to make an impeachment successful. Again, my feeling is let's see what Bob Mueller produces. But the evidence would have to be pretty overwhelming," Schiff told CNN.

Across the caucus, Democrats have been asked to comment about Pelosi, D-Calif., abruptly shutting the door on impeachment in an interview published Monday.

“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told the Washington Post. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Democrats have long questioned whether Trump has been compromised by the Russians over the course of Russia investigations conducted by special counsel Robert Mueller and congressional panels. Under new Democratic leadership this term, congressional panels, including the House Intelligence Committee, are also embarking on a sweeping investigation into Trump’s financial transactions, as well as Russia.

In October, Schiff opened the door to impeaching Trump over family tax fraud, but he also tamped down expectations in an interview in January in which he said Trump would more likely be voted out of office.

Schiff has adamantly stressed his committee will continue its work unimpeded regardless of what Mueller's report says. He also declared in late February that if Mueller's full report on the investigation is not released to the public after it is completed, his panel would bring him in to testify to Congress.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

In perhaps a moment of clarity, Speaker Nancy Pelosi dropped some big news about President Trump. The California Democrat says she does not want to see POTUS impeached. Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat - Just

Daily Wire

Published  1 month ago

Leave it to Jim Acosta of CNN to gaslight the White House for asserting that the Democratic Party is now courting blatant anti-Semitism in their ranks.

At the first press briefing in 42 days on Monday, the CNN correspondent got into a jousting match with White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders over recent comments made by President Trump, who accused Democrats of being the anti-Jewish party.

Last week, the president said in response to House Democrats' drafting a House resolution on hate that failed to condemn Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-MN) anti-Semitic statements regarding Israel:

I thought yesterday's vote by the House was disgraceful, because it's become, the Democrats have become an anti-Israel party. They've become an anti-Jewish party. And I thought that vote was a disgrace and so does everybody else if you get an honest answer. If you get an honest answer from politicians, they thought it was a disgrace. The Democrats have become an anti-Israel party; they’ve become an anti-Jewish party, and that’s too bad.

According to Jim Acosta, President Trump condemning anti-Jewish sentiment so forcefully was "beneath everybody" and asked Sanders if Trump would tone it down.

"Isn't that kind of rhetoric just sort of beneath everybody?" Acosta asked Sanders, according to Fox News. "Do you think that the president has thought, at all, going into the 2020 campaign that the rhetoric just needs to be lowered? Whether it’s talking about Democrats, the media, immigrants, or should we just plan on hearing the president use the same kind of language that we heard in 2016 and all through the first couple years of this administration?"

Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that the only shame in this scenario belongs to the Democrats for failing to condemn Ilhan Omar's anti-Semitism.

“Democrats have had a number of opportunities to condemn specific comments and have refused to do that,” Sanders said. "I think that is a great shame. The president has been clear on what his position is, certainly what his support is for the people and the community of Israel."

Acosta asserted that Trump slamming the Democrats for hating Jews is "patently untrue."

"Democrats don’t hate Jewish people, that’s just silly," Acosta said. "It’s not true."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has asserted that Ilhan Omar's anti-Semitic comments were just a different "use of words." "The incident that happened, I don’t think our colleague is anti-Semitic," Pelosi said. "I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn’t understand that some of them are fraught with meaning that she didn’t realize."

When Sanders tried calling on another reporter, Acosta kept firing questions away, reminding the press secretary of when Trump said there were "fine people on both sides" following the Charlottesville protest where a white supremacist domestic terrorist plowed his car into a crowd of people, killing one woman.

"Essentially suggesting that there were very fine people in the Nazis," Acosta said.

"That’s not at all what the president was stating," Sanders replied. "The president has been incredibly clear in consistently and repeatedly condemning hatred, bigotry and racism in all of its forms, whether it’s in America or anywhere else. To say otherwise is simply untrue."

CNN's @Acosta: "Democrats don't hate Jewish people that's just silly. It's not true." @PressSec: "They should call out their members by name."

Acosta then suggests Trump thinks "there are very fine people" who are Nazis.

Sanders wasn't having it. pic.twitter.com/7EpuF1wOHV

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) March 11, 2019

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats upped their ante on illegal immigration Tuesday, announcing new legislation that would not only grant legal status to potentially millions of illegal immigrant “Dreamers,” but adds hundreds of thousands of more migrants to the mix.

Dreamers would be eligible for in-state college tuition and taxpayer-backed financial aid, would get new protections against swift deportation, and would have a “direct” pathway to citizenship.

Even some already-deported illegal immigrants would be allowed to apply to return under the bill, announced by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and fellow Democrats in a rally at the Capitol.

“There should be nothing partisan or political in this legislation,” Mrs. Pelosi said.

The bill goes beyond the Dream Act, legislation that’s been kicking around for nearly two decades, which would offer a path to citizenship to as many as 2 million illegal immigrants.

The updated version would also grant a pathway to citizenship to hundreds of thousands of people here under Temporary Protected Status or Deferred Enforced Departure.

Those are both types of humanitarian protections designed to give people a temporary safe place in the U.S. — along with work permits and some other taxpayer benefits — while their home countries recover from natural disasters, instability or wars.

Yet over the decades, those protections have become semi-permanent. The average TPS holder has been in the U.S. 20 years at this point.

Democrats said they’ve put down roots, and asking them to return now is unfair.

“We are not going to let Donald Trump send them back, putting their lives in peril or tearing their families apart,” said Rep. Nydia Velazquez, a New York Democrat.

She and fellow Democrats said those to whom they’re offering citizenship rights are already American in most ways, save for their illegal entry or continued iffy legal status.

Dream Act legislation has been on the cusp of passage before, clearing the House in 2010 but defeated in the Senate by a GOP filibuster that year.

Last year, President Trump floated several different deals that would have granted some more permanent legal status to Dreamers, but Democrats and some Republicans said he was asking for too much in return with his demand for border wall money, limits to family-based immigrant visas and an end to the visa lottery.

Those negotiations took place under a GOP-led Congress.

“We are in charge now,” Rep. Mark Takano, California Democrat, said Tuesday, underscoring why Democrats are optimistic they can win a legalization without also having to embrace Mr. Trump’s get-tough policies.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

Republican Whip

Published  1 month ago

Democrats promised results, restraint, and responsibility to the American electorate. What did we get instead? Liberal lunacy. Words have consequences. Speaker Pelosi and her party must be held accountable for the outrageous rhetoric of their members. Check below for a list of Democrats’ most careless quotes ↓   Sen. Bernie Sanders on climate change: “We […]

NPR.org

Published  1 month ago

The speaker giveth, and the speaker taketh away.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has reclaimed office space her predecessor, Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., awarded to Vice President Mike Pence.

Republicans gave Pence, a former House member, a first floor bonus office in the U.S. Capitol shortly after President Trump was inaugurated in 2017.

The vice president rarely used the space, but it was a symbolic gesture of the warm relationship Pence enjoyed with Ryan and the House GOP. The vice president serves as the president of the U.S. Senate and historically has been provided an office in the Senate side of the Capitol, which is where Pence more regularly holds court when he visits Congress.

A placard above the door identifying it as Pence's House office was quietly removed in recent weeks. A House Democratic aide confirmed to NPR that the space will be re-assigned. "Room assignments are reviewed and changed at the beginning of every Congress," the aide said.

The speaker has sole authority to dole out office space in the Capitol, which is prized real estate for members of leadership and senior staff. While Pelosi revoked Pence's office privileges, the aide said she is providing new office space for the White House legislative affairs team that they did not previously enjoy under the GOP majority.

A spokeswoman for Vice President Pence has not responded to NPR's request for comment.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Women’s March founder and noted anti-Semite Linda Sarsour and Niwad Awad, the Executive Director of CAIR, held a rally last Wednesday in Washington DC in support of Rep. Ilhan Omar. Sarsour was asked if she believed the nation of Israel has a right to exist —  She refused to answer. During their rally an angry […]

NBC News

Published  1 month ago

While some Democrats are already clamoring for Congress to begin impeachment proceedings, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says President Donald Trump is "just not worth it."

In an interview with the Washington Post published Monday, Pelosi said, "I'm not for impeachment."

Pelosi, who was House minority leader when President Bill Clinton was impeached by the Republican majority house in 1998, told the paper, "Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he's just not worth it."

But asked if she thought Trump was "fit" to be president, Pelosi said, "No. I don't think he is. I mean, ethically unfit. Intellectually unfit. Curiosity-wise unfit. No, I don't think he's fit to be president of the United States," she said, before chiding herself for "coming across too negatively."

In the same interview, she complimented Trump with a laugh, calling him "a great organizer for Democrats, a great fundraiser for Democrats and a great mobilizer at the grassroots level for Democrats. And I think that's good for America."

Billionaire Tom Steyer, who's been running television advertisements calling for Trump to be impeached, blasted Pelosi for her comments.

"Speaker Pelosi thinks 'he's just not worth it?' Well, is defending our legal system 'worth it?' Is holding the President accountable for his crimes and cover-ups 'worth it?' Is doing what’s right 'worth it?' Or shall America just stop fighting for our principles and do what's politically convenient?" he said in a statement.

The issue has been on the president's mind. In an an interview with CBS on Super Bowl Sunday, Trump said, "The only way they can win, because they can't win the election, is to bring out the artificial way of impeachment."

"It's supposed to be high crime and misdemeanors. Well, there was no high crime. There was no misdemeanor. There was no problem whatsoever," Trump said then.

Responding to Pelosi's comments on Monday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said, “impeachment should never be on the table because the president is doing a great job.”

As for Pelosi's comments on Trump's fitness to be president, Sanders said, “Most of America disagrees with her comments. That’s why they voted him into office.”

Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by almost 2.9 million votes.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is ruling out impeaching President Donald Trump, arguing in an interview with the Washington Post Monday that “he’s just not worth it.”

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it,” Pelosi told the Post.

Pelosi’s remarks come as House Democrats are expanding their investigation into President Trump and his allies, requesting documents from over 80 individuals and entities regarding the president’s finances and communications. Some lawmakers are hopeful their findings will lead to uncovering an impeachable offense.

However, congressional investigators such as House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) are warning against calling for impeachment, urging caution until the release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. “Let us see what the facts are, what the law is, and what the behavior is of the president,” Pelosi said when pressed on impeachment at a press briefing last Tuesday.

Yet their pleas have not deterred some Democrats from demanding President Trump’s ouster. Appearing on MSNBC’s All In last Monday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) claimed President Trump’s actions have already “crossed the threshold of what was brought for impeachment” against President Richard Nixon. “[W]hat we know is that the president’s behavior has already crossed the threshold of what was brought for impeachment before the House in the Nixon administration and the Clinton administration. In fact, he crossed those thresholds in the first weeks or months of office. And so, that is another means, if these other means fail, to control this president,” he said.

Earlier this February, Rep. Al Green (D-TX) announced he will bring a vote on impeaching to the House floor for the third time, despite failing to hold a successful vote in 2017 and 2018.

The Texas Democrat said he will bring the measure to a vote “regardless” of the Mueller report’s findings, pledging to “act on Trump’s bigotry.”

“There will be a vote on impeachment regardless as to what the Mueller Commission says,” Green vowed in a recent House floor speech.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., revealed she's opposed to the impeachment of President Donald Trump in the absence of evidence that is "compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan."

"I’m not for impeachment," Pelosi told The Washington Post in an interview published Monday. "Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it."

The speaker's remarks ran counter to sentiments expressed by some freshman members of her caucus, most notably Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, who vowed to Democratic activists that she would help "impeach the motherf---er" hours after she was sworn in this past January.

Pelosi told the Post her own relationship with Trump has been "respectful of the office that he holds."

"[I] just tell him what I think," Pelosi said, adding that she was "[h]opeful that at some point we can find common ground that he’ll stick to. So, yeah, respectful, honest and hopeful."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

However, Pelosi also accused the president of "disregarding the Constitution of the United States [and] disregarding our commitments to the world in terms of our commitment to NATO, to Paris climate, to our values."

When asked if she thought Trump had done anything good for America, Pelosi quipped: "He’s been a great organizer for Democrats, a great fundraiser for Democrats and a great mobilizer at the grass-roots level for Democrats. And I think that’s good for America."

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

On Tuesday afternoon, two weeks after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 18th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 16 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled it out of order. After Democrats denied Johnson’s request to vote on the bill he criticized them for failing to allow a vote. As Democrats have done on five occasions, the pro-life Congressman’s mic was ultimately cut off as he attempted to speak further on the legislation.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

ACTION: Contact members of Congress and urge them to sign the Discharge Petition to bring the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to the House floor for a vote.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats aren’t giving up on attempting to impeach President Trump, even though Speaker Nancy Pelosi all but dismissed it in an interview published Monday.

“I happen to disagree with that take,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told the Washington Examiner Monday night, responding to the Pelosi interview. “But you know, she’s the speaker. … I think we’ll see.”

Pelosi told the Washington Post she doesn’t support the House trying to impeach Trump. “He’s just not worth it,” the California Democrat said in the interview.

Pelosi’s comments contradict the views of many House Democrats who are eager to pursue a path to impeachment, either from the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing probe or new, broad House investigations that will examine Trump’s business dealings and potential conflicts of interest.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., said her constituents are demanding that Congress investigate Trump and even attempt to remove him from office if the findings call for it.

Jayapal is definitely not abandoning impeachment, she told reporters.

“It’s not about whether or not it’s worth it,” Jayapal said. “It’s our obligation to the American people and the Constitution. That’s how I think about it.”

Jayapal said it’s too soon to decide Trump shouldn’t be impeached, in part because the House probe alone could take months. “We haven’t had done any investigation,” Jayapal said.

Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said he did not interpret Pelosi’s comments to mean she is ruling out a vote to oust the president.

“I think we have to look at all the evidence in the report and where it will lead us, and not prejudge the issue,” Khanna said. ”I think she was making an off-the-cuff statement. I don’t think she was making a statement about Congress’ constitutional responsibility to look at evidence and look at where the hearings are. I think she even said it depends on what is in the reports.”

Ocasio-Cortez agreed that Pelosi’s impeachment views are not absolute.

Pelosi in many recent interviews has downplayed impeachment and said she wants House Democrats to focus on their agenda. Democrats will introduce bills to end pay discrimination and to legalize Dreamers in the coming days.

Pelosi has often said she is awaiting Mueller’s findings, Democrats said Monday.

“I wouldn’t say she’s completely concrete,” Ocasio-Cortez told the Washington Examiner. “She’s always demonstrated leadership that takes all kinds of factors into account. Should the Mueller report drop and we see something, I wouldn’t count anything out.”

Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, who has served in the House for 10 years and whose state voted for Trump, agreed with Pelosi that it would not be worth it to pursue impeachment.

“I don’t think the country has the stomach for any more divisiveness,” Fudge told the Washington Examiner. “So if we can find a way to get through this term and do what we need to do to run the right candidate, to do what we believe can be done in terms of flipping the White House, that is where we should focus our efforts. I believe in winning.”

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in an interview published Monday that she's against impeaching President Trump "unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan," arguing "he's just not worth it."

"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it," Pelosi told The Washington Post.

The issue has divided Democrats, with some members pushing for Trump's removal for office and others indicating they plan to wait and see what ongoing investigations produce.

Zero Hedge

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has come out against impeaching President Trump, telling the Washington Post in a wide-ranging article that she thinks it would be too divisive to the country, adding that Trump is "just not worth it."

I’m not for impeachment. This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this: Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it. -Washington Post

One might draw from that conclusion that Pelosi doesn't believe the ever-impending Mueller report will contain much of value.

And while Pelosi could have said "let's wait and see what the House Intelligence and Judiciary investigations turn up" - her current stance against impeachment suggests that she doesn't put much stock in efforts led by Chairs Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) to re-turn over every stone Mueller has and more.

The Post asked Pelosi to clarify her comments, asking her if she believes Trump is "fit to be president," to which she replied:

Are we talking ethically? Intellectually? Politically? What are we talking here?

All-All of the above. No. No. I don’t think he is. I mean, ethically unfit. Intellectually unfit. Curiosity-wise unfit. No, I don’t think he’s fit to be president of the United States. And that’s up to us to make the contrast to show that this president — while he may be appealing to you on your insecurity and therefore your xenophobia, whether it’s globalization or immigrants — is fighting clean air for your children to breathe, clean water for them to drink, food safety, every good thing that we should be doing that people can’t do for themselves. You know, I have five kids, and I think I can do everything for them, but I can’t control the air they breathe, the water that they drink. You depend on the public sector to do certain things for the health and well-being of your family, and he is counter to that. -Washington Post

"I don’t usually talk about him this much," Pelosi added. "This is the most I’ve probably talked about him. I hardly ever talk about him. You know, it’s not about him. It’s about what we can do for the people to lower health-care costs, bigger paychecks, cleaner government."

So while Pelosi doesn't think Trump is fit to be president, she has stopped short of joining many in her party who have openly called for his impeachment.

Townhall

Published  1 month ago

In case you missed it last week, House Democrats voted against a motion preventing illegal aliens from voting.

Today I offered a motion to recommit #HR1 reaffirming that only US citizens should have the right to vote.

Dems rejected it.

Next time you go to the ballot box, keep that in mind. The future of their party is in cities like San Fran, where illegals can vote. Let that sink in.

— Rep. Dan Crenshaw (@RepDanCrenshaw) March 8, 2019

You do realize your bill #HR1 would actually make that kind of fraud in #NC09 LEGAL. Right?

TRUTH: it would legalize vote harvesting across the entire country, use your tax $ to do it, and limit free speech drastically. All in the name of “democracy.”

Even ACLU opposes it. https://t.co/Pn72uB3hEe

— Dan Crenshaw (@DanCrenshawTX) March 9, 2019

Meanwhile, Speaker Nancy Pelosi argued during a press conference last week we should be welcoming our "newcomers" by allowing them to vote.

"When we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been, our families," Pelosi said in Texas. "These newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system and that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America."

This isn't the first time Pelosi has revealed Democrats are on the side of illegal aliens voting. Late last year, Pelosi complained about a border wall preventing illegal entry into the United States.

"Quite frankly when the president talks about this being a national security issue, it really isn't. It's about a policy that is discriminatory about where people are coming into this country," she said.

Sure seems like illegal aliens voting in U.S. elections counts as foreign influence...

This post has been updated with an additional tweet.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

In a stunning admission that the Mueller report is going to be a triple-decker nothingburger, Nancy Pelosi has just called off the impeachment dogs and cruelly snuffed out the hopes and dreams of the unhinged

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

House Judiciary Committee Republicans on Tuesday released hundreds of pages of transcripts from last year's closed-door interview with ex-FBI attorney Lisa Page, revealing new details about the bureau's controversial internal discussions regarding an “insurance policy” against then-candidate Donald Trump.

Page first entered the spotlight in December 2017, when it was revealed by the Justice Department inspector general that she and then-FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok exchanged numerous anti-Trump text messages. The two were involved in the FBI’s initial counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 election, and later served on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

LISA PAGE TESTIMONY: COLLUSION STILL UNPROVEN BY THE TIME OF MUELLER'S SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTMENT

Among their texts was one concerning the so-called "insurance policy." During her interview with the Judiciary Committee in July 2018, Page was questioned at length about that text -- and essentially confirmed this referred to the Russia investigation while explaining that officials were proceeding with caution, concerned about the implications of the case while not wanting to go at "total breakneck speed" and risk burning sources as they presumed Trump wouldn't be elected anyway.

Further, she confirmed investigators only had a "paucity" of evidence at the start.

Then-Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., kicked off that section of questioning by asking about the text sent from Strzok to Page in August 2016 which read: “I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy’s [McCabe's] office—that there’s no way he gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

The former FBI lawyer explained how the FBI was trying to strike a balance with the investigation into the Trump campaign—which agents called “Crossfire Hurricane.”

LISA PAGE 'COOPERATIVE,' 'CREDIBLE,' LAWMAKERS SAY AFTER 5-HOURS CLOSED-DOOR SESSION

“So, upon the opening of the crossfire hurricane investigation, we had a number of discussions up through and including the Director regularly in which we were trying to find an answer to the question, right, which is, is there someone associated with the [Trump] campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton,” Page said. “And given that it is August, we were very aware of the speed and sensitivity that we needed to operate under.”

Page continued that, “if the answer is this is a guy just being puffery at a meeting with other people, great, then we don’t need to worry about this, and we can all move on with our lives; if this is, in fact, the Russians have coopted an individual with, you know, maybe wittingly or unwittingly, that’s incredibly grave, and we need to know that as quickly as possible.”

Page explained that the text message reflected their “continuing check-in” as to “how quickly to operate.”

NEW STRZOK-PAGE TEXTS REVEAL OTHERS WERE 'LEAKING LIKE MAD' IN LEAD UP TO TRUMP-RUSSIA PROBE

“[W]e don’t need to go at a total breakneck speed because so long as he doesn’t become President, there isn’t the same threat to national security, right,” Page explained, while saying that if Trump were not elected president, the bureau would still investigate.

“But if he becomes President, that totally changes the game because now he is the President of the United States,” Page told lawmakers. “He’s going to immediately start receiving classified briefings. He’s going to be exposed to the most sensitive secrets imaginable. And if there is somebody on his team who wittingly or unwittingly is working with the Russians, that is super serious.”

Page made clear, though, that those involved did not think Trump would beat Clinton: “So this reflects: Let’s be reasonable, let’s not, you know, throw the kitchen sink at this because he’s probably not going to be elected, and so then we don’t have quite as horrific a national security threat than if we do if he gets elected.”

Page also spoke to how little information the bureau was starting with, saying the FBI “knew so little” about whether the allegations were “true or not true,” and had "a paucity of evidence because we are just starting down the path" of vetting the allegations.

She later said that all they needed was an allegation, and claimed “it is entirely common, particularly in a counterintelligence investigation, that you would only have—you would have a small amount of evidence” in launching a probe.

The transcripts were released as Mueller continues his investigation, which Trump assails as a "witch hunt" on a regular basis but could have an impact on where congressional Democrats go with their own investigations -- or whether they pursue impeachment, something House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has come out against for the time being.

Page, who served a short detail on Mueller’s team, returned to her post at the FBI in 2017, and ultimately left the bureau in May 2018. Strzok was removed from Mueller’s team after the texts were discovered and was reassigned to the FBI’s Human Resources Division before being fired in August 2018.

Former FBI Deputy Director McCabe, meanwhile, recently said he did not recall ever discussing the "insurance policy" with Strzok or Page.

The Last Refuge

Published  1 month ago

Remember: “everyone has a plan until they get punched in he face.” ~ Mike Tyson The exploitation of Michael Cohen toward the launch of Speaker Pelosi’s impeachment effort backfire…

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

President Trump kicked off a new battle with Congress on Monday by releasing his fiscal 2020 budget plan seeking billions more in funding for a border wall and controversial work requirements for Americans collecting a variety of welfare benefits.

Washington Free Beacon

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi revealed for the first time Monday that she opposes the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

"There have been increasing calls, including from some of your members, for impeachment of the president," noted Washington Post reporter Joe Heim.

"I’m not for impeachment," the California Democrat responded. "This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before."

"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she continued. "And he’s just not worth it."

Pelosi insisted later in the interview that it is her view Trump is "ethically" and "intellectually" unfit to be president, but she doesn't believe that ought to be her focus.

"I don’t usually talk about him this much. This is the most I’ve probably talked about him. I hardly ever talk about him," she said. "You know, it’s not about him. It’s about what we can do for the people to lower health-care costs, bigger paychecks, cleaner government."

Pelosi was previously critical of calls for impeachment without overtly opposing the idea, saying billionaire Tom Steyer's media blitz during the 2018 midterm elections was "a gift to the Republicans." Pelosi was also among the top Democrats who were critical in January of Rep. Rashida Tlaib's call to "impeach the motherf***er."

"That is not the position of the House Democratic Caucus…" she said at an MSNBC town hall. "I do think that we want to be unified and bring people together. Impeachment is a very divisive approach to take and we shouldn’t take it … without the facts."

WayneDupree.com

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Rashida Tlaib raised up the religious victory flag during her keynote address at the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) 15th annual banquet.

Amy Mek of the Federalist Papers highlighted this so-called victory speech in her article. Tlaib has been running around with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar creating havoc inside the Democratic Party and building the pillars of a takeover.

“‘We always said ‘the Muslims are coming’… I think we’re here! We’re not only everywhere in all kinds of different governments but, mashallah, we’re in the United States Congress,” she said.

They sure are and their goal have never changed, only their tactics. We keep saying that the United States will never become what happened in the U.K. but things are not slowing down. Americans had better educate themselves and use the Bible and the story of Isaac and Ishmael as a starting point.

Hassan Shibly, Executive Director of CAIR-FL, had a huge smile bringing Tlaib up to the stage with a hearty “Allahu Akbar! The first Palestinian-American Congresswoman, our dear sister Rashida Tlaib!” he said.

Rashida Tlaib presents at HAMAS-linked CAIR-Chicago Conference

Rashida explains that envisioning her enemies (Lobbyists & Special Interests groups) DEAD brings her joy & inspiration

CAIR is established by U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s “Palestine Committee” which is Hamas in America pic.twitter.com/yc7kkT7PHl

Tlaib introduced herself to this nation, and possibly foreign news reporting sources too, who may be judging her, but hopefully not judging all American women attaining elective office in Washington, DC., in the worst possible way. I had never heard of Tlaib before, but her political introduction laced with profanity will assure that she won’t be forgotten for the vulgar hateful language she carried into her very beginning as an elected Congresswoman, D-MI.

This woman’s lack of class, exemplified by her language and usage in front of her son is a good example of the Democrats entering congress today; along with the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Water’s who care and have done nothing for their constituents are going to be the ruination of this country. If individuals like them who embrace socialistic/Marxist philosophies continue to be elected and our constitution ignored, there is little hope for this nation. A lawless society has no future!

Trump Derangement Syndrome is really a fact, and the Democrat Party search for quality of its Representatives has obviously been lowered, if it ever existed.

Please consider making a donation to WayneDupree.com

and help our mission to make the world a better place

If you find inaccurate information within this article, please use the contact form to alert us immediately.

NOTE: Facebook and Twitter are currently censoring conservative content. We hope they will reverse their policy and honor all voices shortly. Until then, please like our page on Facebook and PLEASE check the Wayne Dupree homepage for the latest stories.

Having problems finding a source for real news links in real time, click on Whatfinger.com. Visit, bookmark and share this resource and then tell your friends and family.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

WOAH! Democrat Adam Schiff, the man who is leading a corrupt investigation into President Trump, recently agreed with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that impeaching Trump without clear evidence of major crimes, is probably not going to happen.

While speaking to CNN, Schiff, arguably the most insane person in congress behind Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, claimed that impeaching President Trump is not the end game.

NATIONWIDE POLL: Should Trump CUT Pensions For Former Presidents?

“In the absence of very graphic evidence, it would be difficult to get the support in the Senate needed to make an impeachment successful. Again, my feeling is let’s see what Bob Mueller produces. But the evidence would have to be pretty overwhelming,” Schiff said.

A pretty alarming thing to say considering Schiff is one of the leaders of the ‘impeachment’ agenda.

This statement comes right after Pelosi stated that, “I’m not for impeachment. Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Wow! Maybe these radical Democrats are finally realizing that President Trump will not be impeached because he didn’t even commit a crime in the first place! Both members of congress have talked a lot about impeachment and removing Trump from office but they are worried that if they try to do so before 2020, the Trump base will get very angry which would probably give him an easy win.

Check out what the Daily Wire reported:

Back in October, Schiff mentioned impeachment directly, though according to the Washington Examiner he walked back his plan to impeach the president in February, around the time rumors began to surface that Special Counsel Robert Mueller was nearing the end of his probe into whether the Trump campaign had actively colluded with Russian officials to impact the outcome of the 2016 presidential elections, and had found little evidence to support Democrats’ theories of Russian intervention.

Mueller is funded through October of 2019, leaving Democrats at least a little hope that the Special Counsel’s inquiry isn’t fully over, but, last week, “placeholder” links began appearing on Amazon, touting the report’s release date as “March 26th” — just a little over a week away. And although Mueller has managed to indict and convict several Trump associates, none are guilty of active collusion during the 2016 election period.

Get Your FREE ‘Build The Wall’ Coin While Supplies Last

With the Mueller report coming out soon, Schiff and Pelosi are probably getting the feeling that the report will show that the Trump campaign did NOT collude with Russia so they are wanting to lower expectations for the Democrat base.

Even thought Schiff admitted that impeachment is unlikely, this isn’t stopping him from his corrupt investigation into President Trump. The congressman from California has made it clear that he will stop at NOTHING to dig up anything Trump has ever done in his past. Schiff has made it a priority to investigate the President instead of serving the American people.

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

URGENT 2020 POLL: Trump or Bernie?

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi scolded Americans late last week for being against a Democrat measure that allows illegal aliens the right to vote. During a press conference in Austin, Texas, Pelosi argued that America must not

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) came out against impeaching President Trump.

“I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” Pelosi said in an interview published Monday in the Washington Post.

“Unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan,” Pelosi said, adding, “He’s just not worth it.”

This isn’t the first time Nancy Pelosi, who is third in the line of succession to be President admitted Trump has committed no crimes.

Billionaire Tom Steyer erupted on hearing the news.

NEW: Billionaire liberal activist Tom Steyer responds: "Is defending our legal system 'worth it?' Is holding the President accountable for his crimes and cover-ups 'worth it?' Is doing what’s right 'worth it?'" https://t.co/dplipIBFnW pic.twitter.com/ZJdNpR6xyu

— ABC News (@ABC) March 11, 2019

Steyer went on Hardball on Monday and vented against the liberal Speaker.

"I think that what she's saying is that regardless of the information, regardless of how unfit he is, we're waiting for Republican permission to go forward and hold him accountable for his crimes." @TomSteyer on Pelosi saying that it's 'not worth it' to impeach Trump. pic.twitter.com/7svNbtcUyL

— Hardball (@hardball) March 11, 2019

Steyer then through a video together demanding impeachment!

If we're waiting for Republicans to give us permission to impeach @realdonaldtrump, we're going to wait a very long time.

We can't afford to wait. It's time to do what's right. pic.twitter.com/riwwmwbTMO

— Tom Steyer (@TomSteyer) March 11, 2019

Tom did not take the news well.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

President Trump's pursuit of additional border wall funding in his fiscal 2020 budget proposal will only lead to another government shut down, warned Democratic leaders on Sunday.

Trump harmed millions when he "recklessy" shut down the government in pursuit of funds to build an expensive border wall, said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., in a joint statement. But Congress refused and the president was "forced to admit defeat" and reopen the government, they added.

"The same thing will repeat itself if he tries this again," they warned. "We hope he learned his lesson."

The Democratic power duo were responding to reports earlier Sunday that the president will seek $8.6 billion in additional funding in his fiscal 2020 budget request to Congress to build barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“At a time when our country faces challenges about jobs for the future, this money would better be spent on rebuilding America, and on education and workforce development for jobs for the 21st Century,” the two Democratic leaders stated.

There was skepticism too on the GOP side that Trump would get exactly what he asks for in his budget proposal.

Asked if Trump will get what he wants in border wall funding in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Republican Conference and Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, replied, "Well no president gets exactly what they want."

But Barrasso added that his colleague, Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., who is the chairman of the budget panel, is "committed to border security."

The president's budget request is slated to be released by the White House on Monday.

New York Post

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Monday that she’s against impeaching President Trump “unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan.” Which is exactly the point — there isn’t.

The speaker is surely up to speed on what evidence Democrats actually have against Trump and has a fair sense of what Special Counsel Bob Mueller’s report will say. And she recognizes that it’s nothing that will persuade anyone who hasn’t wanted Trump ousted since Election Day 2016.

Which means that moving to impeach him would be not just “divisive to the country,” as she says, but also bad for Democrats — since it would show them as unable to resist the most demented demands of their base.

This, when last week’s pathetic failure to confront Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism already exposed them as in thrall to extremists.

Now, will Pelosi call off the dogs? Committee Chairmen Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff will keep on subpoenaing away, and grandstanding for the cameras — in hopes of maybe somehow, someday, somewhere finding some genuine dirt, while at least harassing the president, his family and associates and feeding an endless string of breathless this time, Trump is going down reports.

Just as impeachment would be bad for the Democrats, chances are Americans will note that the press has been blaring those “scoops” for more than two years now, and not a one has panned out. Keeping it up only shows that not just the Democratic Party, but also most of the media, can’t stop themselves from playing to the unhinged left.

Conservative Tribune

Published  1 month ago

New York Post

Published  1 month ago

Enlarge Image

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Monday that she’s against impeaching President Trump “unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan.” Which is exactly the point — there isn’t.

The speaker is surely up to speed on what evidence Democrats actually have against Trump and has a fair sense of what Special Counsel Bob Mueller’s report will say. And she recognizes that it’s nothing that will persuade anyone who hasn’t wanted Trump ousted since Election Day 2016.

Which means that moving to impeach him would be not just “divisive to the country,” as she says, but also bad for Democrats — since it would show them as unable to resist the most demented demands of their base.

This, when last week’s pathetic failure to confront Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism already exposed them as in thrall to extremists.

Now, will Pelosi call off the dogs? Committee Chairmen Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff will keep on subpoenaing away, and grandstanding for the cameras — in hopes of maybe somehow, someday, somewhere finding some genuine dirt, while at least harassing the president, his family and associates and feeding an endless string of breathless this time, Trump is going down reports.

Just as impeachment would be bad for the Democrats, chances are Americans will note that the press has been blaring those “scoops” for more than two years now, and not a one has panned out. Keeping it up only shows that not just the Democratic Party, but also most of the media, can’t stop themselves from playing to the unhinged left.

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she’s not in favor of impeaching President Trump, dealing a major setback to the anti-Trump resistance which has clamored for House Democrats to take the politically charged step.

Mrs. Pelosi, in an interview with The Washington Post Magazine, said that while she doubts Mr. Trump’s fitness for office, impeaching him would be too divisive.

“I’m not for impeachment,” she told the magazine, adding she was aware she was breaking news with the announcement. “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Mrs. Pelosi had been trying to tamp down impeachment talk within her ranks for months, but she’s had only moderate success.

Top Democrats, and important liberal activists, continue to agitate for their party to pull the trigger.

“There’s so much evidence that this president should be impeached it’s hard to keep track of it all,” major liberal donor Tom Steyer tweeted Monday afternoon.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, last week launched what many analysts called the pathway to impeachment, issuing document requests to some 81 persons or entities that came within the Trump orbit during his time as a businessman, a candidate or as president.

Mr. Nadler, New York Democrat, said he’s convinced the president has obstructed justice, but he doesn’t have the evidence yet, so he has gone looking for it.

Mrs. Pelosi’s statement could put a damper on those efforts.

In her interview with The Post, she said her feelings about impeachment are borne of the harm it would cause, not her feelings on Mr. Trump’s ability to serve.

“Intellectually unfit. Curiosity-wise unfit. No, I don’t think he’s fit to be president of the United States,” she said, describing deep ideological differences between herself and Mr. Trump over the role of government in Americans’ lives.

“This president — while he may be appealing to you on your insecurity and therefore your xenophobia, whether it’s globalization or immigrants — is fighting clean air for your children to breathe, clean water for them to drink, food safety, every good thing that we should be doing that people can’t do for themselves,” she said. “You know, I have five kids, and I think I can do everything for them, but I can’t control the air they breathe, the water that they drink. You depend on the public sector to do certain things for the health and well-being of your family, and he is counter to that.”

She went on to say that she doesn’t usually like to talk about the president so much, and said it was “coming across too negatively.”

“I hardly ever talk about him. You know, it’s not about him. It’s about what we can do for the people to lower health-care costs, bigger paychecks, cleaner government,” she said.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Tom Fitton, Adam Schiff Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch announced Monday it filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Adam Schiff over his contacts with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson and Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen. The official complaint filed by Judicial Watch with the Office of Congressional Ethics, requests House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) be […]

Diamond & Silk

Published  1 month ago

Democrats are out in public about their intentions now.

Republicans proposed a motion to reaffirm that only US citizens should have the right to vote.

But House Democrats voted in favor of supporting illegal aliens and other non-citizens voting in local elections, voting against the motion.

“The vote marks a stunning reversal from just six months ago, when the chamber — then under GOP control — voted to decry illegal immigrant voting,” The Washington Times reported. “The 228-197 vote came as part of a broader debate on Democrats’ major legislative priority this year, HR 1, the ‘For the People Act,’ which includes historic expansions of voter registration and access, as well as a major rewrite of campaign finance laws.”

“It sounds like I’m making it up,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) said. “What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?”

“Today I offered a motion to recommit #HR1 reaffirming that only US citizens should have the right to vote,” Crenshaw added on Twitter. “Dems rejected it. Next time you go to the ballot box, keep that in mind. The future of their party is in cities like San Fran, where illegals can vote. Let that sink in.”

Just six months ago, 49 Democrats joined Republicans in condemning the practice. Now only six Democrats did, all the others thought it was fine for non-citizens to vote.

While federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, local governments can determine if they want non-citizens to vote in other elections.

San Francisco, for example, recently began allowing non-citizens to vote in school board elections.

“We’ve watched Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens for a while now,” House Majority Whip Steve Scalise tweeted. “But today they took it a step further by blocking our motion to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in elections—effectively devaluing the vote of legitimate voters.”

Scalise explains how that then enables the person to get on the voter rolls and “maybe you catch it and maybe you don’t” if they end up voting then in other elections.

We've watched Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens for a while now. But today they took it a step further by blocking our motion to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in elections—effectively devaluing the vote of legitimate voters. pic.twitter.com/mEnXNCSsAA

— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) March 8, 2019

According to the Washington Times, Rep. John Lewis told colleagues, “We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in.”

And earlier in the week, when talking about HR 1, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said immigrants “make America more American,” and we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

From CNS:

“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said. “And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

The Washington Post‘s Eugene Scott has decided to fact-check President Donald Trump’s claim Friday: “The Democrats have become an anti-Israel party. They’ve become an anti-Jewish party, and that’s too bad.”

The president made that statement after Democrats passed a weak resolution on antisemitism that failed to rebuke Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) for her recent hateful remarks and submerged antisemitism among other forms of discrimination. Omar refuses to apologize and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is defending her. Even some Democrats were angry at the outome: “This shouldn’t be so hard,” said Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL).

But the Post decided to ride to the rescue, fact-checking Trump’s opinion with arguments that had nothing to do with the present circumstances, and recycling false claims from Democrats that the president himself is antisemitic.

Scott’s first argument against the idea Democrats have “become an anti-Jewish party” was to cite the voting patterns of American Jews. Roughly 70% of the Jewish vote goes to Democrats and 30% to Republicans, and there are more Jewish Democrats in public office than Jewish Republicans. If Democrats were really “anti-Jewish,” Scott argued, Jews would not prefer to vote Democratic or to run as Democrats in large proportions.

But Trump’s argument has to do with what Democrats are becoming, not what they have been. It is likely that at least some Jewish voters will agree in the next election.

Moreover, the reason Jews vote for Democrats has little to do with the party’s position on issues relating to the Jewish community and more to do with the fact that Jews tend to be liberal. “Nationally, American Jewish voters cite healthcare (43 percent), gun violence (28 percent), Social Security and Medicare (21 percent) and the economy (19 percent) as being among their top two issues. Only 4 percent listed Israel among their top voting issues, a decline from 9 percent in 2016,” the radical left-wing group J Street, which often opposes Israel, said in a press release after the 2018 elections. Generally, more observant Jews and more pro-Israel Jews have tended to vote Republican in recent years.

Scott then went on to argue that “the president has come under fire for remarks that some found anti-Semitic.” He tried to debunk the idea that Democrats could “become an anti-Jewish party” by arguing that Trump himself was “anti-Jewish.” It was a rather pathetic attempt, recycling several familiar, and false, attacks.

He began with the Charlottesville hoax: “After white nationalists marched through Charlottesville, chanting ‘Jews will not replace us,’ Trump called some of the protesters ‘very fine people,’ a comment that drew harsh condemnation.” As is clear from the transcript of Trump’s remarks, he condemned the white nationalists and neo-Nazis several times — a fact Scott failed to mention. In the phrase “very fine people,” Trump was referring to peaceful protesters against the removal of a Confederate statue as opposed to the white supremacist group.

Scott next claimed that Trump “defended .. the use of an image of a six-point star, which resembled the Star of David, over a pile of $100 bills” during the 2016 campaign. The image was used inadvertently and was quickly replaced; even left-leaning Politifact, which criticized Trump for “lack of message discipline,” came to the conclusion that “it seems unlikely that the Trump campaign intended to put out a Star of David image.”

Next, Scott claimed, “At a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition in 2015, Trump made comments that reinforced stereotypes about Jewish people.” He did not cite the comments directly — because as both Trump and the audience understood, he was joking. Among laugh lines like, “You just like me because my daughter happens to be Jewish … The only bad news, I can’t get her on Saturday,” Trump also used edgier material: “I don’t want your money.” The audience did not find the jokes offensive because of the context of familiarity.

(Notably, Scott neglected to mention Trump’s immediate Jewish family members anywhere in his article.)

Finally, Scott noted that “in the final days of the campaign, [Trump] made headlines for running an adthat referenced the ‘global power structure’ attempting to control the world through Clinton while featuring images of prominent Jewish leaders like George Soros.” Soros is Jewish, but he is not a “prominent Jewish leader.” If anything, given his anti-Israel views and advocacy, he is the opposite. The ad itself was a standard attack on the “political establishment,” not Jews, and the supposed “Jewish leaders” included Janet Yellen, then-chair of the Federal Reserve. The only reason the ad “made headlines” was because Democrats, and the media, were (and remain) primed to pounce on anything Trump said or did as evidence of latent antisemitism or racism.

At that point, Scott ran out of ammunition. He allowed that Trump has been good for Israel, but added that “being pro-Israel and being the party of American Jews is not the same thing.”

Notably, Scott did not even try to debunk Trump’s claim that “Democrats have become an anti-Israel party.” That part seems beyond debate.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Judge Jeanine Pirro dropped the gavel on Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the disgraceful surrender to the extremists in the Democratic party by watering down the resolution to formally condemn Rep. Ilhan Omar over her latest

Truthdig: Expert Reporting, Current News, Provocative Columnists

Published  1 month ago

The harder it becomes for Israel to sell its apartheid state, the more pronounced its already massive interference will become.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

There is no longer any question that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hates America as the nation currently exists and continues to push her radical vision to impose her will on millions while the media laps up her

Axios

Published  1 month ago

In an interview released Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the Washington Post that impeaching President Trump is "just not worth it."

"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it."

Why it matters: Pelosi’s comments — which mark the first public stance she's taken firmly against impeachment — will certainly rattle rank and file Democrats, especially progressives and party activists who have been calling for impeachment since the day they took back the House in the 2018 midterms.

True Pundit

Published  1 month ago

On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called House Republicans “xenophobic” for inserting a provision in a House bill that would require vendors conducting background checks to notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement when the buyers was an illegal immigrant. That provision was a change from prior policy, that would allow vendors to notify ICE but not require them to do so.

The Republicans had used a motion to recommit before the House’s vote on the legislation, allowing them as the minority party in the House to debate and amend a the bill before the Speaker called for a vote. On Wednesday, the House passed the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, which included the GOP’s provision, 240 to 190.

Pelosi said: No, no. The Republicans will never fail to have their xenophobic motions to recommit as they did last week. It doesn’t matter whether we have a resolution or not. So this has nothing to do with that. This has to do with (Long pause) I see everything as an opportunity. This is an opportunity once again (shaking her fist) to declare strong as possible opposition to anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim statements, white supremist (sic) attitudes, the president may think there are good people on both sides, we don’t share that view. So it has nothing to do with that. However I do grant you that the Republicans will try to put these kinds of statements in their motions to recommit, but that’s housekeeping. That’s not a policy.- READ MORE

True Pundit

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-ca) Said The United States Must Not Suppress The Vote Of Newly Arrived Legal Immigrants — Including Those Foreign Nationals Who Arrive En Masse At The U.s.-mexico Border.

During a press conference in Austin, Texas this week, Pelosi admitted that the goal for the country’s mass illegal and legal immigration system is to ensure the more than 1.5 million new arrivals who come to the U.S. every year are on the voter rolls.

Pelosi added that it is immigrants, not American citizens, who make the nation “more American.”

When we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families. And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits.

And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.

The “newcomers” who should be fully able to participate in voting, Pelosi said, include the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens and border crossers who arrive at the southern border every year. – READ MORE

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar in unquestionably an anti-Semite, but cloaks herself in victimhood – portraying herself as a “Muslim under siege” unfairly attacked because of her religion.

America First with Sebastian Gorka

Published  1 month ago

When the American Conservative Union asked if I wanted to address CPAC this year, of course I said yes. Then came several weeks of discussion as to what the subject of my speech should be. This is the biggest event of its kind in the nation, with more than 200 speakers and this year in excess of 10,000 attendees, more than half under the age of 25, so I am not envious of the job Matt Schlapp and Dan Schneider have to do to pull off such a feat. (Especially when your speakers include the president and the vice president and all the security that entails).

The topic we eventually settled on was the threat Russia poses to America, a subject I am always happy to address given my family history. With parents who suffered under a Stalinist dictatorship and a father who escaped from a Communist political prison, providing a reality-check on the menace posed by a Russia still run by a KGB colonel comes easy.

However, on the day, eight minutes into my speech I decided I needed to change tack. Russia is a threat, but it is not the Soviet Union. Instead I felt compelled to talk about the real threat we face as the free-est nation on God’s Earth: the rise of socialism within our borders.

My speech was on the morning of the first day of CPAC, and the remarkable thing was, as the next three days unfolded, my decision to ad lib on that specific topic was echoed again and again—without any “central planning” from the organizers—by speaker after speaker. From Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA, to Mr. Brexit, Nigel Farage, to Mark Levin, and finally the vice president and President Trump himself. (If you missed the president’s barnburner, do yourself a favor and watch it. And bookmark the link so you can return to it when you feel like the radical crazies are winning and you need a laugh).

All of us ended up reflecting on the fact that, like a zombie that just will not die, Karl Marx’s ideology of destruction is back, and this time not as an external threat held to by a nation that wants to destroy or enslave us, but in the guise of an erstwhile mainstream American party that has been taken over by extremists.

Yet those who have surrendered to the deadly utopianism seem to be suffering from a psychosis of some kind. Democrats by and large deny they are socialists, so much so that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stood to clap during the president’s State of the Union as he pledged that America will never be a socialist nation. This at the same time that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) announced her “New Green Deal,” a centralization of power designed to destroy the free-market completely. No gasoline engines. No air travel. All buildings demolished and then rebuilt to a politically correct code. Not to mention the rationing, or eventually phasing out of red meat so we can get a grip on bovine flatulence. (If you want to see the original green scam plan Ocasio-Cortez’s office tried to deep-six, you can find it here.)

If patriotic Americans ever capitulated and the plan were implemented it would give more power to the federal government than any Communist state ever had. Yes, there may have been breadlines in Moscow, Prague, and Warsaw, but they never banned meat or automobiles.

The fact is, the Democratic Party is in big trouble. Its old white leadership thought they could allow the fringe types into the club and control them, dilute their extremism. They are failing. This burgeoning internal civil war is clearest not when it comes to new disagreements but rather, in confronting old skeletons.

The Left has always had a default setting that was anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish. Just look at the history of the crypto-anti-Semitic BDS movement and where it was born. But in the past few weeks, with blatant anti-Semites like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib actually winning seats in Congress as Democrats, we have a blatant institutionalization of Jew-hatred at the highest levels of the Democratic Party. Pelosi said she would deal with Omar’s public statements of hate. Then she removed Omar’s name from the censure motion and then it was delayed. Next it was watered down even more by focusing on all “hatred,” not the specific and vile comments from the freshman congresswoman. Now, with Pelosi storming out of the latest meeting on the measure, it looks as if the party has a full-fledged revolt on its hands.

America’s Founders deliberately built our federal system in a way so as to keep it permanently hobbled in some respects. The checks and balances and the separation of powers were designed to effect gridlock, not obviate it, and were meant to prevent a domestic “King George scenario.” But did they ever envisage a day when one of our two parties would embrace the principles of a totalitarian policy? Note every declared frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination has endorsed AOC’s green socialist plan. With a worldview informed in its totality by the tenets of Judeo-Christian civilization, could they have ever imagined institutionalized hatred of half our heritage being normalized?

The Democrats are in trouble. The question remains, how much damage will they do to our Republic and our friends and allies before their own internal civil war leads to the expulsion of the extremists from our political culture?

Check out American Greatness, the voice for independent, conservative thought today!

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

WASHINGTON, March 14 (UPI) — Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., was removed from his post as a regional whip for the Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives Friday in response to criticism over comments he made that implied the U.S. Jewish lobby was responsible for a possible war with Iraq.

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said she asked Moran to leave the position Friday.

"I have taken this action because Congressman Moran's irresponsible remarks were a serious mistake," Pelosi said. "As I said earlier this week, his comments were not only inappropriate, they were offensive and have no place in the Democratic Party."

At an anti-war forum for constituents last week, Moran said: "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this. … The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going and I think they should."

He later defended the comments as coming in response to a question from a Jewish constituent about the best way to oppose the possibility of military action to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, and that they were intended as an example of the power of all religious groups not just Jewish organizations.

Moran on Friday said in a statement that he would resign the leadership "as a way to demonstrate acceptance of my responsibility for insensitive remarks I recently made."

"I will continue to reach out to the Jewish community and others who were offended by my remarks," he said. "Most importantly, I will strive to learn from my mistakes and listen to the concerns of my constituents."

Mid-Atlantic Democrats had elected Moran as a regional whip three years ago, which serves as a liaison between the leadership and rank and file members and as key vote counters during legislative debates.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

TheWrap

Published  1 month ago

Tucker Carlson came out swinging at the top of his show Thursday evening with the Fox News host blasting Democrats for their decision to not offer his network a 2020 presidential primary debate. He also took aim at CNN’s Brian Stelter and Ana Navarro, and accused the mainstream media of allowing a political party to dictate news coverage.

“‘They criticize Nancy Pelosi,’ screams the eunuch. ‘That’s not allowed. They must be excluded,'” Carlson said in a mocking tone moments after playing footage of Stelter justifying the DNC decision by citing Fox’s relentlessly critical coverage of Democrats. “Needless to say ubiquitous windbag Ana Navarro agrees with that,” Carlson continued, before playing footage of her.

Carlson went further still, suggesting that Stelter’s on-air position represented the true feelings of CNN boss Jeff Zucker and that he was using Stelter as a way to launder his personal opinions.

“Tom Perez is arguing that a political party should decide who gets to cover the news. Amazingly CNN and MSNBC agree with him,” Carlson said “Jeff Zucker issued a public statement saying so. Zucker didn’t do it in his own voice of course, he prefers to lurk behind the curtain. Instead Zucker dispatched his creepy little spokesman to deliver the party line.”

Carlson went on to defend his own network’s dedication to free speech.

“You may dislike Fox News, but there is no question about this channel’s commitment to free speech. We defend speech, even when it’s unpopular, even when the person speaking has attacked us personally,” he said. “Free expression is bigger than any one person or organization. It’s the very heart of this country.”

“We really believe that. CNN and MSNBC do not believe that,” Carlson added.

A CNN spokesperson declined to comment. Stelter himself addressed the issue on Twitter with an eye-roll.

“Misplaced priorities: Instead of leading his hour with, let’s say, Paul Manafort’s sentencing, Tucker led with… me,” he said. In his Thursday evening newsletter, Stelter said Carlson “misstated what I’ve said about Fox being rejected by the DNC” and linked to past remarks from his Wednesday evening newsletter, which he said reflected his actual position on the issue.

Yahoo

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that barring “overwhelming” new evidence she would not pursue impeachment against President Trump because it would be too divisive and “he’s just not worth it.”

“I’m not for impeachment,” said Pelosi in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. “This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this: Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

Impeachment by the House of Representatives, which Democrats control, can be accomplished by a simple majority. But to remove Trump from office would require a two-thirds majority vote in the Republican-led Senate.

Pelosi’s comments echo those by House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., in an interview with Politico earlier Monday.

“You don’t want to divide the country, so you have to think you have such a case that once the case is finished being presented, enough people understand you had to do it,” said Nadler.

A poll of Iowa Democrats released over the weekend found only 22 percent of respondents saying they cared “a lot” about impeachment, far lower than issues like health care (81 percent), climate change (80 percent) or income inequality (67 percent).

Other Democrats are more enthusiastic. Freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., made headlines in January for saying about the president that “we’re going to impeach this mother***er” at a MoveOn event in Washington, D.C. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., first introduced articles of impeachment against Trump for obstruction of justice in July 2017.

Read more from Yahoo News:

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Pop icon and left-wing activist Cher lauded Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi for fighting against “bully” President Donald Trump at an event for International Women’s Day.

“Since the day our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence, our country has been run almost exclusively by old white men,” Cher said at the VH1 Trailblazer Honors event. “Thankfully because of Nancy and other strong women, this is changing.”

“Nancy is a fighter. She won’t back down. She muscled through the Affordable Care Act and she isn’t afraid to go to-to-toe with a bully and beat him at his own game.”

The ceremony, which aired on Friday for International Women’s Day, is meant to honor “history-making women.”

"Since the day our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence, our country has been almost exclusively ran by old white men"⁣⠀ ⁣⠀ COME 👏🏼THRU 👏🏼 CHER 👏🏼⁣⠀ Get a FIRST LOOK at her honoring @speakerpelosi at #TrailblazerHonors, TONIGHT at 9/8c on @VH1!

“When I see Trump spew his hate and tell his gazillion lies, I get pissed off and I feel uneasy at the same time,” the “Strong Enough” singer also said.

“I see Nancy come on TV and I think, ‘OK, this is all good, Nancy is in the house.'”

The 72-year-old recently lashed out at Trump, saying that he kisses the “asses” of “child molesters,” among others.

“WHY IS trump ”ALWAYS” PR MAN 4 VILLAINS!?” she said. “WHY DOES HE [Love],KOWTOW,[Kiss] ASSES OF DICTATORS,CHILD MOLESTERS, MURDERS, WIFE BEATERS, ANTISEMITES, WHITE SUPREMACISTS, HATER OF ANY SKIN NOT LILY WHITE.WHY!?”

www.theepochtimes.com

Published  1 month ago

Our economy is so strong that more than a million American households are no longer dependent on food stamps, and newly employed workers can proudly say that President Donald Trump is the reason they can feed their families without government assistance.

According to the latest food stamp enrollment data from the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the number of Americans on food stamps consistently decreased every month during the last fiscal year.

Earlier this month, the USDA also revealed that more than 1.4 million households have stopped using food stamps since shortly after Trump took office in 2017—a remarkable milestone that demonstrates the effectiveness of Trump’s economic agenda.

This is a remarkable achievement—not just as a matter of economics, but in human terms. Many food stamp recipients are ashamed to use them in public due to the stigma of dependency, and helping those people become self-sufficient elevates their self-esteem and restores their pride.

Of course, the massive decrease in the number of Americans who depend on food stamps directly contradicts the liberal lie that Trump’s economic agenda helps only the rich.

Almost every prominent Democrat in the United States publicly criticized the president’s middle-class tax cuts, claiming that the initiative was nothing short of a “Ponzi scheme.”

“This is a shell game, a Ponzi scheme that corporate America will perpetrate on the American people,” Rep. Nancy Pelosi said in 2017. “But if you’re the wealthiest 1 percent, Republicans will give you the sun, the moon, and the stars—all of that at the expense of the great middle class.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders also denounced the proposal at the time, attempting to portray it as a tax cut for the wealthy. “Only 12 percent of Americans believe the wealthy should receive a tax cut,” he wrote in a tweet. “So of course, Republicans are trying to give the wealthy a huge tax cut.”

Even the mainstream media was happy to amplify the Democrats’ delusion, flooding the United States with a tsunami of biased analyses attempting to discredit the president’s economic vision.

Contrary to all this criticism, however, Trump’s economic agenda proved to be a winning formula for U.S. prosperity, creating robust GDP growth, a thriving labor market, and higher wages, enabling more people to climb out of poverty.

The same can’t be said of the true food stamp president, President Barack Obama.

According to the USDA, a record 20 percent of U.S. households were on food stamps in 2013—a full year into Obama’s second term in office.

The overall economy wasn’t doing very well, either—at the end of Obama’s first term, the unemployment rate was more than double its current mark, hovering above 8 percent for most of 2012.

Regrettably, the Democrats were far less vocal about the needs of the poor when they were the ones calling all the shots in Washington.

Indeed, liberals were mute when Obama’s policies hamstrung the U.S. economy and prolonged the recession. Where was the outrage over the disastrous unemployment rate or the record number of U.S. households on food stamps back then?

Now that the economy is booming once again, liberals have suddenly rediscovered their concern for the poor. They’re too late, though—Trump’s pro-growth policies are lifting people out of poverty and proving once and for all that the liberal welfare state is just a poverty trap.

Darrell Scott is CEO of the National Diversity Coalition for Trump, and a member of the Donald J. Trump for President Inc. advisory board.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

Democrats are out in public about their intentions now.

Republicans proposed a motion to reaffirm that only US citizens should have the right to vote.

But House Democrats voted in favor of supporting illegal aliens and other non-citizens voting in local elections, voting against the motion.

“The vote marks a stunning reversal from just six months ago, when the chamber — then under GOP control — voted to decry illegal immigrant voting,” The Washington Times reported. “The 228-197 vote came as part of a broader debate on Democrats’ major legislative priority this year, HR 1, the ‘For the People Act,’ which includes historic expansions of voter registration and access, as well as a major rewrite of campaign finance laws.”

“It sounds like I’m making it up,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) said. “What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?”

“Today I offered a motion to recommit #HR1 reaffirming that only US citizens should have the right to vote,” Crenshaw added on Twitter. “Dems rejected it. Next time you go to the ballot box, keep that in mind. The future of their party is in cities like San Fran, where illegals can vote. Let that sink in.”

Just six months ago, 49 Democrats joined Republicans in condemning the practice. Now only six Democrats did, all the others thought it was fine for non-citizens to vote.

While federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, local governments can determine if they want non-citizens to vote in other elections.

San Francisco, for example, recently began allowing non-citizens to vote in school board elections.

“We’ve watched Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens for a while now,” House Majority Whip Steve Scalise tweeted. “But today they took it a step further by blocking our motion to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in elections—effectively devaluing the vote of legitimate voters.”

Scalise explains how that then enables the person to get on the voter rolls and “maybe you catch it and maybe you don’t” if they end up voting then in other elections.

We've watched Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens for a while now. But today they took it a step further by blocking our motion to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in elections—effectively devaluing the vote of legitimate voters. pic.twitter.com/mEnXNCSsAA

— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) March 8, 2019

According to the Washington Times, Rep. John Lewis told colleagues, “We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in.”

And earlier in the week, when talking about HR 1, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said immigrants “make America more American,” and we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

From CNS:

“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said. “And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

They're exempt from consequences for bigoted speech and abusive actions because they are members of the 'correct' political party.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Far-left NBC News covered up its own findings about the effect Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) antisemitic remarks are having in her own home district.

Desperate to craft a puff-piece to protect Omar and the Democrat Party, NBC published the following headline Sunday night: “Far from Washington, Rep. Omar’s constituents see the Israel controversy in a different light.”

The story opens with this Pablum: “Rep. Ilhan Omar’s comments about Israel have consumed Washington. But here in Minnesota’s diverse 5th Congressional District, a pillar of progressivism that handed Omar a decisive victory in November’s midterm elections, there has been far less outrage.”

And in the opening graphs, we are told Omar’s antisemitic conspiracy theories about American Jews and Israel, which are no different than the garbage spewed by the alt-right, which have earned Omar the admiration of David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the KKK, are seen as no big deal back home:

In interviews here, including with residents who are Jewish and Muslim, few of Omar’s constituents voiced any anger at the lawmaker, even if they found the remarks troubling. One Jewish leader said she would be open to a good-faith foreign policy debate.

To the director of the Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center, a large mosque 10 miles south of this city, the furor is overblown.

“Anti-Semitism is real in this country,” Mohamed Omar, who is not related to the freshman Democrat, said in an interview in a private study, as children nearby hurried to Friday afternoon prayers. But the controversy, he said, is a “distraction.”

But buried under six paragraphs, we finally learn that Omar’s rabid antisemitism is in fact causing stress and worry at home:

Rabbi Marcia Zimmerman of Temple Israel, a Reform Jewish congregation that is the oldest synagogue in this city, said many of members of her community have called her over the last month to say they were troubled by Omar’s comments.

“I don’t know the intention, but I know the impact. The words have been hurtful,” Zimmerman said in the tranquil lobby of the 141-year-old temple, surrounded by 12 floor-to-ceiling windows that symbolize the Torah’s 12 tribes of Israel. She added that the comments are especially problematic amid a recent spike in anti-Semitic incidents nationwide.

NBC’s cover-up is also contradicted by reporting found elsewhere.

SF Gate found that Omar’s hate is dividing longstanding ties between Minnesota’s Jewish and Somali communities. “Omar’s words sting at home, threatening to strain ties of Jewish and Somali Minnesotans,” the headline reads. The story continues:

In Minnesota’s Twin Cities, Jews and Somali immigrants have been partners for decades.

When Somali refugees arrived in Minnesota, starting in 1993, Jewish leaders saw echoes of their forebears who faced virulent anti-Semitism as newcomers to the state more than a century before. The communities developed strong ties, joining to fight hunger and illiteracy and raising money for one another in response to discrimination and threats of violence.

Then came the election to Congress last year of Ilhan Omar, a Somali immigrant who spent four years in a refugee camp as a child and arrived in Minnesota as a teenager.

An outspoken critic of Israel, Omar has courted controversy with provocative remarks that some say invoke anti-Semitic stereotypes. The pattern has alarmed many Jews, and as Omar faced yet another firestorm last week, community leaders on both sides voiced pain and confusion, fearing that the comments could damage an alliance they have spent years trying to nurture.

Omar’s hatred of Jews and most especially Israel have forced the Democrat Party to finally reveal its long-simmering antisemitism, which harkens back to the Party’s role in founding and protecting the Ku Klux Klan, especially in the Deep South.

Last week the Democrat Party, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, basically came out of the anti-Jewish closet by refusing to specifically condemn antisemitism after Omar, for the third time in just two months, spewed obscene stereotypes about Jews, Israel, and money.

All the Democrats could bring themselves to do was condemn “all hate.”

That one of America’s two major political parties cannot bring itself to specifically condemn antisemitism has a lot of Americans worried, not just those in Omar’s home district.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Fox News host Judge Jeanine Pirro's Opening Statement went full throttle on congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Pirro blasted Omar's hateful and anti-Semitic tropes against Israel. Pirro shifted her Opening Statement towards

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Presisdent Trump will seek a total of $8.6 billion for border wall funding from Congress as part of the White House's upcoming budget proposal for the next fiscal year, sources tell Fox News, although the move faces all-but-certain rejection in Congress.

Medium

Published  1 month ago

In an interview with the Washington Post yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she opposed the pursuit of the impeachment…

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

On Thursday, on a party line vote, Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats in the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1, dubbed the “For the People Act of 2019.” It is a massive federal intrusion into the states’ constitutionally-protected realm of regulating and maintaining voter rolls.

It’s also a recipe for voter fraud. Republicans in the House correctly derided it as a “voter fraud and election theft” bill. But that understates how bad it is. H.R. 1 rolls out the red carpet for election fraud.

This is true in multiple respects. A few of the most outrageous provisions in the bill are the following:

Preventing states from requiring proof of citizenship. The problem of aliens registering to vote has become one of the greatest threats to the integrity of American elections. In many states, the number of aliens on the voter rolls is in the thousands. Four states — Kansas, Arizona, Alabama, and Georgia — have addressed this problem by enacting laws requiring proof of citizenship to register. As Kansas secretary of state, I drafted our law and then defended it against the ACLU’s attacks in court. (The case is now on appeal in the Tenth Circuit.)

All of that would be in vain if the H.R. 1 were to become law. The bill prohibits states from requiring proof of citizenship by declaring that mere “attestation” of citizenship on a voter registration form is enough. That’s ridiculous. It has also been demonstrated empirically to be false. In defending the Kansas law in court, I presented more than a hundred instances of aliens who had knowingly or unknowingly checked the box claiming to be citizens when registering to vote. Asking registrants to check a box declaring their citizenship is utterly ineffective in ensuring that only U.S. citizens are registered to vote.

And we have already seen elections that have likely been stolen by aliens voting. The infamous J.J. Rizzo v. Will Royster primary election for the Missouri legislature in 2010 is such a case. There, some 50 Somali nationals who were coached to vote for Rizzo tipped the election for him — he won by a margin of exactly one vote.

But even when illegal votes by aliens don’t change the outcome of an election, they do effectively disenfranchise U.S. citizens. Every time an alien votes, it cancels out the vote of a citizen. If H.R. 1 were to become law, this sort of disenfranchisement would become even more widespread.

Voting is the most precious right of citizenship. Yet many on the Left are willing to give it away to non-citizens. The Democrat stronghold of San Francisco now allows aliens to vote in school board elections. During the deliberation on H.R. 1, Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) offered a motion to recommit which would have expressed the sense of Congress that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.” The motion would have sent the bill back to committee for such language to be added by amendment. All but six House Democrats voted against the motion, killing it.

Enabling people to easily vote at multiple addresses. H.R. 1 also makes it easy for fraudsters to vote multiple times at multiple polling places. Now, most states use provisional ballots to deal with the fact that voters sometimes change their residence but forget to change their registration address. You get to vote at the polling place near your new residence, but you use a provisional ballot. This allows the election officials to verify in the days after the election that your new address is indeed correct and that you didn’t also vote at your old address. Your vote is then added to the official tally.

But, inexplicably, that’s not good enough for the authors of H.R. 1. The bill would compel election officials across America to allow any voter to walk into any polling place and assert that he now lives at a new address in that district — and then be given a regular ballot, not a provisional one. At that point, the voter’s ballot is cast and then intermingled with the other ballots. If it were later discovered that the person lied and does not live in the district, it would be too late to do anything about it.

Even worse, the fraudster could do it all day long, going into separate polling places and declaring a new address each time. Election officials might eventually discover the crime, but the damage would already be done; and the fraudulent votes could not be removed from the totals.

Dumping duplicate names and bad data into state election databases. Voter roll databases are difficult enough to keep accurate as it is. Every year millions of Americans change addresses or die. For example, the Pew Center on the States studied this problem in 2012 and found that there were over 1.8 million deceased individuals on voter rolls across the country. The number of people who are registered in multiple states was even higher — approximately 2.75 million. In total, approximately 24 million voter records (or one out of eight) were invalid or significantly inaccurate.

H.R. 1 would make this problem much worse. It forces states to dump data from their various government databases, as well as from federal databases, into the voter rolls in order to “automatically” register voters. The problem is that most of those databases are even less accurate than the voter rolls are. The addition of this garbage data into the states’ voter rolls would create millions more duplicate and inaccurate names on the voter rolls, each of which would present an opportunity for individuals to commit voter fraud.

Usurping the constitutional role of the states. The United States Constitution gives the states primary responsibility for determining the “time, place, and manner” of elections in Article I, Section 4. Congress is allowed to modify those rules regarding the time, place, and manner of federal elections. However, Article I, Section 2, affirms that the states have sole authority to determine the qualifications for voting in each state, and by extension the qualifications for becoming registered to vote.

The authors of H.R. 1 evidently are not familiar with that part of the Constitution. Nor are those representatives who voted for it. If H.R. 1 ever became law, it would eviscerate Article I, Section 2. It would replace state rules for determining who is a qualified voter with a one-size-fits-all federal system. The bill even gets into the minutia of determining the content of state mailings to voters and the content of state election websites.

These are only a few of the many flaws in H.R. 1. For the sake of brevity, I will end the list here.

Fortunately, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate will not advance the bill; and President Trump has made clear that he would veto it if it came to his desk. But beware: This invitation for voter fraud will likely be offered again when Democrats next control the Senate.

Kris W. Kobach served as the Secretary of State of Kansas 2011–2019. In that capacity he authored Kansas’s Secure and Fair Elections (SAFE) Act of 2011. An expert in immigration law and policy, he coauthored the Arizona SB-1070 immigration law and represented in federal court the ten ICE agents who sued to stop Obama’s 2012 DACA executive amnesty. During 2001–2003, he served as U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s chief adviser on immigration and border security at the U.S. Department of Justice. His website is kriskobach.com.

The Old School Patriot

Published  1 month ago

Howdy, y’all!

Yes it is once again time for our end of week comic relief known as “Stuck on Stupid Saturday.” Now, for those of us who are serious college basketball fans, this is the time of year we affectionately call “March Madness.” But, there is a clear and present madness playing out in Washington, DC. Yes, there can be no denial, this week’s Old School Patriot Stuck on Stupid recognition goes to the young freshmen Democrat Members of Congress I have dubbed, The Four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse.” Uh huh, these four dubious young ladies, Alexandria “da Boss” Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley — in just two and a half months — have made quite the splash . . . but for the wrong reasons.

“Well, if you thought there would be a day where the far left wing of the House Democratic caucus would quiet down a bit, given their anti-Semitism issues, you’d be wrong. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) sent a fundraising email last night suggesting that AIPAC was coming after her and that the U.S.-Israeli relationship should be severed. No, I’m not kidding. This is insanity. AOC has been one of the few defenders [which includes Louis Farrakhan] of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), who once again was accused of anti-Semitism for suggesting those who support Israel are exhibiting dual loyalty. The latter is a common anti-Semitic smear. Omar has also peddled the talking point about Jewish money and influence with her “all about the Benjamins” tweet.

In 2012, she [Omar] said that Israel had hypnotized the world. She’s run the gauntlet on this front. The recent dual loyalty fiasco has given her party leadership heartburn, exposing its fractured points with this resolution that condemns anti-Semitism, which has been watered down because…apparently, there are a lot of Democrats who don’t think this is an issue. They’re just angry that their side is being pilloried for peddling bigotry when they wanted the entire focus to be on Trump and his phantom prejudices. So, after days of anti-Semitic theater, AOC decided to blast this fundraising email (via NTK Network):

“Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is calling for an end to the United States’ special relationship with Israel while the House debated condemning all forms of hate speech, including anti-Semitism, on Thursday. The House of Representatives was debating condemning anti-Semitism on Thursday because of anti-Semitic comments made by Ocasio-Cortez’s friend and fellow member of Congress, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), which were directed at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). “It’s official — AIPAC is coming after Alexandria, Ilhan, and Rashida,” the email said. “Rashida, Ilhan, and Alexandria have times dated to questions out foreign policy, and the influence of money in our political system. And now, lobbying groups across the board are working to punish them.”

The email then asked for people to contribute to help “keep up the fight against lobbying and special interests of all forms in Washington.” The email then appeared to call for an end to the United States’ special relationship with Israel. “In this administration and all others, there should be no special relationship or status,” the email said. “We should actively check anti-Semitism, anti-blackness, homophobia, racism, and all other forms of bigotry.”

As for this faux resolution that said everybody is bad, what a joke! But, these loud voices have, frankly, made Nancy Pelosi cower to their insidious demands. Yes, these four young Marxist/Islamist Princesses have completely thrown the party of the jackass on its arse.

Rep, Tlaib, who is facing FEC violation allegations, ranted that by the end of this month she will introduce articles of impeachment on President Trump. Well, that cat is outta the bag.

Not to be outdone, Rep. Pressley of Massachusetts, brought to the floor a bill to lower the voting age to 16. Uh huh, sweet 16. Now, I do not know about y’all, but at the tender age of 16, I was focused on my studies, football, track, and well, girls . . . not to mention my part-time job. I was not focused on politics, then again, we did not have social media nor teachers who were endeavoring to indoctrinate us.

These four are completely dominating the information cycle and the direction of what was once the Democrat Party, now it is the Socialist Party. Rep. Omar has now turned her sights on Barack Obama. Bold. However, the excuses for Omar are laughable, one stating that she comes from a different culture. Nancy Pelosi made comments alluding to Omar’s inability to understand the language, words, that she is using. Hey y’all, I call total bovine excrement. Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, and Pressley all know what they are doing. And, it appears that Nancy Pelosi does not mind being on the cover of Rolling Stone with the Four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse. After all, we only have 12 years until the world ends, so we should stop having children.

Do not be deceived, there are those out there cheering these four on, and they are indeed a special kind of stupid. But what is truly perplexing is that these four are not the ones who enabled Nancy Pelosi to once again be the Speaker of the House. But, doggone, they are going to make sure that she is not Speaker after 2020. When was the last time you heard about any of those “moderate” Democrats who won in GOP congressional districts?

I must say, I do admire these four young women for their abject boldness. I truly admire them for that. The progressive socialist left will fight vehemently even in knowing what they are fighting for is dumb. Republicans can have all the right ideals, principles, policies, and perspectives . . . but they lack courage, as a whole.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has come to Washington, DC, and even when displaying utter ignorance at times — a true socialist quality — she is relentless. She gets support, but this is what the progressive socialist left has always wanted. Ilhan Omar is a Somali refugee, saved by the benevolence of these United States of America. Now she is turning her hatred upon this very country, and our ally.

They are telling us who they are, and that they do not play by the established rules. The GOP needs Four Horsemen, or Women, who will take the ideological field of battle and finally, fight back against the “Stuck on Stupid crowd.”

I am very sure that this will not be the last time these four receive this distinction. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley, congratulations, you are the recipients of this week’s “Stuck on Stupid Saturday” award.

During his 22 year career in the United States Army, Lieutenant Colonel West served in several combat zones and received many honors including a Bronze Star, three Meritorious Service Medals, three Army Commendation Medals, one with Valor device, and a Valorous Unit Award.

In November of 2010, Allen was elected to the United States Congress, representing Florida’s 22nd District.

He is a Fox News Contributor, Director of the Booker T. Washington Initiative at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Senior Fellow at the Media Research Center, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of Guardian of the Republic: An American Ronin’s Journey to Family, Faith and Freedom, and, Hold Texas, Hold the Nation: Victory or Death, published October 16, 2018, from Brown Books Publishing Group.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Last week, Thomas Friedman, the columnist for the New York Times penned a column about his obvious connection to Rep. Ilhan Omar, the newly elected firebrand from Minnesota’s Fifth District—a Democratic stronghold.

Friedman was raised there. He called the district a "crazy mix of Minnesota Jews (we called ourselves "the Frozen Chosen”)" that welcomed Somali refugees like 37-year-old "a half-century later" and elected her to Congress.

The Washington Post reported that Somali refugees started to arrive in the state back in 1993 and, despite their cultural differences, these groups came together to work for the common good. But recent comments by Omar has reportedly strained the relationship in the community.

MEGHAN McCAIN ACCUSES JEWISH ARTIST OF ANTI-SEMITISM AFTER MOCKING OMAR COMMENT

Omar Jamal, a Somali community activist, told the Post that he has been in touch with Jewish leaders after Omar's comments viewed by some as anti-Semitic. He supported her campaign but called her recent comments, "wrong, period," according to the report.

"This is up to Ilhan Omar," he said. "She has really spoken in a very dangerous way, and it’s going to be up to her to reach out to people and fix this."

The paper reported that one Jewish leader showed Omar a picture of a cousin who was killed in WWII and said that is why questioning dual loyalty is offensive.

Avi S. Olitzky, a senior rabbi in St. Louis Park, which is in the Fifth District, told The Star-Tribune that Omar’s comments have been a clear attack on the Jewish community.

Omar has apologized for her comments and has support from her Democratic colleagues. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi raised eyebrows on Friday when she said the congresswoman “doesn’t understand” that some of the words she uses are "fraught with meaning."

Omar – who filled the House seat that was held by Keith Ellison -- also took aim at former President Obama in an interview with Politico on Friday, saying his message of “hope” and “change” was a “mirage.”

"Recalling the ‘caging of kids’ at the U.S.-Mexico border and the ‘droning of countries around the world’ on Obama’s watch," Omar charged that Obama "operated within the same fundamentally broken framework as his Republican successor,” the piece read.

“We can’t be only upset with Trump… His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies," Omar reportedly said. "They just were more polished than he was."

Omar’s rhetoric has been embraced by some. Her proponents see her attack on AIPAC as bold. Amber Harris, a constituent, told the Star-Tribune that the attacks against Omar are unfair and “obscene.”

“She’s trying to change the Democratic Party to what I think it should be,” she said.

Friedman, for his part, pointed out in his column that he has a lot in common with Omar, but said his dislike of Aipac is based on that fact that it has “let itself become the slavish, unthinking tool of Netanyahu, who opposes a two-state solution, I believe Aipac works against Israel’s long-term interests.”

He wrote that evidence that he's seen suggests that Omar's dislike for Aipac is based on a dislike for Israel.

"Ilhan Omar represents, among other neighborhoods, a significant and liberal Jewish community — my hometown," he wrote. “I can tell you that a vast majority of Jews there would be proud if their congresswoman used her links to American Jews and Muslims to be a bridge builder for peace in the Middle East and America, not just another Aipac/Israel basher. She is young and very new to the national spotlight. Friends of mine back home tell me her humanistic instincts are impressive and authentic. I don’t know if it’s her or her advisers, but she’s gotten herself into a bad place — a huge missed leadership opportunity.

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

Democrats desperately want to turn the page on a painful week, but doing so is proving to be difficult.

The Daily Signal

Published  1 month ago

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of the forthcoming "First Freedom: A Ride through America's Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today."

Rep. Ilhan Omar argues that American “democracy is built on debate,” tweeting, “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee.” I’m sure no decent person disagrees with her comment. Also, every sane person understands this is merely a deflection from Omar’s many anti-Semitic comments.

No one asked her—or anyone else—to pledge allegiance to a foreign nation. It’s her belief that supporting the Jewish state, a longtime ideological and geopolitical ally of the United States, is an act of dual loyalty—either by Jews or by others who, as Omar might say, have been “hypnotized” to do “evil.” She is the one who accuses Jewish Americans, a group that has played a robust role in the nation’s civic life for a long time, of doing the bidding of a foreign power to the detriment of their own.

Just as no one is forcing Omar to take a position on Israel—much less pledge allegiance to it—no one is attacking her right to free speech. This isn’t Eritrea—a country Omar recently visited and was quite impressed by—where a dictatorship can arrest and torture citizens for taking unpopular positions. If Omar’s moral compass tells her to advocate for terrorists and theocrats, she’s free to do so. Americans are likewise free to point it out.

But Democrats’ draft measure condemning anti-Semitism is a useless and transparent attempt to distract from a serious problem of their own creation. The decree mentions Alfred Dreyfus, Leo Frank, Henry Ford, and “anti-Muslim bigotry”—because hey, even when Jews are being smeared, it’s about Islamophobia—but not once does it condemn Omar or the strain of hatred she is helping normalize on the left. The resolution, teeming with useless platitudes, is one that even Omar could probably support.

It’s also worth remembering that it was only after a handful of Jewish Democrats, such as Eliot Engel, objected to Omar’s comments that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was forced to act—or rather, pretend to act.

Even now, a number of pundits on the left, including columnists for The Washington Post and The Atlantic, argue that Omar—as well as fellow anti-Semite Rep. Rashida Tlaib—operates within the parameters of acceptable debate. Omar could read portions of the Hamas Charter into the Congressional Record, and The New York Times would tell us her “latest remarks on Israel draw criticism.”

Another tactic taken up by Democrats is trolling for supposedly anti-Semitic comments by Republicans to deflect and dilute the attention on Omar. This week, Democrats found one such straw man when the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, Jim Jordan, spelled liberal donor Tom Steyer’s name with a dollar sign in a tweet. Liberals across the media quickly took up the cause: “Gee whiz, what if Ilhan Omar had done this?!”

Well, if Omar had inserted a dollar sign into the name of a Jewish donor, considering her history, we’d have to assume she was clumsily trying to make another bigoted comment.

There’s absolutely nothing anti-Semitic about calling out Steyer—and other billionaires who spend millions every cycle helping political causes. Steyer, perhaps more than anyone, in fact, is known for advocating the impeachment of Donald Trump.

So when House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler issued document requests from 81 people and organizations in a massive trolling investigation for “obstruction,” Jordan reacted as people in both political parties tend to do, by accusing the other party of being bought by big donors and special interests.

Moreover, Steyer grew up with a nonpracticing Jewish dad and became involved in the Episcopal Church when he was 40. I certainly had no idea that “$teyer” had any Jewish background. His surname isn’t Jewish. He’s not a supporter of Jewish causes. If anything, he’s been a longtime supporter of anti-Israel candidates and organizations.

But Democrats, who hear dog whistles at every mention of “globalist,” can’t get their ire up when one of their own drops tropes that date back to at least “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Congress, of course, really has no business setting guidelines for acceptable political speech. Pelosi does, however, have the power to name committee appointees. And with this power, she decided to place a doltish hater of Jews, someone with radical positions and absolutely no relevant experience, on the House Foreign Affairs Committee to appease the growing anti-Israel contingent in her party.

She did this knowing about Omar’s history of anti-Semitic tweets, radicalism, and support of Hamas. Last week, Pelosi was mugging on the cover of the celebratory issue of Rolling Stone with Omar and her bestie, apologist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. These, claims the magazine, are “women shaping the future.” If so, that will be Pelosi’s legacy.

Blunt Force Truth

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now making excuses for anti-Semite and freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar.

“I don’t think our colleague is anti-Semitic, I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn’t understand that some of them are fraught with meaning that she didn’t realize,” Pelosi told the Washington, D.C. Economic Club.

Omar went after President Obama in an interview with Politico, the New York Post reports:

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Bernie Sanders issued a statement defending Rep. Ilhan Omar and 'legitimate criticism' of Israel.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), one of Congress’s most ardent supporters of Israel, plans to introduce a resolution explicitly condemning antisemitism next week, according to a report.

Jewish Insider, citing “a source familiar with the plan,” reported that the Texas Republican is helping to a draft a measure which is solely a “condemnation of anti-Semitism.”

“There’s nothing extraneous. The entire thing clocks in at just over 100 words,” the source told Jewish Insider. It is unclear whether the text will mention Rep. Ilan Omar (D-MN), whose latest anti-Jewish remarks prompted the House of Representatives to pass an anti-hate resolution Thursday. Last week, Omar received bipartisan blowback for suggesting pro-Israel organizations pressure lawmakers into pledging allegiance to a foreign country.

The resolution, which passed 407-23, was publically panned by several Republicans, including House Conference Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-WY) joined Reps. Lee Zeldin (R-NY), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), because it failed to mention Omar by name. The expansion of its scope — from antisemitism alone to “all hate” — was a bid to end dissension among Democrats over freshman congresswoman Omar’s latest remarks on Israel.

“If [Omar] was a Republican, that member’s name would be in this resolution and this resolution would be all about condemning antisemitism and it would be done so forcefully,” Zeldin said in a fiery House floor speech. “Even if you gave [Omar] every benefit of the doubt, that she had no idea what she was doing, why now wouldn’t she be apologizing? Why would she be more emboldened to refuse an apology altogether? I apparently am giving Rep. Omar more credit than the speaker is because I don’t believe she is naive.”

In a press conference Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refused to call on Omar to apologize, claiming the Minnesota Democrat was unaware her that her antisemitic remark would be interpreted as such.

“I do not believe she understood the full weight of her words. These words have a history and a cultural impact,” the House Speaker told reporters.

Omar apologized last year for a 2012 tweet in which she said Israel had “hypnotized” America. And last month, she apologized for suggesting that Republicans support Israel because they are paid to do so by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Of note, the pro-Israel group does not make donations to political candidates.

Pelosi and House Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY) criticized Omar for pushing the anti-Jewish trope. Engel called the freshman’s remarks about divided loyalties a “vile antisemitic slur” and demanded that she apologize immediately.

Ahead of touring of tornado-stricken parts of Alabama and Georgia, President Donald Trump criticized Democrats for failing to condemn Omar, saying, “They’ve become an anti-Israel party, they have become an anti-Jewish party.”

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

There’s no doubt that the shifting demographics in America favors Democrats at the ballot box. Over the last few decades we’ve seen solid red states like California go blue and we all saw that Ted Cruz only won in Texas by a few points. Arizona just elected a radical leftist senator. There is definitely a shift happening. Immigration has played a huge part in that shift but there are obviously other factors as well.

Democrats understand this shift and they understand that they have momentum in places like ten years ago they didn’t have a shot. Nancy Pelosi recently spoke a little bit about it and you might be surprised where she said ‘ground zero’ will be in the 2020 election.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said this week that Texas will be “ground zero” for Democrats in 2020 and predicted that when Texas turns blue soon, it will change the country and the world.

“Texas is ground zero for us in the next election,” Pelosi reportedly said at the Travis County Democratic Party’s Johnson Bentsen Richards Dinner. “When you helped win in 2018, you were doing something very patriotic for America and when we win a great Democratic victory — and it’s essential that we win the victory in 2020 — we will know that that victory was our destiny.”

Pelosi told activists to know the power that they have to change the country—and the world—by turning Texas blue and giving Democrats the Lone Star State’s 38 Electoral College votes.

To be fair, Democrats floated the idea of Hillary doing well in Texas back in 2016 and she got destroyed. However, it would be silly to dismiss what Pelosi is saying. If Democrats were to turn Texas blue you can kiss the idea of a Republican being president again goodbye. Could a candidate like Beto win a Texas general election? It seems ridiculous but then again he came fairly close to beating Ted Cruz.

At the very least, Republicans should take these threats seriously.

Here’s some interesting data from the Beto/Cruz race if you’re into that kind of thing.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Women’s March co-founder Linda Sarsour explained Friday how she and other left-wing organizers influenced the final language of the “anti-hate” resolution that passed the House Thursday night.

The resolution, initially launched as a rebuke exclusively against anti-Semitism following remarks made by Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, was later broadened to include all forms of bigotry. Sarsour in her video took credit for convincing House Democratic leadership for “expanding the language of the resolution to include condemning all forms of bigotry.” (RELATED: Democratic Rebuke Against Anti-Semitism Becomes Resolution Against Everything Else)

????Sarsour explaining how she, CAIR and other Mu$lim organizations took control of the House, protected Omar, and demanded Pelosi rewrite the censure to include all forms of hate.

Sarsour delivered a letter to Pelosi with over 500 agency signatures. ????Look inside for more info pic.twitter.com/pLnDoMF83p

— Cindyseestruth (@cs00582scs) March 9, 2019

The Women’s March co-founder attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last Tuesday for initially allowing the anti-Semitism resolution, saying in a Facebook post, “Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

However, according to Sarsour Friday, she and her fellow organizers worked behind the scenes to change the original intent of the non-binding resolution by the end of the week. (RELATED: Democrat Anti-Hate Resolution Passes House)

Democrats argued with one another last Wednesday over the resolution’s language. Washington Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the progressive caucus’s leader, did not want Omar’s name in the resolution, while a number of Jewish members reportedly pushed to include it. Ultimately, the resolution omitted Omar’s name.

“Friends, our supporters, you know the Women’s March we’re going through some rough times and if you know anything about this past week, I’m going to give you some ideas of what we did this week. So, many of you know that our sister Congresswoman Ilhan Omar was under attack,” Sarsour said.

She continued, “And you know being able to mobilize progressive leaders across the country to sign on to a letter to organize a press conference in support of Ilhan Omar to call on the Democratic leadership to actually expand the language of the resolution to include condemning all forms of bigotry because that’s the kind of movement we’re apart of.”

“The women’s march is a movement that unequivocally rejects all forms of racism and anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia and that’s what we called on the Democratic leadership to do — that in our lifetime we made history with a resolution that is going to be in the public record for life,” Sarsour added.

Follow Kerry on Twitter

Kerry Picket is a host on SiriusXM Patriot 125

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill aimed at allowing illegal aliens to vote. While celebrating their victory, Speaker Nancy Pelosi took to the mic. Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat - Just Cover

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar, the not ready for prime time Democrat from Minnesota just can’t seem to get out of her own way these days. Already mired in controversy over an anti-Semitic remark about dual loyalty that resulted in a (watered down) rebuke from the Democrat-run House, the freshman lawmaker finds herself knee-deep in another spat […]

David Harris Jr

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says that Americans are suppressing the votes of 12 to 30 million illegal aliens. Miss Nancy, do you realize what illegal means? No, it’s not a sick bird. It means breaking the law. Should we ever decide to allow illegals to vote or grant amnesty and citizenship to the illegals, the Democrats would absolutely dominate the elections. That is how we got Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. Both districts have a huge number of Muslim refugees. The Democrats are getting bolder, and the only way to slow them down is for a red wave to hit in 2020 and reduce Democrats back to the minority.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said the United States must not suppress the vote of newly arrived legal immigrants — including those foreign nationals who arrive en masse at the U.S.-Mexico border.

During a press conference in Austin, Texas this week, Pelosi admitted that the goal for the country’s mass illegal and legal immigration system is to ensure the more than 1.5 million new arrivals who come to the U.S. every year are on the voter rolls.

Pelosi added that it is immigrants, not American citizens, who make the nation “more American.”

When we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families. And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. [Emphasis added]

And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America. [Emphasis added]

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is making another sad excuse for Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic verbiage.

Pelosi’s support of Omar is almost like the Democratic Party openly endorsing anti-Semitism.

Exclusive Trump 2020 Coin – YOURS FREE

Instead of condemning Omar’s hateful words towards Israel and the Jewish culture, the Democrats keep defending her and coming up with different excuses for her bad behavior in congress.

Pelosi tried to say that Omar “has a different experience in the use of words” — but that’s nonsense.

Omar has lived in America long enough, since 1995, to know exactly what she’s saying is hurtful to many Americans and those in Israel.

If President Trump said the same things Omar said, the Democrats wouldn’t let him sleep a single night peacefully until he apologized.

However, when a Democrat says something terrible, the Democrats stand up for them regardless of how wrong it is.

Pelosi is a perfect example of a Democrat defending bad behavior practiced by another Democrat.

Pelosi defends Rep. Omar: she “has a different experience in the use of words”https://t.co/DgxoNPgc3g pic.twitter.com/lAzIBHEtpM

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 8, 2019

An opinion piece in the NY Post stated that Democrats dislike people who are hateful, unless that person is part of their party.

“Democrats hate hate — but when it comes to a hater in their own midst, they’ll make excuses or even elevate the bigot.

Because Democratic leaders publicly bent over backward to excuse Omar’s continued use of classic anti-Jewish tropes. Pelosi claimed she “doesn’t believe” that Omar’s comments were “intended in any anti-Semitic way,” and that the resolution is “not about her.” No. 2 House Democrat Steny Hoyer also insisted Omar isn’t anti-Semitic.”

How long will it take for Democrats to wake up and realize that some of the members in their party are hurtful to their cause then they divide the country with anti-Semitic remarks?

Will Democrats ever condemn Omar’s statements or remove her from government?

Many Americans hope so.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Move over Speaker Pelosi — the Radicals are in charge now.

Radical Democrat and anti-Semite Rep. Ilhan Omar went after Barack Obama in her latest interview.

This comes the day after Democrats failed to condemn her for her anti-Semitic attacks in the past few weeks.

You know your party’s in trouble with Nancy Pelosi looks like the sane one of the bunch.

The New York Post reported:

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

“His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies. They just were more polished than he was,” Omar said.

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore. We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

The explosive comments about a man lionized by Democrats were only the latest in a series of incendiary statements that have put the national spotlight on Omar, a Somali-American Muslim who spent four years in a refugee camp in Kenya after her family fled the violence in their homeland.

New York Post

Published  1 month ago

Enlarge Image

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

“His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies. They just were more polished than he was,” Omar said.

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore. We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

The explosive comments about a man lionized by Democrats were only the latest in a series of incendiary statements that have put the national spotlight on Omar, a Somali-American Muslim who spent four years in a refugee camp in Kenya after her family fled the violence in their homeland.

In February, her second month in office, Omar responded to a tweet about House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy’s threats to punish her and another congresswoman for criticizing Israel.

“It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she tweeted, a line from a Puff Daddy song about $100 bills.

Critics said Omar was perpetuating a hateful trope about Jewish Americans and money.

She recently got into another hot mess after another tweet was slammed by some as anti-Semitic.

The ensuing firestorm rattled the Democratic House majority and spurred days of recriminations and tense negotiations that led to the compromise package condemning bigotry that sailed through the House on Thursday, with only 23 Republicans voting against it.

The party’s leftist wing, led by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said Omar was being singled out when others at the highest levels of government had said things that were worse and escaped censure.

More moderate Dems, including Jewish lawmakers such as New York’s Eliot Engle, wanted the resolution to focus only on anti-Semitism as a direct response to Omar’s comment, which questioned the loyalty of politicians who accept donations from pro-Israel PACs and organizations.

Ultimately, after days of chaos and acrimony, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was able to unite her caucus — and box in a big majority of Republicans — to back the compromise.

And Omar — along with Rashida Tlaib of Michigan the first Muslim women in Congress — said she’s willing to keep speaking out and be a Republican punching bag if it helps advance her agenda, a prospect that likely makes many of her fellow Democrats cringe.

HuffPost

Published  1 month ago

Unable to play video. HTML5 is not supported!

Content loading...

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is still throwing shade at President Donald Trump’s southern border wall, painting it as nothing more than than a cheap campaign promise.

“We’re not talking about funding a wall, we’re talking about funding a campaign applause line,” she said during a talk at the Economic Club of Washington, D.C., on Friday with the organization’s president, David Rubenstein.

Pelosi has been a staunch opponent of Trump’s efforts to gain additional funding for the U.S.-Mexico barrier, having stood firm against his demands for some $5.7 billion amid a historically long 35-day government shutdown that ended in January.

“There was nothing serious, scientific, evidence-based that a wall was what was going to be the best way to secure our borders,” she added. “We all are there to secure our borders. We take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, the American people, our country, and we honor that.”

Furthering her point, the congresswoman noted that the majority of trade, immigration and tourism between both countries occurs at legal ports of entry, stressing that a wall “is not the way that we relate to other countries, other people.”

In retaliation for Congress’ decision to appropriate only $1.375 billion for border security, Trump declared a national emergency last month in an attempt to access more money. That declaration is currently being challenged in multiple lawsuits, including one by California and 15 other states arguing it is unconstitutional.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar has panned President Barack Obama's message of "hope and change", calling it a "mirage" in an explosive interview.

David Harris Jr

Published  1 month ago

AOC and her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, are now still shown as controlling the PAC, Justice Democrats PAC, which is being used to attack Nancy Pelosi. It is the same PAC that could send AOC to prison for up to five years because they hid their control from the FEC and created a slush fund of over 1 million dollars. It shows that AOC and Chakrabarti took control of the PAC in December of 2017, and they still retain control as of Wednesday of this week, even though they removed AOC’s name as governor of the PAC.

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti obtained majority control of Justice Democrats PAC in December 2017, according to archived copies of the group’s website, and the two appear to retain their control of the group, according to corporate filings obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. If the Federal Election Commission (FEC) finds that the New York Democrat’s campaign operated in affiliation with the PAC, which had raised more than $1.8 million before her June 2018 primary, it would open them up to “massive reporting violations, probably at least some illegal contribution violations exceeding the lawful limits,” former FEC commissioner Brad Smith said.

Ocasio-Cortez never disclosed to the FEC that she and Chakrabarti, who served as her campaign chair, controlled the PAC while it was simultaneously supporting her primary campaign, and former FEC commissioners say the arrangement could lead to multiple campaign finance violations. The group backed 12 Democrats during the 2018 midterms, but Ocasio-Cortez was the only one of those to win her general election.

“If the facts as alleged are true, and a candidate had control over a PAC that was working to get that candidate elected, then that candidate is potentially in very big trouble and may have engaged in multiple violations of federal campaign finance law, including receiving excessive contributions,” former Republican FEC commissioner Hans von Spakovsky told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

SARAH PALIN

Published  1 month ago

After repeatedly condemning the nation of Israel and those who support it in a series of anti-Semitic comments, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has picked up an endorsement from David Duke.

“David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and an open racist and antisemite, is publicly defending Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) in the wake of the freshman Democrat’s series of antisemitic statements that have rankled the Democrat Party nationally,” Breitbart reports.

In one tweet, Duke calls Omar “the most important member of the U.S. Congress.”

“Simply stated, she is important because the dared expose the gorilla in Congress that nobody dares speak,” Duke said in another tweet.

Here’s more from Breitbart:

Duke has been a lightning rod in American politics for years, and in recent years the media and left have gone after Republicans–particularly President Trump–for having been praised by him. During the 2016 presidential campaign, the media demanded repeatedly that Trump disavow Duke–which he did. But now Duke has endorsed Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI)–a Hawaiian Democrat–in the 2020 presidential election.

This is not the first time Duke has taken up Omar’s cause either. Back in early February, when she first came under the national spotlight for anti-Semitism at the beginning of the new Congress, Duke backed her up publicly as well.

Duke’s decision to back Omar now comes in the wake of several Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and presidential candidates like Sens Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), as well as many other Democrats, refusing to demand that Omar apologize and attempting to explain away her comments as somehow not deliberately anti-Semitic.

As the Hill reports, Gabbard vehemently denounced the endorsement.

“I have strongly denounced David Duke’s hateful views and his so-called ‘support’ multiple times in the past, and reject his support,” Gabbard said.

An op-ed from the Washington Examiner adds:

Duke issued a series of tweets today saying that freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar’s string of obviously anti-Semitic statements and actions make her “the most important member of the U.S. Congress.” Duke, whose 50-year history as a Nazi sympathizer and former KKK leader is well-documented, meant it as high praise.

In January, Omar said the nation of Israel has hypnosis over the entire world. In February, the Minnesota Democrat said people who support Israel were bought off by Jews. And, most recently in March, she said if someone supports the American-Israeli relationship then they must have pledged allegiance to a foreign government.

According to the op-ed, mainstream media outlets will undoubtedly treat Duke’s endorsement of a Democrat differently than the way they pounced on Duke’s campaign endorsement of Trump. Trump immediately and repeatedly denounced the endorsement.

Check it out:

First, Omar herself should be repeatedly questioned about whether she accepts Duke’s endorsement and about why her views and his dovetail so nicely. Second, every Democrat should be asked, in light of Duke’s embrace of Omar, why the Democratic caucus shouldn’t be seen as Duke-friendly because it refused to adopt a resolution specifically denouncing Omar’s anti-Semitism.

This bears repeating: If the Duke-Omar embrace isn’t turned into a universal question for all Democratic House members, the media will have failed as an institution to act in a professional, even-handed manner.

If the media will not hold Democrats to the same standard, then it should forever ignore all of Duke’s efforts to thrust himself into the news merely by saying or tweeting something.

iHeartRadio

Published  1 month ago

The same Swamp Congressman Jerrold Nadler has targeted the Trump business and it's employees for massive investigation, putting them on trial while searching for a crime when there is no evidence of one.

But in 2009, he argued that it would be an abuse of power for Congress to ever do that. The organization ACORN had been caught tampering with the election. As some called for an investigation, Nadler said “Whatever infractions Acorn may be guilty of, Nadler said, “it ought to be vetted or sanctioned by the appropriate administrative agency or by the judiciary. But Congress must not be in the business of punishing individual organizations or people without trial.” He cited a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pointing out that this was the first time in Congressional history that a group had been so singled out.

“I was just offended by the whole notion,” Nadler told theVillage Voice. “Congress is not supposed to be prosecutor, judge, and jury. It is fundamental.”

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

The Democrats' refusal to condemn anti-Semite Ilhan Omar seems to be getting worse. On Thursday, Democrat 2020 candidate and Senator, Cory Booker flat out refused to comment on Omar during a press briefing. “Any questions? Anybody?”

National Review

Published  1 month ago

I have a new hobby. It’s collecting the excuses Democrats make for Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota Democratic congresswoman who has an unhealthy fixation on Jewish influence, Jewish money, and Jewish loyalty. Omar has said that Israel “hypnotized the world,” ascribing to Jews the power of mind control in the service of manipulating public opinion. She’s said the only reason Congress supports Israel is Jewish campaign donations. Most recently, using the classic anti-Semitic trope of dual loyalty, she criticized supporters of Israel for having “allegiance to a foreign power.” A real treasure, Omar is. A typical freshman congresswoman sees her mission as — forgive the expression — bringing home the bacon for her district. Not Ilhan. Her project is to mainstream anti-Semitic rhetoric within the Democratic party. Once upon a time, you’d have to visit the invaluable website of the Middle East Media Research Institute to hear such tripe. Now you just need to flip on C-SPAN.

And Democrats are powerless to stop it. They’re tripping over themselves, making rationalizations, dodging reality, and trying to clean up this anti-Semitic mess. Omar is new to this, they say. She never intended to come across as anti-Semitic. She can’t help it. “She comes from a different culture.” She didn’t know what she was saying — she’s a moron! She’s just trying to “start a conversation” about the policies of Israel’s government. And why are you singling her out, anyway. “She is living through a lot of pain.” She’s black, she’s a woman, and she’s Muslim. You can’t condemn her without also condemning white men of privilege. What are you, racist? Islamophobic? Shame on you for picking on this poor lady, who just happens to say that American Jews serve a foreign power by buying off politicians and using the Force to blinker people’s minds.

Before such “arguments” — they are really assertions of victimhood to intimidate critics — Nancy Pelosi shudders. She’s supposed to be this Iron Lady, returned to power after exile, ruling her caucus with a vise-like grip. But her hands are covered in Palmolive. She’s spent the first weeks of Congress doing little more than responding to the various insanities of Omar and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. Pelosi will condemn Omar one minute, before appearing with her on the cover of Rolling Stone the next. She’s lost a step. She can’t hold her caucus together when Republicans call for motions to recommit on the House floor. The policies her candidates ran on in swing districts vanished under the solar-powered glare of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. We’re not talking about covering preexisting conditions, we’re pledging to rid the world once and for all of the scourges of air travel and cow flatulence. Pelosi’s trigger-happy committee chairmen, firing their subpoena cannons into the air at random, look like goofballs desperate to impeach President Trump.

Whatever control Pelosi had over her majority vanished the second she delayed the resolution condemning Omar. It then became undeniable that AOC & co. is in charge. Identity politics has rendered the Democrats incapable of criticizing anti-Semitism so long as it dons the wardrobe of intersectionality. It’s nothing short of incredible that three women from three different cities — New York, Detroit, and Minneapolis — can run roughshod over 233 other House Democrats with a little help from social media, woke 24-year-olds in the digital press, and the Congressional Black Caucus. If you’re Ocasio-Cortez right now, you must love life from the comfort of the test kitchen in your luxury D.C. apartment building. What’s next for this trio — two of whom are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, two of whom support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that seeks Israel’s destruction, and all three of whom combine radical anti-American politics with radical self-regard — finding a candidate to primary pro-Israel Democrat Eliot Engel, chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, on which Omar sits? Challenging Chuck Schumer in the Democratic primary when he’s up for reelection in 2022?

The most pressing order of business has got to be the 2020 presidential election. Omar, AOC, and Tlaib don’t strike me as Cory Booker supporters. Amy Klobuchar might be too much of a taskmaster for them. Most likely the radicals will line up behind the current frontrunner, Bernie Sanders, who has already surrounded himself with anti-Israel activists. Sanders has said criticism of Omar is just a means to “stifle debate” over Israel’s government. He’s too smart to believe that. As the most successful Jewish presidential candidate in history, he has a responsibility to draw lines. After all, he’s no stranger to the dual-loyalty charge — though of course in his case the other country was the Soviet Union.

Bernie Sanders has no interest in stopping Omar. He recognizes that she represents the impending transformation of the Democratic party into something more closely resembling the British Labour party. Labourites elected avowed socialist Jeremy Corbyn party leader in September 2015. The years since have been spent in one anti-Semitism scandal after another. Sanders wants desperately to be the American Corbyn. If anti-Semitism is the price of a socialist America, so be it. Remember what Stalin said about the omelette. I’m sure Bernie does. If Democrats can’t rebuke Omar swiftly and definitively, if they have trouble competing with Ocasio-Cortez’s Instagram cooking show, how will they be able to stop Sanders from carrying his devoted bloc of supporters to plurality victories in the early primaries, and using the divided field to gain momentum just as Trump did?

So far this year the Democrats have floundered in a pit of racism, sexual assault, and anti-Semitism. They’ve embraced policies akin to infanticide, and announced plans to expropriate wealth, pay reparations for slavery, eliminate private health insurance within two years, and rebuild or retrofit every building in the United States before the world ends from climate change twelve years from now. Throughout it all, they’ve received a pass from the know-nothing media. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Sanders have all made the claim that Omar has done nothing but criticize the policies of Bibi Netanyahu. That’s a bald-faced lie, a falsehood not one of the hundreds upon hundreds of reporters covering the Democratic field has scrutinized. These are the very people who have spent the past three years sermonizing on the importance of truth in politics, and they are doing Bernie’s work for him. Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution insists that the Democratic party continues to be center-left. But the election returns and publi- opinion data that support her thesis become much less important when the party’s biggest stars make a hard-left turn. The Democrats seem ripe for a takeover by Bernie and his pals, or at least for a blistering and incendiary battle for control similar to what the GOP experienced last time around.

Blame for Democratic radicalization is most often assigned to Trump — there’s little he isn’t blamed for — but it really ought to go to President Obama. It was Obama who established “daylight” between the United States and Israel, who blamed opposition to his Iran deal on “money” from “lobbyists,” who failed to veto a U.N. resolution singling out the Jewish State and declaring its settlements to have “no legal validity.” It was Obama’s disastrous second term — when he handed the reins of governance to an administrative state immune from popular sovereignty, when he flouted the Constitution in expanding his administrative amnesty, when he made overtures to hostile governments in Iran and Cuba — that set into motion the decline of the American center-left. Now the Obama bros defend Omar on their podcast and in their newsletter, and bolster the presidential candidacy of Robert Francis “Beto” “Take the Wall Down” O’Rourke. If Obama really wanted to arrest the Democrats’ slide into socialism and anti-Semitism, he’d speak out. Do you think Joe Biden will able to stop it? Fat chance. The odds of a Bernie Sanders nomination, a Howard Schultz candidacy, and a Donald Trump victory increase every time Ilhan Omar opens her mouth.

This piece originally appeared in the Washington Free Beacon. It is reprinted here with permission.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Radical Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar has recently been under fire for her most recent anti-Semitic comments specifically targeting Israel.

Instead of taking the opportunity to condemn the congress woman, Democrats have spent the entire week tiptoeing around the subject in an effort to defend the anti-Semite.

Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat – Just Cover Shipping

House Minority Whip James Clyburn took things to another level when he told descendants of Holocaust survivors and people put in Franklin Roosevelt’s Japanese internment camps that they need to “check their privilege.”

Check out what The Hill reported:

Clyburn came to Omar’s defense Wednesday, lamenting that many of the media reports surrounding the recent controversy have omitted mentioning that Omar, who was born in Somalia, had to flee the country to escape violence and spent four years in a Kenyan refugee camp before coming to the United States.

Her experience, Clyburn argued, is much more empirical — and powerful — than that of people who are generations removed from the Holocaust, Japanese internment camps during World War II and the other violent episodes that have marked history.

It gets worse. Clyburn goes on to mock Holocaust descendants by saying, “I’m serious about that. There are people who tell me, ‘Well, my parents are Holocaust survivors.’ ‘My parents did this.’ It’s more personal with her,” Clyburn said. “I’ve talked to her, and I can tell you she is living through a lot of pain.”

He wasn’t done there. Clyburn made it clear that the victims in this situation were not Jewish people who were targeted by Omar, but it was actually Omar herself! Oh, that totally makes sense!

“She won’t be targeted. We’re going to target those people who had her picture on the Twin Towers,” Clyburn told the Hill.

“This resolution is going to be inclusive; it’s going to be expansive; and I might just try to add something to deal with that billboard that’s up in Pennsylvania this morning calling John Lewis and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus racists,” he added.

WOW! Instead of going after Omar who is a member of Congress who spewed anti-Semitic hate, Clyburn is going to go after some random guy in Pennsylvania who put up billboards.

This is the Democratic party for you.

When one of them messes up, they blame someone else, even if that person is just some random guy.

We saw this similar tactic used by the Left earlier this week.

After Omar became under fire again for her anti-Semitism, the House led by Nancy Pelosi decided that they were NOT going to condemn Omar, but instead they were going to come out with a statement that said “all hate is bad,” specifically mentioning Islamophobia in an effort to target the Right.

Talk about a deflection!

Pelosi didn’t even mention Omar’s name in the resolution.

The House Democrats are sending a very clear message that racism and anti-Semitism is acceptable as long as you are a Democrat. Imagine the outrage if these comments came from a Republican!

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

The House voted Thursday to condemn anti-Semitic comments by Rep. Ilhan Omar as part of a broader resolution decrying bigotry in all its forms, including Islamophobia and white nationalism.

Gingrich 360

Published  1 month ago

Speaker Nancy Pelosi – and the old guard Democrats at large – are in a very difficult position.

The radical young voters the Democrats have been courting for years have finally elected like-minded radical young representatives – and Pelosi and her leadership team has no control over them.

A big reason why, as I mentioned on Hannity this week, is that there is a wide generational gap between Democratic House leadership and freshmen Democrats, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and others.

The median year of birth for the 59 Democrats who assumed office this year is 1973. Sixteen of these members were born on or after 1980. Nancy Pelosi was born in 1940. The average age of Democratic leadership as a whole is 71. To the new Democrats, the members of leadership are like the grandparents. I don’t mean this in a positive way that could foster an opportunity for maternal or paternal mentorships. To the new Democrats, Pelosi’s team represents an outdated, backward way of thinking about government. How many 30-somethings do you know who share the same point of view as their 80-year-old grandparents?

The result is, these new Democrats are throwing a party – and the grandparents aren’t invited. Pelosi and members of Democratic leadership are simply trapped in a cycle of responding to headlines. This is how you end up with the so-called Green New Deal, which is a work of complete legislative fantasy that would utterly bankrupt the country. It’s also how the House got to a second forced public condemnation of the new Democrats’ flagrant anti-Semitism. Pelosi simply can’t control the young, radical, progressive wing, which is ardently socialist, anti-Israel, and contemptuous of America and its history.

This gap will continue to create massive cross-pressure in the party. For the Democrats who represent moderate districts – perhaps districts that voted for President Trump – the radical left-wing of the party is terrifying. Meanwhile, those who represent radical districts are going to continue having their party and continue to ignore the old guard.

This is not at aberration. The new class of Democrats despise Pelosi and the grandparents. The old guard has failed to create the radically progressive, socialist America that the new guard wants. This phenomenon has some similarities with conservative voters who widely rejected establishment Republicans and the liberal voters who rejected Hillary Clinton in the 2016 primary.

Already, because of Pelosi’s inability to control her caucus, the Democrats can’t do anything positive. It’s making them desperate. The most they can do is focus their efforts on their shared vendetta against President Trump and everyone in his orbit.

The 81 subpoenas that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler levied against Trump allies – many of whom are private citizens who never intended or wanted to become public figures – is a perfect example of this desperation. Democrats are slowly realizing – with dawning horror – that Robert Mueller is not likely to provide them anything close to a smoking gun in their crusade against the President, so they are resorting to punishing his political campaign, family members, and longtime private sector employees in a vindictive public display. They are seeking to hurt anyone and everyone who has helped President Trump in any way. At best, it’s a gross political circus. At worst, it’s callous abuse of power.

These divides in the Democratic Party are only going to become more pronounced as Pelosi’s grip slips further. The new Democrats’ private party will become increasingly raucous until it has lost all touch with normal Americans. Moderate Democrats will have to continue answering for their colleague’s radicalism. Pelosi and the grandparents will not be invited along, but they will still be left cleaning up the mess.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said this week that Texas will be “ground zero” for Democrats in 2020 and predicted that when Texas turns blue soon, it will change the country and the world.

“Texas is ground zero for us in the next election,” Pelosi reportedly said at the Travis County Democratic Party’s Johnson Bentsen Richards Dinner. “When you helped win in 2018, you were doing something very patriotic for America and when we win a great Democratic victory — and it’s essential that we win the victory in 2020 — we will know that that victory was our destiny.”

Pelosi told activists to know the power that they have to change the country—and the world—by turning Texas blue and giving Democrats the Lone Star State’s 38 Electoral College votes.

“Know your power, this state is so important,” Pelosi reportedly said. “When it turns — and it will soon — it will make a difference not only in Texas and the lives of individual people here, it will make a difference in the country and it will make a difference in the world.”

President Donald Trump carried Texas by nine percentage points over Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Democrats became more optimistic about turning Texas into a battleground state in 2020 after former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke narrowly lost his 2018 Senate race to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).

After O’Rourke’s came within 2.6 percentage points of defeating Cruz, Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa told the Texas Tribune that “turning Texas blue is not an event, it’s a process.”

“And I think 2020 will put us, if not blue, purple — deep purple,” he reportedly added.

As the Tribune noted, “Texas hasn’t voted for a Democrat for president since Jimmy Carter in 1976. The last time both parties made a serious play for the state’s electoral votes was in 1996, when President Bill Clinton campaigned here for his re-election ahead of Election Day. Bob Dole won the state by 4.9 percentage points.”

Top super PACs on the left, though, are reportedly planning to spend massive amounts in Texas if the Democrat is within striking distance of Trump in 2020.

Texas could soon have two Democrats running for president to challenge Trump. Julian Castro, the former San Antonio mayor, is already in the race and O’Rourke, who has ruled out running for Senate in 2020 against Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), is reportedly set to announce his 2020 decision this month.

Medium

Published  1 month ago

Some traditions say that having children is the same as attaining immortality. In the case of Meghan McCain, the apple certainly didn’t…

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Michigan Democrat Representative Rashida Tlaib claimed that popular outcry has driven her to introduce legislation against the president immediately.

“We saw record turnout in an election year, where people wanted to elect a jury that would begin the impeachment proceedings to Donald Trump,” Tlaib said at a press briefing held in her office foyer.

“We want to work on these economic justice issues, racial justice issues,and everything,” she said. “But guess what? There is a wall there, and a constitutional crisis that is not going to [let us] do our jobs as American Congress members to push a lot of these agendas forward.”

Rashida “impeach the motherf**ker” Tlaib joins prominent Democrats like California’s Rep. Brad Sherman, and Rep. Al Green of Texas, in open attempts to push Trump out of the Oval Office. Both of the aforementioned congressmen have introduced impeachment articles of their own, though neither have made any real progress.

Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen made a similar attempt in the past, but has not reintroduced his articles to the now Democrat-led Congress. Even so, he recently told the The New York Times that impeachment “is almost going to be impossible not to deal with.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been very open about resisting efforts to impeach the President unless there is hard evidence to back it up. There is concern that the appearance of Democrats having prematurely reached a verdict would backfire in future elections. “When the facts are known, then we can make a judgment,” Pelosi said last week.

Tlaib is unmoved by such warnings. “This is the largest class since Watergate,” Tlaib said, referencing the newly-elected Democrats. “This is a class — a diverse class — that comes … with a sense of urgency to act. To act to hold corporations accountable, to act in holding President Trump accountable, to act to really try to see real reforms, even within our congressional process.”

“This is an emergency for many of us,” she said. Meanwhile, Tlaib is dealing with a minor emergency of her own: Allegations that she paid herself almost $20,000 from campaign funds — after the election was over.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

Who will win in the controversy over Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic comments?

Well, for now, looks like all Democrats are losing because they can’t put out a simple anti-Semitic resolution. If you can’t even do that, how can you ask anyone to invest any effort in you to run anything or vote for you for the presidency?

Candidates like Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) couldn’t even bring themselves to specifically condemn her remarks. Harris even came to her defense saying that condemning her might “put her at risk.”

Now it looks like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who started the whole idea of the resolution is backing down a bit, saying that she didn’t belief that Ilhan Omar’s comments were “intentionally” anti-Semitic.

She’s also saying that there wouldn’t be a vote on the resolution this week because the House Foreign Affairs Committee is going to work on it more.

Rep. Eliot Engel, who is the head of the Committee, condemned some of Omar’s remarks last week.

This week, he too seems to be backing off a bit, saying he wasn’t looking to have her kicked off the Committee, “I’m looking to get rid of anti-semitism, not looking to punish anybody.” Instead he said, “I’m hoping that she’ll grow and she’ll change.”

Isn’t she already a grown woman? Why are you treating her like a child? And how many times is this now?

Democrats are digging their own hole and pulling the dirt in on top of themselves with the epic fail that is this resolution saga.

Sean Hannity

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi doubled-down on her fierce defense of Rep. Ilhan Omar Friday; telling a packed crowd in Washington, DC that the new lawmaker “has a different experience in the use of words.”

“The incident that happened… I don’t think our colleague is anti-Semitic. I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn’t understand that some of them are fraught with meaning that she didn’t realize.”

Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Rep. Ilhan Omar: "I don't think our colleague is anti-Semitic. I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn't understand that some of them are fraught with meaning that she didn't realize." pic.twitter.com/dbYJTO7uzh

— The Hill (@thehill) March 8, 2019

Omar made national headlines days ago when she viciously accused American politicians of being secretly bribed to support the State of Israel and of having a “dual allegiance” to a foreign country.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Old guard House Democrats and radical Democratic lawmakers young enough to be their grandchildren are locked in a power struggle.

Diamond & Silk

Published  1 month ago

Democrats have completely shot themselves in the foot over their “Anti-Semitic” resolution.

It’s taken them days just to try to construct what they want to say which shouldn’t take anytime at all.

Protip? “We condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms including the remarks made by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).”

If they’d done that, it still wouldn’t have been a substantive action like kicking her off the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Except they couldn’t even do that, they had to try to water it down by adding a more general condemnation of hate and of Islamophobia, reportedly.

And there was no mention of Omar.

So essentially it’s a toothless general comment as it stands in draft now.

But even so, the attempt has now antagonized the far left and defenders of Omar, one of whom is now calling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a “white supremacist.”

What irony that the Democrats are now getting hoisted on their own petard.

First, Linda Sarsour attacked Pelosi saying she was a “white feminist” helping to support the patriarchy, basically demeaning white feminists, which basically is the majority of Sarsour’s Women’s March contingent. Way to rip your own folks.

Now, another far-left Democrat is going after Pelosi.

From Daily Wire:

Anger at Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for daring to allow a floor vote on a measure condemning anti-Semitism spread beyond progressive Democrats in Congress late Tuesday, when a former candidate for the “Justice Democrats” — the same arm that elected Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — called the Speaker a “white supremacist.”

Saira Rao, a “Justice Democrat” who ran for office in Colorado (and lost), has been active in supporting Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) following an outcry over clearly anti-Semitic statements Omar made last week at an event for progressive activists. Tuesday night, she weighed in on the debate over whether House Democrats should adopt a measure condemning anti-Semitism by comparing Pelosi to infamous white supremacist David Duke.

“I am going to unfollow anyone who posts anything positive about Nancy Pelosi,” Rao tweeted. “Nancy Pelosi is a white feminist. White feminists are white supremacists. Nancy Pelosi is a white supremacist. And if you idolize Nancy Pelosi, you may as well declare allegiance to David Duke.”

Rao praised Sarsour’s statement earlier in the day, which said that white feminists are part of the “patriarchy.”

Way to toss most of your supporters and make them evil.

Now many other Democrats, like presidential candidates Kamala Harris, aren’t condemning Omar’s comments either. Harris said putting Omar “in the spotlight” might “put her at risk.”

This might be funny that they were tearing each other apart if it wasn’t so sad that they can’t make a simple resolution against anti-Semitism and deal with an anti-Semitic member.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Radical Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar has been under fire for her most recent anti-Semitic comments concerning Israel. Led by Nancy Pelosi, the House Democrats are refusing to condemn the anti Jewish Representative because they are

Sara A. Carter

Published  1 month ago

The House passed a resolution widely condemning hate late Thursday, but Democrats are facing backlash over their wavering, last minute edits to the resolution and failure to condemn Rep. Ilhan Omar for her antisemitic statements.

Progressive Democrats came to Omar’s defense this week after senior Democrats challenged Omar’s statements. It didn’t take long for the Democratic stalwarts to cave to the young progressives, who were critical of anyone condemning Omar for blatantly racist remarks against Jewish people.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was one of the first senior Democrats to break under pressure from new Congressional progressives that came out in support of Omar. She made excuses for Omar’s antisemitic statements, and instead said the vote was to condemn all “forms of hatred.” Pelosi spoke to reporters earlier Thursday where she addressed Omar’s (D-MN), recent anti semitic statements.

Pelosi said she does not believe Omar is anti semitic. Further, Pelosi told reporters that Omar “doesn’t understand the weight of her words”.

The bill originally condemned anti semitism. Then, it was edited. The Democrats added other groups to the resolution such as actions of hate against anti-Muslim and all other anti-minority. It wasn’t done, however, because by late Tuesday they added Latinos. The Latinos were added at the request of the congressional Hispanic Caucus.

However, the bill makes no mention of Omar’s name.

“Whereas white supremacists in the United States have exploited and continue to exploit bigotry and weaponize hate for political gain, targeting traditionally persecuted peoples, including African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, and others with verbal attacks, incitement, and violence.” reads the new section.

Originally, the vote was set for early this week.

Key resolutions from the bill:

(1) rejects the perpetuation of anti-Semitic stereotypes in the United States and around the world, including the pernicious myth of dual loyalty and foreign allegiance, especially in the context of support for the United States-Israel alliance;

(2) condemns anti-Semitic acts and statements as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States;

(3) reaffirms its support for the mandate of the United States Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism as part of the broader policy priority of fostering international religious freedom and protecting human rights all over the world;

(4) rejects attempts to justify hatred or violent attacks as an acceptable expression of disapproval or frustration over political events in the Middle East or elsewhere;

(5) acknowledges the harm suffered by Muslims and others from the harassment, discrimination, and violence that result from anti-Muslim bigotry;

(6) condemns anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against all minorities as contrary to the values of the United States;

(7) condemns the death threats received by Jewish and Muslim Members of Congress, including in recent weeks;

(8) encourages law enforcement and government officials to avoid conduct that raises the specter of unconstitutional profiling against anyone because of their race, religion, nationality, political, or particular social group, including the assignment of blame or targeting members of an entire religious group for increased suspicion, based on the conduct of a single individual or small group of individuals; and

(9) encourages all public officials to confront the reality of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, and other forms of bigotry, as well as historical struggles against them, to ensure that the United States will live up to the transcendent principles of tolerance, religious freedom, and equal protection as embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the first and 14th amendments to the Constitution.

Vox

Published  1 month ago

Democrats passed their sweeping anti-corruption bill known as HR 1. It’s already doomed in the Senate.

Observer

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Win McNamee/Getty Images.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Win McNamee/Getty Images.

Responding to criticisms from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-K.Y.), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called a far-sweeping anti-corruption bill a “power grab” for the American people.

“It’s a power grab, a power grab on behalf of the people,” Pelosi said of the legislation.

Subscribe to Observer’s Politics Newsletter

The bill H.R. 1—which the House will vote on this Friday—aims to crack down on gerrymandering while providing more transparency with dark money in politics. Under the legislation’s Disclose Act, super PACs would be required to disclose the names of donors who contribute more than $10,000 to political campaigns. Other provisions include opting for independent state commissions over legislatures to draw lines for congressional districts, declaring election day a national holiday, establishing an automatic voter registration system, and requiring presidential and vice-presidential candidates to release their tax returns from the past 10 years.

McConnell has made clear he will vote against the bill should it arrive on the Senate floor, branding the legislation as the “Democrat Politician Protection Act” and accusing Democrats of orchestrating a “power grab.”

“This new House Democrat majority’s top priority is apparently assigning themselves an unprecedented level of control over how they get elected to Washington, D.C., along with how, where and what American citizens are allowed to say about it,” the Senate Majority Leader said on Tuesday. “More than anything else, Washington Democrats want a tighter grip on political debate and the operation of elections, nationwide.”

“This is about instilling the confidence of the American people in the political process, in what happens in government, that it is the people’s interests that are being served,” countered Pelosi on Friday morning.

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

Newsweek

Published  1 month ago

While congressional Democrats are divided on how hard to investigate President Donald Trump’s family members—particularly his daughter and senior White House adviser, Ivanka Trump—House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said they were fair game for scrutiny.

“Whover falls into that net, falls into that net,” Pelosi told The Washington Post on Thursday. “They are advisers to the president. They have security clearances. This is not their children at home.”

Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, have served in the West Wing since Donald Trump took office. Ivanka Trump has been working on issues such as workforce development and paid family leave, while Kushner has been tackling Middle East peace and the U.S. criminal justice reform.

Their top-secret security clearances were controversial. CNN reported that the president pressured then-chief of staff John Kelly and White House counsel Don McGahn to approve a security clearance for Ivanka Trump. And the Post reported that Ivanka then nudged her father to give Kushner security clearance despite career intelligence officials’ concerns that he could be influenced by his foreign contacts.

Two House Democratic committee chairmen shared Pelosi’s view on the matter.

“Jared Kushner and Ivanka don’t receive any immunity from public or congressional investigation because they’re related to the president,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a member of the House Judiciary and Oversight and Reform Committees investigating Trump, told the Post. “A family member who accepts official governmental responsibilities or participates in illegal activity has no special immunity from investigation.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said, "They have to be as accountable as everybody else. We’ve got to do our job… We are not crossing any lines.”

But other Democratic leaders hesitated to target Trump’s children.

Representative Gerald Connolly of Virginia, who sits on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, told the news outlet it would be “too high-profile” and “very dicey business.”

Representative Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, also on the Oversight and Reform Committee, said that going after the president’s children should be the “last resort” but that lawmakers should get them to testify publicly if there is no other way to question them. “They’re part of the operation, so they’re integral. I think there’s just a sense of decency that you don’t do that unless you really have to. We’re not out there to cause family problems,” Lynch told the Post. “But in this case, like I said, there is no exemption for anyone. If we have to get the information, we have to get it.”

A lawyer for Ivanka Trump and Kushner did not immediately respond to a request forcomment from Newsweek on Friday.

President Trump is sensitive to criticism to his children, particularly his daughter, and in the past reportedly urged them to leave Washington.

In September 2017, Politico reported that the president, after hearing criticism of his daughter, told her, “Baby, you’re getting killed, this is a bad deal.”

WSJ

Published  1 month ago

Americans love a good political brawl, and that’s terrible news for Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Her Democratic Party has commenced a full throw-down—with itself.

Few things have benefited Democrats more in the past few years than the Donald Trump show. The president likes to be the center of attention, and the media likes nothing more than to oblige him. This dynamic helped make the 2018 election a referendum on the man himself rather than his policies, and that made Mrs. Pelosi speaker of the House.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

The political party that’s long attracted the support of 75 percent of American Jews has shown this week that their leaders won’t stand up for the community when it matters.

There’s a revolution underway. American Jews, who have been an integral part of the Democratic coalition for more than a century, are currently being made uncomfortable in their political home. And the whole thing is being live-tweeted.

What’s shocking isn’t that there are anti-Semites (and those willing to tolerate them) on the political left. There are Democratic members of Congress with ties to Louis Farrakhan, after all. But leftist anti-Semitism, which has continuously bubbled just below the surface for many years — and too often been blithely ignored — has burst into full view this year.

First there was the Women’s March subsumed by anti-Semitism, then the whole brouhaha over Sen. Marco Rubio’s anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions bill, and now there’s Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who simply can’t stop slandering American Jews and Zionists, two overlapping but not identical groups.

The Democratic National Committee felt compelled to pull their partnership with the Women’s March because it had become so toxic. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also managed to quickly formulate a leadership response condemning anti-Semitism when Omar created a stir with her hateful words just last month. But now something has clearly shifted.

Pelosi’s attempt to lead her caucus in a symbolic vote condemning anti-Semitism, which should have been a gimme, became a political football. Rather than rally to support long-time Jewish colleagues, who have expressed serious concerns about Omar’s anti-Semitism, members are mutinying in support of Omar.

Pelosi was recently lauded for her discipline and leadership. Yet she seems to have lost control of her own members. So she can’t enforce Rep. Eliot Engel’s demand for an apology after Omar’s latest “vile anti-Semitic slur,” accusing American Jews of dual loyalty, let alone strip Omar of her seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. House Republicans would support Omar’s removal, but it’s increasingly clear that many Democrats do not. Just like Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, Omar isn’t going anywhere.

From the outside, it appears we are watching a revolution in real-time. Pelosi and other long-time leaders are attempting to maintain power amidst a storm started by a freshman who’s been in office for two short months. (Doesn’t it feel longer?)

There have always been members of Congress who’ve taken a tough line on Israel. What Omar wants is different, though. She wants to make Congress a safe space for expressing Jew hatred, and based on the outpouring of support for her this week, there’s Democratic support for that. Omar has also had back-up from powerful progressive allies outside Congress like Linda Sarsour, who took to Facebook to blast Pelosi as “a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men.”

Those Democrats who want to uphold traditional norms, including the marginalization of anti-Semitism, are fighting an uphill battle. But is that battle still raging off-camera, or have Democratic leaders already surrendered?

It’s concerning that in less than one week, Pelosi has been reduced to pretending that Omar’s tweets were not “intentionally anti-Semitic,” while Majority Leader Steny Hoyer strained credulity, saying that Omar’s not an anti-Semite. That they lack the support of their members to speak truthfully on this issue, let alone take any decisive action, is a glaring problem.

And to be clear, the problem is not the use of “tropes.” Words are not violence, but hateful speech, especially from people in positions of authority, can lead to harmful real-world actions.

Democrats like to remind us of that link in other settings, but not here. Consider Sen. Kamala Harris’ statement: “I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk.” Omar is a public figure, so fair game for criticism, as Harris should know. It is striking, though, that Harris expresses zero concern about American Jews’ safety, a mere four months after 11 American Jews were massacred while praying in Pittsburgh.

This fight has been a long time in the making, but things are changing quickly. It’s been only two years since Jewish women felt the need to publicly make the case that one could be both a Zionist and a feminist. Is it now time for a debate about whether one can be both a Jew (who believes in Israel’s right to exist) and a Democrat?

The political party that’s long attracted the support of 75 percent of American Jews has shown this week that their leaders won’t stand up for the community when it matters. It’s quite breathtaking, really. It’s not only bipartisan support for Israel that’s being debunked as much weaker than advertised, but also, quite troublingly, an acceptance of Jew hatred directed at fellow Americans. For the record, that hatred is not only being tolerated but embraced by congressional Democrats.

The “allyship” progressives always cheer is proving to be a one-way street. Jews, who have traditionally voted for Democrats, are feeling betrayed, abandoned, and even politically homeless.

This path leads toward disaster. For Jews to truly have a home in America, anti-Semitism must be marginalized by both major political parties. And if the Democrats succumb to Omar’s anti-Semitism, the only winners will be bigots.

Melissa Langsam Braunstein, a former U.S. Department of State speechwriter, is an independent writer in Washington DC and a senior contributor to The Federalist. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, National Review Online, and RealClearPolitics, among others. She has appeared on EWTN and WMAL. Melissa shares all of her writing on her website and tweets as @slowhoneybee.

Copyright © 2019 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Hours after House Democrats pushed through an anti-hate resolution in response to Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic comments, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sent out a fundraising email suggesting an end to America’s relationship with Israel. The New York Democrat has publicly defended Omar after controversial remarks and tweets as she came under fire for anti-Semitism after accusing those who […]

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) celebrated the passage of a resolution against antisemitism in the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday, even though her own antisemitic remarks triggered the vote, because it was the first time Congress had condemned “Anti-Muslim bigotry.”

The World Jewish Congress criticized Democrats for “watering down” language on antisemitism after including a variety of other groups that had little or no relation to the controversy. The resolution also failed to name Omar.

In a joint statement with Reps. Rashid Tlaib (D-MI) and André Carson (D-IN), the other Muslims in Congress, Omar said:

Today is historic on many fronts. It’s the first time we have ever voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history. Anti-Muslim crimes have increased 99% from 2014-2016 and are still on the rise.

We are tremendously proud to be part of a body that has put forth a condemnation of all forms of bigotry including anti-Semitism, racism, and white supremacy. At a time when extremism is on the rise, we must explicitly denounce religious intolerance of all kinds and acknowledge the pain felt by all communities. Our nation is having a difficult conversation and we believe this is great progress.

Omar neither retracted nor apologized for her own antisemitic comments, in which she claimed that Americans who support Israel owe “allegiance to a foreign country.” It was her second antisemitic outburst in recent weeks.

Omar and her supporters pointed out that she had been the target of anti-Muslim slurs, including a display in the West Virginia state legislature that portrayed her under the exploding World Trade Center on Sep. 11, 2001.

House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Eliot Engel (D-NY) called Omar’s comments a “vile anti-Semitic slur.” But Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who appointed Omar to the committee, said Thursday she would not demand that Omar apologize.

Update: The House actually passed a resolution condemning anti-Muslim bigotry less than a week after 9/11.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) excused the many anti-Semitic comments spoken and tweeted by freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-CA) as Omar having language issues. Omar, 37, is a Muslim refugee from Somalia who came to the U.S. in 1995 and became a citizen in 2000. Omar is a 2011 graduate of North Dakota State University with degrees in political science and international studies.

23 years ago, from a refugee camp in Kenya, my father and I arrived at an airport in Washington DC.

Today, we return to that same airport on the eve of my swearing in as the first Somali-American in Congress. #Hope #Ilhan 🙏🏾 pic.twitter.com/jVeP3DOipN

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) January 2, 2019

Pelosi spoke about Omar at an event on Friday at the Economic Club of Washington, D.C. Video of her remarks was posted by the RNC.

“…Uh, the incident that happened was, uh, I don’t think our colleague is anti-Semitic. I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn’t understand that some of them are fraught with meaning that she, what, didn’t realize. But none the less that we had to address…”

Pelosi waved her left arm and hand continuously as she explained away the highly educated Omar’s anti-Semitism as ignorance of the English language.

Conservative Tribune

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats are pushing back against a proposed resolution to condemn anti-Semitism

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

The Democrats’ internal fight over the anti-Semitism resolution reveals a stark picture of the competing factions vying for control over the party’s agenda.

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

When the American Conservative Union asked if I wanted to address CPAC this year, of course I said yes. Then came several weeks of discussion as to what the subject of my speech should be. This is the biggest event of its kind in the nation, with more than 200 speakers and this year in excess of 10,000 attendees, more than half under the age of 25, so I am not envious of the job Matt Schlapp and Dan Schneider have to do to pull off such a feat. (Especially when your speakers include the president and the vice president and all the security that entails).

The topic we eventually settled on was the threat Russia poses to America, a subject I am always happy to address given my family history. With parents who suffered under a Stalinist dictatorship and a father who escaped from a Communist political prison, providing a reality-check on the menace posed by a Russia still run by a KGB colonel comes easy.

However, on the day, eight minutes into my speech I decided I needed to change tack. Russia is a threat, but it is not the Soviet Union. Instead I felt compelled to talk about the real threat we face as the free-est nation on God’s Earth: the rise of socialism within our borders.

My speech was on the morning of the first day of CPAC, and the remarkable thing was, as the next three days unfolded, my decision to ad lib on that specific topic was echoed again and again—without any “central planning” from the organizers—by speaker after speaker. From Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA, to Mr. Brexit, Nigel Farage, to Mark Levin, and finally the vice president and President Trump himself. (If you missed the president’s barnburner, do yourself a favor and watch it. And bookmark the link so you can return to it when you feel like the radical crazies are winning and you need a laugh).

All of us ended up reflecting on the fact that, like a zombie that just will not die, Karl Marx’s ideology of destruction is back, and this time not as an external threat held to by a nation that wants to destroy or enslave us, but in the guise of an erstwhile mainstream American party that has been taken over by extremists.

Yet those who have surrendered to the deadly utopianism seem to be suffering from a psychosis of some kind. Democrats by and large deny they are socialists, so much so that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stood to clap during the president’s State of the Union as he pledged that America will never be a socialist nation. This at the same time that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) announced her “New Green Deal,” a centralization of power designed to destroy the free-market completely. No gasoline engines. No air travel. All buildings demolished and then rebuilt to a politically correct code. Not to mention the rationing, or eventually phasing out of red meat so we can get a grip on bovine flatulence. (If you want to see the original green scam plan Ocasio-Cortez’s office tried to deep-six, you can find it here.)

If patriotic Americans ever capitulated and the plan were implemented it would give more power to the federal government than any Communist state ever had. Yes, there may have been breadlines in Moscow, Prague, and Warsaw, but they never banned meat or automobiles.

The fact is, the Democratic Party is in big trouble. Its old white leadership thought they could allow the fringe types into the club and control them, dilute their extremism. They are failing. This burgeoning internal civil war is clearest not when it comes to new disagreements but rather, in confronting old skeletons.

The Left has always had a default setting that was anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish. Just look at the history of the crypto-anti-Semitic BDS movement and where it was born. But in the past few weeks, with blatant anti-Semites like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib actually winning seats in Congress as Democrats, we have a blatant institutionalization of Jew-hatred at the highest levels of the Democratic Party. Pelosi said she would deal with Omar’s public statements of hate. Then she removed Omar’s name from the censure motion and then it was delayed. Next it was watered down even more by focusing on all “hatred,” not the specific and vile comments from the freshman congresswoman. Now, with Pelosi storming out of the latest meeting on the measure, it looks as if the party has a full-fledged revolt on its hands.

America’s Founders deliberately built our federal system in a way so as to keep it permanently hobbled in some respects. The checks and balances and the separation of powers were designed to effect gridlock, not obviate it, and were meant to prevent a domestic “King George scenario.” But did they ever envisage a day when one of our two parties would embrace the principles of a totalitarian policy? Note every declared frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination has endorsed AOC’s green socialist plan. With a worldview informed in its totality by the tenets of Judeo-Christian civilization, could they have ever imagined institutionalized hatred of half our heritage being normalized?

The Democrats are in trouble. The question remains, how much damage will they do to our Republic and our friends and allies before their own internal civil war leads to the expulsion of the extremists from our political culture?

Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.

Photo Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images

realclearpolitics

Published  1 month ago

FNC: In his monologue, Tucker Carlson asked what would happen if America's two main political parties "changed completely and nobody noticed." Carlson said the Democratic Party has morphed into something that bears no resemblance to what it was even 10 years ago.

"Where are the adults in the Democratic party? It used to be in the leadership but not anymore," Carlson said.

Transcript, via FOX News:

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS: Good evening and welcome to Tucker Carlson Tonight. What if one of America's two great political parties changed completely and nobody noticed? We don't need to guess. It happened. While the National Press Corps stare's transfixed at the President's Twitter feed, the Democratic party has morphed into something that bears no resemblance to what it was even ten years ago.

For many decades, that party was a coalition of liberal intellectuals, the urban poor, and the country's working class. That last group kept the Democrats grounded in the vicinity of reality, but those voters are long now, and with them, the Democrats' connection to America itself. Consider the party's evolution on the question of borders, Bill Clinton ran twice against illegal immigration. He attacked it in stump speeches and in his State of the Union address. Clinton understood that without borders, you don't have a country. He also knew and repeatedly said that a flood of low-wage labor undermines the wages of American citizens, because it does.

Try making that point today. Keith Ellison will denounce you as a Nazi. Ellison is a Democratic congressman from Minnesota. This year, he was nearly elected Chairman of the DNC. He's not a fringe character, and yet the other day, he announced that opposing illegal immigration in any way is morally on par with aiding Hitler.

BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEITH ELLISON, MINNESOTA CONGRESSMAN: I'm one of the people who believe that we should give our neighbor sanctuary. And if you ask yourself what would happen if I was a gentile in 1941, if my Jewish neighbors were under attack by the Nazis. Would I give them sanctuary? You might be about to find out what you would do. Would you pass that moral test or would you fail it?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So if you think we ought to enforce the immigration laws, Congress itself passed, Congressman Ellison believes you are evil. When did Democratic politicians start talking like this? Maybe around the time Congresswoman Maxine Waters of Los Angeles became a folk hero on the left. In a recent appearance, Waters explained that the Trump administration isn't simply wrong on the issues, it's a front for the Klan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAXINE WATERS, LOS ANGELES CONGRESSWOMAN: I'm cleaning out the White House. This person who does not respect you, this dishonorable human being who cheats everybody, this dishonorable human being who will lie at the drop of a hat, this dishonorable human being who has the alt-right and the KKK and everybody else inside his cabinet. I'm going to say impeach 45 every day, impeach 45 every day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: That's not political rhetoric, it's a war cry. it's incitement to hysteria and maybe worse. If you really thought the Ku Klux Klan control the White House, what would you do? What wouldn't you do? Where are the adults in the Democratic party? It used to be they were in leadership, but not anymore. Nancy Pelosi is the most powerful Democrat in the House of Representatives, she was once a speaker, if you remember, she may soon be again. Pelosi isn't just tolerant of illegal immigration, she's now explicitly encouraging it. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NANCY PELOSI, MINORITY LEADER, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: The list goes on and on about how we want to advance and protect the Dreamers until we can pass the bill. Their families did a great thing for our country, bringing these kids here who are working, who are in the military, who are in school, who are a brilliant part of our future.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Breaking our laws is now a great thing says one of our country's chief lawmakers. People who ignore the legislation, Congress writes, should be congratulated for it, says one of Congress' top leaders. That's more than perverse, this is what it looks like when the people in charge of a country decide to destroy it. Their motive? it's always the same, political power. They lost it, they want it back. Even if it means hurting the people they are sworn to protect. Democrats alienated the middle of the country during the Obama years but they have no plans to convince those voters to return.

Instead, they plan to replace them with new and more reliable voters from abroad and damn the consequences for the rest of us. That's why they are far more upset about DACA than they are about the Opioid crisis. It's why they care more about preventing a border wall than they do about raising the wages of American workers. It's not complicated. What's amazing is they are now saying it out loud.

Sara A. Carter

Published  1 month ago

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) claimed the media was treating Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) badly for making several anti semitic comments. Clyburn defended Omar in an interview with The Hill this week. In fact, Clyburn said that Omar’s experience as a refugee was more empirical to the experiences of holocaust survivors.

“I’m serious about that. There are people who tell me, ‘Well, my parents are Holocaust survivors.’ ‘My parents did this.’ It’s more personal with her,” Clyburn told The Hill. “I’ve talked to her, and I can tell you she is living through a lot of pain.”

Pelosi Caves

On Wednesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) caved in to the pressure. Pelosi said she didn’t believe the tweets were “intentionally anti-Semitic,” and that the House should add to the House resolution to condemn anti semitism. Additionally, Pelosi said she would add condemnation for any bias against blacks and Muslims to the resolution.

In a video on twitter, Omar addressed death threats she had received. “I know that as long as I breathe that I will continue to make people uncomfortable in the best way possible,” she said.

“I don’t ever want you to worry about me. I am fine. I know what my mission is. I know what my purpose is. I know that as long as I breathe that I will continue to make people uncomfortable in the best way possible” @IlhanMN is strong but we will NOT be silent #StandWithIlhan pic.twitter.com/x2oXdN4w5N

— Rasha (@RashaMK) March 5, 2019

President Trump chimed in Wednesday on twitter saying, “It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-semitism in their conference. Anti-semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!

It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-Semitism in their conference. Anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 6, 2019

Diamond & Silk

Published  1 month ago

Watch: The Dems Resolution Against Anti-Semitism Is A Total Disaster

The Democrats started this resolution nonsense to demonstrate they were actually doing something about Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks.

But they bought their own trouble when they had an internal revolt from folks who refused to condemn her, including most of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates who have weighed in so far.

Now the Democrats have finalized the resolution.

And it’s as bad as you would imagine, in terms of meaningless drivel.

Here’s a link to the full resolution.

Warning: you can’t get those three minutes back again, as Twitchy notes.

They literally mention what she’s done, list a lot of other incidents but can’t seem to put her name in there anywhere.

But they do get in the evil centrists.

On the other hand, they did get the Charleston church shooting in there, which, while horrible, didn’t have to do with anti-Semitism.

Nor did they specifically call out leftist anti-Semitism which is a growing and troubling trend, not just in Congress, but particularly on college campuses. And the failure to specifically condemn Omar gives further wind to anti-Semitism.

Let’s look at what the GOP did with Rep. Steve King (R-NY).

They condemned him specifically and his alleged remarks. They also removed him from any Committee assignments.

But Democrats not only are refusing to condemn Omar, but leaving her on the critically important House Foreign Affairs Committee where her biases can have significant effect.

And if she really doesn’t understand the weight of her words, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed, or needs to “grow and change” as Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) argued, why is she on such an important committee?

HT: Twitchy

gellerreport

Published  1 month ago

The neo-Nazi Democrats have chosen to be led by the worst of the worst racists and bigots. How laughable that left-wing goons dare call the most pro-Jewish, pro-Israel President “antisemitic.” The Democrat national socialist party have taken a page from the German national socialist party (Nazis).

Linda Sarsour Explains How She Influenced Democratic Leadership To Scrap Original Anti-Semitism Resolution

Women’s March co-founder Linda Sarsour explained Friday how she and other left-wing organizers influenced the final language of the “anti-hate” resolution that passed the House Thursday night.

The resolution, initially launched as a rebuke exclusively against anti-Semitism following remarks made by Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, was later broadened to include all forms of bigotry. Sarsour in her video took credit for convincing House Democratic leadership for “expanding the language of the resolution to include condemning all forms of bigotry.” (RELATED: Democratic Rebuke Against Anti-Semitism Becomes Resolution Against Everything Else)

The Women’s March co-founder attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last Tuesday for initially allowing the anti-Semitism resolution, saying in a Facebook post, “Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

Democrats argued with one another last Wednesday over the resolution’s language. Washington Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the progressive caucus’s leader, did not want Omar’s name in the resolution, while a number of Jewish members reportedly pushed to include it. Ultimately, the resolution omitted Omar’s name.

According to Sarsour on Friday, she and her fellow organizers worked behind the scenes to change the original intent of the non-binding resolution by the end of the week. (RELATED: Democrat Anti-Hate Resolution Passes House)

“Friends, our supporters, you know the Women’s March we’re going through some rough times and if you know anything about this past week, I’m going to give you some ideas of what we did this week. So, many of you know that our sister Congresswoman Ilhan Omar was under attack,” Sarsour said.

She continued, “And you know being able to mobilize progressive leaders across the country to sign on to a letter to organize a press conference in support of Ilhan Omar to call on the Democratic leadership to actually expand the language of the resolution to include condemning all forms of bigotry because that’s the kind of movement we’re apart of.”

“The women’s march is a movement that unequivocally rejects all forms of racism and anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia and that’s what we called on the Democratic leadership to do — that in our lifetime we made history with a resolution that is going to be in the public record for life,” Sarsour added.

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

The longtime Democratic leader is struggling to unite her warring factions.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Radical Democrat Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has recently been under fire for her recent anti-Semitic comments.

At first, it seemed that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic party was going to condemn Omar. However, now they seem to be backtracking.

In a recent interview, Pelosi stated that she doesn’t think that Omar’s comments were “intentionally anti-Semitic.”

NEW Trump 2020 Black Hat – Yours Free!

Check out what the National Review reported:

Pelosi’s comment, which was reported by Politico, came hours after House Democrats sparred in a closed-door meeting over a resolution condemning religious bigotry intended at least partially in response to Omar’s comments. A number of Omar’s fellow progressives lashed out at Pelosi and suggested their older colleagues were making a politically costly mistake by rebuking Omar.

“We’ve individually and collectively already responded to the fact that we oppose all ‘-isms’ that do not treat people in this country fairly and justly,” Representative Bonnie Watson-Coleman (D., N.J.) said during the meeting, according to the Washington Post. “To continue to engage in this discussion is simply an opportunity to give both the media and Republicans distractions from our agenda. We’ve got important work to do.”

It’s sad to see how hard it is for the Democrats to agree that anti-Semitism is bad and should be condemned.

Pelosi seems to care more about the “politics” of the situation than Omar’s anti-Semitic comments which is why she is failing to condemn the congress woman.

Many people think that Pelosi is afraid to disagree with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is also defending Omar because she doesn’t want to create a divide in the party.

Just weeks ago, Omar was under fire for claiming that the only reason the United States is allies with Israel is because of the money.

Check out what the National Review reported:

Omar, who has previously been accused of anti-Semitism by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for attributing U.S. support for Israel to the “Benjamin’s,” once again inflamed tensions last week by suggesting that accusations of anti-Semitism, including from her “Jewish colleagues,” are intended to chill debate over the alliance.

“What I’m fearful of — because [Representative] Rashida [Tlaib] and I are Muslim — that a lot of our Jewish colleagues, a lot of our constituents, a lot of our allies, go to thinking that everything we say about Israel to be anti-Semitic because we are Muslim,” said Omar, speaking at a progressive town-hall event in Washington, D.C. alongside Representative Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.).

“So for me, I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” she later added.

Not only is Omar failing to apologize for her anti-Semitism, but she is now claiming to be the victim.

Instead of saying sorry for her anti-Semitic comments, the Democratic congresswoman is using this opportunity to attack President Trump for his “anti-Muslim” agenda.

Talk about a deflection!

What are your thoughts? Should Omar be removed from Congress? Let us know in the comments section below!

Conservative Review

Published  1 month ago

LevinTV host Mark Levin came out swinging against the Democratic Party on his radio program Wednesday, blasting the bigotry of the party evident in the split in the Democratic conference over voting for a resolution condemning anti-Semitism.

“The Democrat Party has among it a growing number of bigots,” Levin said. “The Democrat Party has shown itself to be exactly what it is. They fear offending the radical, extreme corner of its base. They fear offending the growing pockets of fundamentalist Islam in this country, let’s be honest, because they vote Democrat through and through. The Democrat caucus was split, we read from news reports, on whether or not to vote for a watered-down, dumbed-down version of a resolution in which the bigot of bigots, Omar, was not to be named. Tough Nancy Pelosi … she buckled. She’s a coward.”

Don’t miss an episode of LevinTV. Sign up now!

Representative Omar’s Comments Were Hateful

For more truth, get BlazeTV: https://t.co/jzsHUi8SXf pic.twitter.com/MTE2yTshCI

— LevinTV (@LevinTV) March 7, 2019

Chris Pandolfo is a staff writer and type-shouter for Conservative Review. He holds a B.A. in politics and economics from Hillsdale College. His interests are conservative political philosophy, the American founding, and progressive rock. Follow him on Twitter for doom-saying and great album recommendations @ChrisCPandolfo.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has caved again to Rep. Ilhan Omar by refusing to outright condemn her for making another round of anti-Semitic comments, and Twitter users are eating her alive for it. As detailed by

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

It's just money, right? Who cares where it comes from? Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat - Just Cover Shipping The taxpayer will be forced to fork over their earnings to the federal government, so might

MAGAMEDIA

Published  1 month ago

Excuses, Excuses

03/07 7:02 am

Nancy Pelosi makes excuses for Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism: “She may need to explain that she did not, it’s up to her to explain. But I do not believe that she understood the full weight of the words.”

So either she’s too stupid to understand what she was saying, or too stupid to realize that we Americans don’t agree with the common Islamic sentiment regarding Jews and Christians; ie, off with their heads….

Either way, if she is indeed this stupid and bigoted, she has absolutely no place in our government!

I can say this: I don’t think the innocent girl vibe is working for me. If you are Muslim, you hate Jews and Christians. It’s in the Quran. They are taught these things from an early age, it’s not like “welp, I’ve become a Congressman, so I guess I can’t think that way any more…” The silent invasion has already begun.

Quran (2:65-66): “Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers.”

Quran (5:51): “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”

Quran (9:30): “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!”

The question I am asking myself is this: why are Democrats so apologetic about Islam? Why are they supporting this ideology that oppresses women, Jews, and Christians? In the age of Social Justice Warriors, where is the justice for the women in our own back yards who have been acid attacked, had their genitals mutilated, who have been victims of an honor killing?

Why protect this ideology. It is obvious to me and everyone else with a brain that this stuff just doesn’t mix well in our Western society.

Like what you see? Stop the silencing of the conservative voice by helping to keep this site alive! Every little bit helps, and is much appreciated! Thank you!

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

HSINO… That is Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — our “House Speaker In Name Only,” an aging figurehead limping towards extinction.

Late last month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declared herself “the boss” — and Thursday’s disgraceful House vote condemning All the Hates proved that sentiment 100 percent true.

Don’t be fooled by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MD); she is not “stepping on rakes” or “accidentally” revealing her antisemitism. This is a coordinated strategy on the part of her and her allies to legitimize antisemitism, to normalize bigoted stereotypes about money-grubbing and dual loyalties that go above and beyond honest criticism of Israel.

That’s the play here, that is what is at stake, and because she’s lost control of the House and her caucus to the Ocasio-Crazies, Pelosi is helpless to stop it.

In fact, Pelosi has become Ocasio-Crazy’s puppet, her mouthpiece… “I do not believe she understood the full weight of the words,” Pelosi told reporters Thursday to explain why she does not believe Omar should apologize or lose her consequential seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“I feel confident that her words were not based on any antisemitic attitude. But that she didn’t have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that might have been unknown to her,” the ventriloquist dummy added without blinking.

This week marked the third time in two months Omar went there, went to a place we have not seen a mainstream figure go since Father Coughlin in the 1930s. And with Ocasio-Crazy out there launching a ridiculous (and condescending) defense of Omar (it’s a learning process) and refusing to back a House resolution that condemns antisemitism alone (think about that), Pelosi had no choice but to back down, to come up with this utterly meaningless All the Hates resolution that Omar was perfectly comfortable voting for.

And why wouldn’t she vote yea? The resolution was not only a triumph for Omar and her wild-eyed ilk over Pelosi, it proved her strategy is working — that you can now hurl these bigoted smears without fear of condemnation.

This is how much of a shell Pelosi is now: she no longer has the influence to convince her caucus to support a standalone resolution against antisemitism; she no longer has the authority to stop Omar from her antisemitic quest to move the Overton window, she is powerless against Omar’s launching of one rhetorical fire bomb after another directly into the middle of Pelosi’s agenda for the 116th Congress.

And let’s be honest, going back to its Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow days, the Democrat Party has always been a hotbed of antisemitism — a party that has tolerated and even feted Louis Farrakhan for decades, that embraces Rev. Al Sharpton, a Party that seems to have grown tired of having to hide its antisemitism and just wants to be free.

David Harris Jr

Published  1 month ago

A video that was posted on Twitter on Tuesday shows Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) telling a room of supporters, in a very provocative manner, not to worry about her and pledging, “I know what my mission is. I know what my purpose is. I know that as long as I breathe that I will continue to make people uncomfortable in the best way possible.”

The video was posted by Rasha Mubarak, president of the Young Democrats of Orange County (Florida) and has already gotten over one million views. Mubarak never posted the context of the video, but the posting is right in the middle of a firestorm about Omar’s questioning the loyalty of Jewish-American supporters of Israel. Can you imagine a Jewish Congressman questioning the loyalty of Omar? It would be a career ender for the Jewish Congressman.

“I don’t ever want you to worry about me. I am fine. I know what my mission is. I know what my purpose is. I know that as long as I breathe that I will continue to make people uncomfortable in the best way possible” @IlhanMN is strong but we will NOT be silent #StandWithIlhan pic.twitter.com/x2oXdN4w5N

The Democrats let it be known the other day that a resolution against anti-Semitism was being put together, mainly because of complaints brought in about the hateful rhetoric of Omar against Israel and Jewish-American supporters of Israel. That resolution has now been postponed, more-than-likely because Nancy Pelosi cannot control the progressive freshman in her party who are defending Omar’s bigotry.

Omar was praised by the other kook freshman Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), who referred to the president as a MF’er in front of supporters, when she retweeted the video with the comment, “I am so honored to serve with @IlhanMN, an incredible courageous woman. Every time I worry about her and the ugly attacks, I remember what she said to me two months ago: “I survived war, I can survive this.”

I am so honored to serve with @IlhanMN, an incredible courageous woman. Every time I worry about her and the ugly attacks, I remember what she said to me two months ago: "I survived war, I can survive this." https://t.co/2wyrC0m6ry

— Rashida Tlaib (@RashidaTlaib) March 6, 2019

What was suspected is likely a reality now as it looks like Pelosi and other Democrat leaders in the House of Representatives are going to do nothing to tamp down the hateful language that comes from the anti-Semites in their party. It’s incredible to watch.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

On Friday, over one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 16th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 14 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Carol Miller (R-WV) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled her out of order. After Democrats denied Davis’ request to vote on the bill they cut her off ruled her out of order again as she attempted to criticize them for denying the request.

Miller responded to Democrats blocking a vote on the bill in comments to LifeNews afterwards.

“I’m a wife, a mother, and a grandmother, I’ve experienced the miracle of life and know that children are our most precious gift. We must ensure protection for the youngest and most innocent of our citizens, and it saddens me that my colleagues across the aisle are willing to play political games on a topic this important,” she said.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

ACTION: Contact members of Congress and urge them to sign the Discharge Petition to bring the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to the House floor for a vote.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

According to a report, House Democrats will not condemn anti-Semitism specifically following the controversy over Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), but will instead condemn “all hate” in general.

Last month, Ilhan Omar created fresh controversy by making an anti-Semitic comment implying that pro-Israel Americans had an “allegiance to a foreign country.”

Omar suggested earlier in February that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was bribing politicians into supporting Israel and as a result was widely criticized as anti-Semitic.

However, Democrats reportedly do not see the need to pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism specifically.

House Democrats spent Wednesday scrambling to put to bed a debate about anti-Semitism that no one wants after advancing a symbolic resolution condemning it that pleased no one.

The resolution, as it was initially conceived in the hours after Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) made a second round of anti-Israel comments last week, would condemn anti-Semitism—a second public rebuke of the freshman lawmaker who has been in office less than 60 days.

But by midweek, faced with a backlash inside the Democratic Caucus, leaders appeared to change course, asking the House Foreign Affairs Committee to draft a resolution that rebuked “all hate.”

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters Wednesday that she did not believe Omar was being “intentionally” anti-Semitic when she implied that pro-Israel Americans have dual loyalty.

President Donald Trump condemned anti-Semitism in a social media post on Wednesday:

It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-Semitism in their conference. Anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 6, 2019

“It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-Semitism in their conference,” the president said.

“Anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!”

2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) defended Omar Wednesday, saying that Americans shouldn’t “equate anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in Israel.”

New: Bernie Sanders speaks out against Ilhan Omar treatment. "What I fear is going on in the House now is an effort to target Congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that debate. That's wrong.” pic.twitter.com/L9AWvwgbsz

— Daniel Marans (@danielmarans) March 6, 2019

“Rather, we must develop an even-handed Middle East policy which brings Israelis and Palestinians together for a lasting peace,” he said.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

After days of infighting and a near-rebellion by Democratic rank-and-file members, the House on Thursday passed a bipartisan resolution that indirectly condemned Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar's 'anti-Semitic' and 'pernicious' comments -- without mentioning her by name.

Washington Free Beacon

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats blew up at each other Wednesday over intra-party attacks and a proposed resolution viewed as a rebuke to Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D., Minn.) latest anti-Semitic remarks, exposing a divide in the caucus.

After news broke of Democrats planning to vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism in response to Omar, and later adding language condemning anti-Muslim bias as well, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said there may be no vote on one at all. Adding to the embarrassment for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) and her members is the resolution would be the second congressional maneuver made in as many months to indirectly respond to Omar's anti-Semitic statements.

At a closed-door meeting reported on by the Washington Post, nerves and emotions were raw following party leadership's reaction to Omar's latest broadside: questioning the political influence in the United States that she says forces "allegiance to a foreign country." This came after her remarks last month, where she tweeted "it's all about the Benjamins" for pro-Israel politicians, suggesting they were paid off by Jewish lobbyists. She apologized for the latter remarks "unequivocally."

While Omar has defended her most recent comments, she has been criticized by some members of her own party, including House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Eliot Engel (D., N.Y.), who said she had invoked a "vile anti-Semitic slur." Rep. Juan Vargas (D., Calif.) was blistered by fellow Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) after tweeting his displeasure with Omar for her questioning of the U.S.-Israel alliance.

"She could have come down the hall and asked me what my opinion is. That would have been fine," Vargas said of Ocasio-Cortez's response on Twitter. "We have a very different opinion here, I believe. To question someone’s loyalty because they’re Jewish, I think, is terrible. It’s something that we shouldn’t question at all."

The Post reported that at one point during the meeting, Pelosi ally Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D., Ill.) pleaded: "Everyone stop tweeting!"

Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) admonished her colleagues to iron out their differences in private, for fear of letting Republicans divide them.

Some members, like Congressional Black Caucus member Cedric Richmond (D., La.), were angry Omar was being singled out at all.

"I think there’s a big rise in anti-Semitism and racism, and that’s a bigger conversation we need to be having," Richmond said. "But it starts at 1600 Pennsylvania. It doesn’t start with one member out of 435 members of Congress."

CBC chair Karen Bass (D., Calif.) said it was "inappropriate to just focus on one person," according to the Hill.

"We need to have equity in our outrage," said Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.), calling the matter a "distraction."

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D., N.J.) didn't know why Democrats were putting forth a resolution in the first place.

"We’ve individually and collectively already responded to the fact that we oppose all ‘-isms’ that do not treat people in this country fairly and justly," she said. "To continue to engage in this discussion is simply an opportunity to give both the media and Republicans distractions from our agenda. We’ve got important work to do."

Pelosi criticized the media and said the Omar issue would be resolved, according to the Post.

"I think you make more of it than there is . . . the press loves to foment unease in the Democratic Party but we are very united" about the party agenda, she said.

"If you say the bacon is not crispy enough, they'll have an article about this unrest and unease in the Democratic Party," Pelosi said, according to the Hill.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats failed Wednesday to introduce a resolution condemning antisemitism, which had been promised in response to the latest antisemitic remarks by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tried to contain the political damage, claiming that repeat-offender Omar was not “intentionally antisemitic.”

Other Democrats found another excuse: they claimed criticizing Omar would stifle “legitimate criticism” of Israel.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) claimed Democrats who criticized Omar were arguing it was “unacceptable to even *question* US foreign policy.” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), running for president as a Democrat, said, “What I fear is going on in the House now is an effort to target Congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that debate. That’s wrong.” Rivals Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) made similar comments.

Rep. André Carson (D-IN), likewise, said that while Americans should “always strive to be inclusive and tolerant,” nevertheless “we cannot shut down legitimate policy debate.” And Omar, he said, “has raised valid points about Palestine and Israel that should be debated.”

Notably, Carson did not cite any examples of “valid points” that Omar had made. That is because she never did. Omar’s target was not Israel, but the American Jewish community.

Omar kicked off the controversy by tweeting last month, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” She was re-tweeting a comment by journalist Glenn Greenwald — a vehement critic of Israel — who lamented the fact that Congress is so supportive of Israel. Omar’s clear meaning — made even clearer in subsequent tweets — was that pro-Israel members of Congress had been paid to support Israel. Her remarks had antisemitic implications; she later apologized.

But Omar could not help herself, and claimed last week in front of a friendly audience at a Washington, DC, bookstore that pro-Israel Americans had “allegiance to a foreign country.” Her remark evoked themes of “dual loyalty” that have been used as a pretext to persecute Jews since the days of the Bible. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee — on which Omar site — called her words a “vile anti-Semitic slur.”

That was the context of Omar’s remarks. She was complaining about Americans who support Israel, not criticizing any Israeli policy.

The only tangential link to any actual policy issue, perhaps, was Omar’s support for the “boycott, divestment, sanctions” (BDS) movement against Israel, which is the target of Republican criticism. Notably, Pelosi put Omar on the foreign affairs committee despite Omar’s support for BDS. She wasn’t silenced; she was promoted.

Omar’s remarks have embarrassed Democrats. They have also weakened the party’s attack on President Donald Trump, whom they have falsely portrayed as a bigot. Still, Democrats lack the political will to condemn antisemitism outright. They added a condemnation of anti-Muslim bigotry to their resolution, but even that could not convince the party’s “progressives” to support it. The result: a “full-scale brawl” over antisemitism in the party.

In an attempt to contain the damage, Democrats are claiming they are protecting “legitimate criticism” of Israel. But rather than saying, “We can criticize Israel, where appropriate, without resorting to vile anti-Semitic rhetoric,” they are effectively saying, “We cannot criticize vile anti-Semitic rhetoric if it might be construed as legitimate criticism of Israel.”

The party is giving a free pass to antisemitic bigotry — and criticism of Israel has nothing to do with it.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Middle East Monitor

Published  1 month ago

American Jews, including prominent figures like Naomi Klein, have signed an open letter in support of Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

The letter states that she has been “falsely accused of antisemitism” and that there was nothing anti-Semitic about calling out the “noxious” role of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in American politics.

It went on to say that “The pro-Israel lobby has played an outsized role in producing nearly unanimous congressional support for Israel”, and slammed AIPAC and other lobby groups including the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the fossil fuel lobby for its “anti-democratic” legislative influence on US politics.

The letter finished by saying “We thank Ilhan Omar for having the bravery to shake up the congressional taboo against criticizing Israel. As Jews with a long tradition of social justice and anti-racism, AIPAC does not represent us.” and called on other Jews to sign the letter.

READ: Ilhan Omar vows to make US live up to religious freedom

Omar has faced huge backlash after calling out AIPAC, including facing accusations of anti-Semitism from both Democrats and Republicans, floor action against her by Nancy Pelosi, and disturbing posters at a Republican event, linking her to the 9/11 attacks.

The charge of anti-Semitism comes after Omar said that the Republican Party’s threats against her and Palestinian-American congresswoman Rashida Tlaib for criticising Israel was “all about the Benjamins, baby!” in reference to money allegedly paid to the party and its members to support Tel Aviv.

When she was asked to clarify who is paying members, she cited AIPAC, which has previously boasted about its financial influence in US politics.

HuffPost

Published  1 month ago

"What Ilhan Omar said doesn’t even come close to the things Steve King says," a GOP member says.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Late Wednesday, one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 14th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 12 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Steve Watkins (R-KS) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled him out of order.

After the vote, Congressman Watkins told LifeNews: “This legislation is a matter of protecting human dignity and should not be a controversial issue. It amends Federal law so that in the case that a baby survives an abortion, the doctor must do everything in their power to give the baby medical care. I will continue to work with my colleagues to bring this legislation to the House Floor for a vote.”

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

The Daily Beast

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats spent Wednesday scrambling to put to bed a debate about anti-Semitism that no one wants after advancing a symbolic resolution condemning it that pleased no one.

The resolution, as it was initially conceived in the hours after Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) made a second round of anti-Israel comments last week, would condemn anti-Semitism—a second public rebuke of the freshman lawmaker who has been in office less than 60 days.

But by midweek, faced with a backlash inside the Democratic Caucus, leaders appeared to change course, asking the House Foreign Affairs Committee to draft a resolution that rebuked “all hate.”

“We’ll see what the committee comes up with, I’m a big believer in the committee system this is their jurisdiction, they have an array of concerns, priorities they are addressing,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters, adding that the resolution was not targeted at Omar’s comments.

Members involved in crafting the resolution have already been hit with requests from the offices of Democratic lawmakers for specific groups to be included in the resolution. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), who is Hindu, reached out to top Democrats to ask that Hindus be specifically mentioned in any resolution condemning religious prejudice, sources said. Other members have suggested Catholics, Muslims, and all forms of racism should be added, too.

Asked if the resolution would be diluted as a result of the inclusion of so many groups, Pelosi replied, “What’s too broad about fighting hatred wherever it exists?”

Though top Democrats have condemned Omar’s latest comments—in which she implied that lawmakers who support Israel have an “allegiance to a foreign country”—most members bristled at the idea of publicly reprimanding her through a resolution, even if it did not mention her by name.

By Wednesday afternoon, several had taken to blaming the media for covering Omar’s remarks, claiming that racist and anti-Semitic actions and language from Republicans were being ignored.

“We have to do better across the board,” said Rep. Max Rose, a New York Democrat who has condemned Omar’s comments in the past. “We also have to acknowledge the incredible hypocrisy you all are showing – that I did not see you guys trailing [Rep. Kevin] McCarthy—over and over and over again, there has been an unequal treatment.”

The House voted last month to approve a symbolic resolution condemning anti-Semitism, which was pushed by Republicans after Omar was criticized in February for suggesting lawmakers had been bought by the Israel lobby. That measure, which passed overwhelmingly, only contributed to skepticism from some Democrats over the ongoing debate.

“We’ve already voted on it,” said Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY). “Whatever we do, it’s going to look like we’re responding specifically to her, and to AIPAC,” he said, referring to the pro-Israel lobbying group

Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) conceded that some members felt Omar had been singled out for her comments and hinted the resolution might be more partisan than originally expected.

“Of all hate, all hate, all hate, all hate. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, all that stuff,” Clyburn said, when asked whether the president’s rhetoric would be addressed in the legislation.

“We all know what the atmosphere in this country is right now, we have an occupant down at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that is poisoning atmosphere of this country when it comes to minorities,” he said. “If are a descendant of someone who came from the s-hole country, you pissed off about a lot of the stuff right about now and I happen to be the descendant of one of those groups.”

—With additional reporting by Erin Banco.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her top aide hold majority control over Justice Democrats, a left-wing PAC waging open war on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other establishment Democrats, according to corporate filings obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Ocasio-Cortez and her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, obtained majority control of the political action committee in December 2017, TheDCNF reported Monday. Chakrabarti resigned from the Justice Democrats’ board in August 2018, Politico reported, and the PAC’s website no longer lists Ocasio-Cortez as a governor, but government documents show the two still hold majority control as of Wednesday afternoon.

Ocasio-Cortez’s role with the PAC, which was a driving force behind her stunning victory in 2018, may have violated campaign finance laws, two former Federal Election Commission (FEC) members told TheDCNF.

Ocasio-Cortez never disclosed her control of the PAC to the FEC. If the congresswoman intentionally withheld that information from the FEC, both she and Chakrabarti “could be facing jail time,” former FEC Commissioner Brad Smith told TheDCNF.

But there’s another aspect to the story: Justice Democrats has aggressively attacked Ocasio-Cortez’s more moderate Democratic colleagues at a time when the party is divided between establishment members and progressives pushing the party left.

Justice Democrats’ corporate filings indicate the group attacking senior Democrats isn’t just allied with Ocasio-Cortez but is also partially controlled by her as well.

Both Ocasio-Cortez and Chakrabarti are still listed on the Washington, D.C., Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs’ website as two of Justice Democrats’ three governors.

The left-wing group is open in its antagonism toward establishment members of the party.

Justice Democrats and Ocasio-Cortez staged a sit-in at Pelosi’s office in November 2018 shortly after the midterm elections.

It hadn’t been reported at that time that Ocasio-Cortez — at least on paper — controlled the group staging the protest in the California Democrat’s office.

Two months later, in January, Justice Democrats released a video showing Ocasio-Cortez discussing primary challenges with the group’s other leaders.

“We gotta primary folks,” Chakrabarti, who previously served as the PAC’s executive director, said in the video. (RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez’s Adviser Went Viral For What He Told Tucker Carlson — But He Got It Wrong)

Justice Democrats spokesman Waleed Shahid told Politico in February: “There is going to be a war within the party. We are going to lean into it.”

Ocasio-Cortez has echoed the Justice Democrats line: She warned moderate Democrats on Feb. 28 that they were “putting themselves on a list” by voting with Republicans and indicated that she would help replace them with progressives in the next election, The Washington Post reported.

Justice Democrats has already publicly marked one center-left Democrat, Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, for a primary challenge. The group is expected to add more names to the list, The New York Times reported in February.

“We are trying to elect more Alexandrias,” Justice Democrats Executive Director Alexandra Rojas told The Times. “She is an example of what one victory can do. Imagine what we can do with more primary wins across the country.”

Spokesmen for Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez and Justice Democrats did not respond to requests for comment.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

(Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib)

Freshman Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib appeared to clash with party leadership on Wednesday after joining protesters to say she'd introduce a resolution this month urging the Judiciary Committee to move forward with impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Tlaib, D-Mich., joined protesters on Capitol Hill to described what she called an “emergency” conveyed to her by her constituents.

"We want to be able to work on these economic justice issues, racial justice issues and everything. But guess what? There is a wall there, and a constitutional crisis that is not going to be able to have us be able to do our jobs as American Congress members to push a lot of these agendas forward."

DEMOCRATIC FRESHMAN LAWMAKER TLAIB RAISES SPECTER OF RACISM DURING COHEN TESTIMONY

Tlaib was pressed by reporters over Democratic leadership’s message that unfounded calls for impeachment could spell trouble for the party in 2020.

“This last election was a calling, I mean we saw record turnout in an election year where people wanted to elect the jury that would begin the impeachment proceedings to Donald Trump.”

She continued: “This is not to say that we disagree. I think that every single colleague of mine agrees there are impeachable offenses. That’s one thing we all agree on. We may disagree on the pace. We may disagree that we have to wait on certain hearings, but at the same time, I think they all know the dangers of allowing President Trump to continue to violate our United States Constitution.”

RASHIDA TLAIB’S CAMPAIGN PAID HER $17,500 IN SALARY AFTER ELECTION DAY, IN POSSIBLE VIOLATION OF FEC RULES: REPORT

House Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has shied away from impeachment talks, particularly with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian meddling in th4 2016 election grinds on.

"When the facts are known, then we can make a judgment," Pelosi said last week.

Tlaib faced backlash early this year after she was captured on video, just hours after being sworn in, recalling a conversation with her son where she told him, "We’re gonna impeach the motherf----r.”

“This is the largest class since Watergate,” Tlaib said Wednesday speaking of the newly elected members of Congress. “This is a class, a diverse class that comes again with the sense of urgency to act, to act to hold corporations accountable, to act in holding President Trump accountable, to act to really try to see real reforms within even our congressional process.”

Tlaib said on Twitter that she plans to introduce a resolution later this month that would call on the House Judiciary Committee to “move on investigative grounds for impeachment.”

Dan Bongino

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) botched a recent announcement where she said she plans to file articles of impeachment against President Trump.

As CNSNews points out, while speaking with protesters outside of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office yesterday, Tlaib appeared lost for words when trying to explain the process.

“Later on this month, I will be joining folks and advocates across the country to file the impeachment, um, ah, um, oh, my God, what is the expression?

“The resolution – I’m sorry, I’m not in the Michigan legislature, ah, impeachment resolution to start the impeachment proceedings.”

Tlaib has been obsessing over impeaching Trump ever since she was sworn into office.

The congresswoman made headlines in January after she went on an expletive-laden rant vowing to impeach the president.

“People love you and you win. And when your son looks at you and says, ‘Momma, look you won. Bullies don’t win.’ And I said, ‘Baby, they don’t, because we’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the motherf***er.’”

David Harris Jr

Published  1 month ago

Antisemitic Linda Sarsour is bragging that she, CAIR and other Muslim organizations took over the House and protected Ilhan Omar from a resolution against her hate speech against Israel and all Jews. Sarsour tells how she convinced Democrat leadership to make the resolution against all bigotry without mentioning Omar or antisemitism. This might appeal to their extreme base, but it probably won’t play well with the other 90% of the population. Americans like Israel.

🤬Sarsour explaining how she, CAIR and other Mu$lim organizations took control of the House, protected Omar, and demanded Pelosi rewrite the censure to include all forms of hate.

Sarsour delivered a letter to Pelosi with over 500 agency signatures. 👇Look inside for more info pic.twitter.com/pLnDoMF83p

The Women’s March co-founder attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last Tuesday for initially allowing the anti-Semitism resolution, saying in a Facebook post, “Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

“Friends, our supporters, you know the Women’s March we’re going through some rough times and if you know anything about this past week, I’m going to give you some ideas of what we did this week. So, many of you know that our sister Congresswoman Ilhan Omar was under attack,” Sarsour said.

She continued, “And you know being able to mobilize progressive leaders across the country to sign on to a letter to organize a press conference in support of Ilhan Omar to call on the Democratic leadership to actually expand the language of the resolution to include condemning all forms of bigotry because that’s the kind of movement we’re apart of.”

“The women’s march is a movement that unequivocally rejects all forms of racism and anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia and that’s what we called on the Democratic leadership to do — that in our lifetime we made history with a resolution that is going to be in the public record for life,” Sarsour added.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

100PercentFedUp.com

Published  1 month ago

Today, Democrat lawmakers were given a chance to stand up to anti-Semitism and condemn freshman US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) for multiple anti-Semitic tweets. US House members today voted on a measure that was supposed to hold Omar accountable for her anti-Semitic remarks. Although anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, Democrat lawmakers skirted Omar’s anti-Semitic […]

TheBlaze

Published  1 month ago

'I do not believe she understood the full weight of her words'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) from charges that she intended to make anti-Semitic remarks, and claimed that the anti-hate resolution in the House of Representatives was not about Omar.

Pelosi made the statements to the media on Thursday, just ahead of the vote for the resolution.

"I don't think that um, the congresswoman perhaps appreciated the full weight of how it was heard by other people, although I don't believe it was intended in an anti-Semitic way," she explained.

"But the fact is if that's how it was interpreted, we have to remove all doubt, as we have done over and over again."

Pelosi said she spoke to Omar about the anti-Semitic comments she made and how the Democrats were going to vote on a resolution against anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred.

"Something that is one resolution, addressing these forms of hatred, not mentioning her name because it's not about her," she explained. "It's about these forms of hatred."

Pelosi would not say whether Omar should apologize, and said it was up to her.

"I do not believe she understood the full weight of her words," she added.

"When you cross that threshold into Congress," she continued, "your words weigh much more than when you're shouting at somebody outside, and I feel confident that her words were not based on any anti-Semitic attitude, but that she didn't have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that may have been unknown to her."

Here's the video of Pelosi's comments:

The resolution was passed overwhelmingly on Thursday with a vote of 407 to 23.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Radical Democratic  Rep. Ilhan Omar has recently been under fire for her recent anti-Semitic comments concerning Congress members "allegiance" to Israel. Omar, who has a history of being anti-Semitic, at one point last month tweeted that

Washington Free Beacon

Published  1 month ago

Roll Call is facing backlash after one of its reporters attempted to discredit a recent effort by a group of leading Jewish and pro-Israel organizations.

creators

Published  1 month ago

After the election and re-election of the country's first black president, who would have thought that, less than two years later, leading Democrats would seriously debate paying blacks reparations for slavery?

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi supports a bill that would set up a commission to consider reparations, which she says is "One of the things that we can do not only just in terms of trying to make up for a horrible, sinful thing that happened in our country in terms of slavery, but for our country to live up to who we think we are." She added: "We have to reduce the disparity in income in our country. We have to reduce the disparity in access to education in an affordable way in our country, reduce the health disparities in our country."

But two years ago, President Barack Obama called reparations a political nonstarter. "It is easy to make that theoretical argument," Obama said in an interview. "But as a practical matter, it is hard to think of any society in human history in which a majority population has said that as a consequence of historic wrongs, we are now going to take a big chunk of the nation's resources over a long period of time to make that right."

President John F. Kennedy took the same positions. Asked in1963 about race-based affirmation action for blacks, Kennedy said: "I don't think we can undo the past. In fact, the past is going to be with us for a good many years in uneducated men and women who lost their chance for a decent education. We have to do the best we can now. That is what we are trying to do. I don't think quotas are a good idea. I think it is a mistake to begin to assign quotas on the basis of religion or race or color, or nationality. ... On the other hand, I do think that we ought to make an effort to give a fair chance to everyone who is qualified, not through a quota, but just look over our employment rolls, look over our areas where we are hiring people, and at least make sure we are giving everyone a fair chance, but not hard-and-fast quotas. We are too mixed, this society of ours, to begin to divide ourselves on the basis of race or color."

Slavery in America ended more than 150 years ago.

Neither former slaves nor slave owners are alive today. Furthermore, columnist and radio host Michael Medved says that only about 5 percent of whites have any sort of "generational" connection to slavery. "The importation of slaves came to an end in 1808 (as provided by the Constitution), a mere 32 years after independence, and slavery had been outlawed in most states decades before the Civil War," wrote Medved in 2007. "Even in the South, more than 80 percent of the white population never owned slaves. Given the fact that the majority of today's non-black Americans descend from immigrants who arrived in this country after the War Between the States, only a tiny percentage of today's white citizens — perhaps as few as 5 percent — bear any authentic sort of generational guilt for the exploitation of slave labor."

Finally, what about the role of the Democratic Party in slavery, Jim Crow and the resistance to ending them? Republican President Abraham Lincoln, elected on an anti-slavery platform, signed the Emancipation Proclamation and led the North in its victory over the South at the cost of at least 620,000 soldiers dead on both sides. Democrats opposed the 13th Amendment, which freed the slaves, the 14th Amendment, which conferred citizenship on them, and the 15th Amendment, which gave them the right to vote.

During the debate over the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Democrats, including Sen. Al Gore Sr., orchestrated a record-breaking 60-day filibuster in an attempt to block the bill from coming to a vote. By percentage, more Republicans in the House and the Senate voted to pass the bill than did Democrats. Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen received an honor, 40 years after his death, from his hometown's local chapter of the NAACP for his work navigating the bill through the Senate. When Republican Rep. Bill McCulloch of Ohio announced his retirement, he received a handwritten letter from former first lady Jackie Kennedy, who thanked him for his role in the bill's passage. Kennedy, who considered the bill a legacy of her husband, wrote: "Your integrity under such pressures is what makes our political system worth fighting for and dying for. Please forgive the emotional tone of this letter — but I want you to know how much your example means to me. It is a light of hope in an often dark world, and one I shall raise my children on as they grow older."

To pay for reparations, does the Democratic Party intend to sue itself for damages?

Larry Elder is a best-selling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an "Elderado," visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @LarryElder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Photo credit: at Pixabay

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

President Trump often complains that he is the victim of "presidential harassment" -- or, as he sometimes puts it, "PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!"

The Old School Patriot

Published  1 month ago

We should stop calling them the Democrat Party. They are progressive socialists. The Democrat party is dead, gone, kaput.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters Wednesday that the House Foreign Affairs Committee would draft a new resolution against antisemitism, meaning that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) would be able to edit it.

Pelosi appointed Omar to the committee — Omar’s first choice — in January, despite concerns about her record of radical anti-Israel statements. She has resisted calls to remove Omar from that committee, even after Omar has repeatedly made antisemitic statements about American support for Israel.

On Wednesday, Pelosi claimed that Omar had not been “intentionally antisemitic,” even after she had been told by party leaders and her own Jewish constituents that her remarks were perceived as offensive toward Jews — and to non-Jewish supporters of Israel.

Democrats had planned to hold a vote on a resolution condemning antisemitism by Wednesday, but a party meeting collapsed into a “full-scale brawl,” according to the Washington Post, after some members objected even to a new version of the resolution that had been modified to include a condemnation of anti-Muslim bigotry as well.

Pelosi told reporters that House Democrats would still introduce a motion condemning antisemitism, but that it would be drafted by the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

New: @SpeakerPelosi said the resolution condemning anti-Semitism to be broadened to include more groups and will be drafted by the @HouseForeign. @Ilhan, who is accused of tweeting anti-Semitic comments and was veiled subject of resolution, is a member of the panel.

— Susan Ferrechio (@susanferrechio) March 6, 2019

Omar sits on that committee, and presumably would be able to write and/or edit the resolution that had been triggered by her own antisemitic statements.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Photo: file

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said in a press briefing Thursday that the massive investigations into President Trump launched by the House Democrats without any evidence crimes were committed is their “Constitutional responsibility” as oversight of the Executive branch. “The House launched investigations on Trump — what kind of evidence does the House have right […]

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Women’s March co-leader Linda Sarsour on Wednesday refused to respond when asked if Israel has the right to exist after promising to answer the question following a Washington, DC, rally in support of Rep. Ilhal Omar (D-MN), who is under fire for repeated antisemitic remarks.

In exclusive footage captured by Breitbart News, videographer Matthew Perdie confronts Sarsour about if the Jewish state and the Middle East’s sole democracy has the right to exist. “We’ll answer questions later, after the press conference,” Sarsour responds, adding, “I’ll be happy to answer that.”

In a subsequent clip, Sarsour and her entourage begin walking away from the pro-Omar event, held near the U.S. Supreme Court, almost immediately after her remarks, refusing to acknowledge Perdie as he repeats his question about Israel.

An associate then physically blocks Perdie from approaching the activist.

Several men begin pushing the videographer and peppering him with questions on why he attended the pro-Omar event — and if he receives compensation from Israel. “Why are you here?” one asks him repeatedly.

“Do you work for Israel?” the man then asks, before inquiring how much the videographer is paid.

Footage of the testy encounter ends with Perdie noting that Sarsour declined to answer the question despite saying she would oblige.

Early Wednesday, the Middle Eastern Women’s Coalition held a separate event on Capitol Hill demanding for Omar’s resignation.

The Minnesota Democrat again became the center of controversy after suggesting last week that members of Congress are pressured by pro-Israel organizations who pledge their “allegiance to a foreign country” — in this case, Israel. She made the controversial remarks while appearing alongside Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), another freshman congresswoman accused of making antisemitic remarks in recent weeks. Last month, the Minnesota Democrat suggested American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) bribed Republican lawmakers into supporting Israel in exchange for bribes. It is widely known that AIPAC does not make financial contributions to political candidates or sitting lawmakers. In 2012, Omar tweeted that Israel had “hypnotized the world” and committed “evil doings.”

Sarsour made headlines this week after attacking House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for participating in drafting a resolution condemning antisemitism in response to Omar’s latest remarks, referring to her as a “typical white feminist” who does the “dirty work of powerful white men.”

Sarsour, who is no stranger to controversy, has attacked Israel and President Donald Trump on various occasions in recent years. In a November Facebook post, Sarsour seemingly accused American Jews of “masquerading as progressives” while choosing “their allegiance to Israel” instead of supporting then-Rep.-Elect Omar’s call to boycott Israel.

Sarsour claimed Omar was “being attacked for saying that she supports BDS (Boycott Divestment Sanctions) and the right for people to engage in constitutionally protected freedoms. This is not only coming from the right wing, but some folks who masquerade as progressives but always choose their allegiance to Israel over their commitment to democracy and free speech.”

Sarsour’s anti-semitic troupe was met with criticism from the American Jewish Committee to criticize.

“Accusing Jews of dual loyalty is one of the oldest and most pernicious antisemitic tropes. No surprise to see it coming from @LSarsour. How long will progressive leaders continue to look the other way in the face of this hate?” the group said in a statement shared to Twitter.

During a speech at the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention in Chicago in 2017, Sarsour infamously called for a “jihad” against President Trump and called on Muslims not to assimilate in America.

Sarsour said:

I hope that we when we stand up to those who oppress our communities that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad. That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or in the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.

“Our number one and top priority is to protect and defend our community, it is not to assimilate and please any other people and authority,” the Muslim American activist continued. “Our obligation is to our young people, is to our women, to make sure our women are protected in our community.”

“Our top priority and even higher than all those other priorities is to please Allah and only Allah,” she concluded.

Sarsour was an active surrogate for 2020 Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the 2016 presidential primary and a Democratic National Convention delegate.

MarkPantano.com

Published  1 month ago

Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich observed that current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears to be losing control of the House of Representatives. Watch:

New York Post

Published  1 month ago

It’s really not hard to get to the bottom of this: When you say that Jews have magical hypnotic powers to control other people, you’re an anti-Semite. When you say Jews control other people

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

As seen on America's Newsroom

Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) pushed back Thursday on the decision by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not to call out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) by name in a planned resolution broadly condemning hatred and anti-Semitism.

In recent weeks, Omar (D-Minn.) has drawn strong criticism for her remarks about Israel and U.S. support of the Jewish state.

Speaking Thursday morning to reporters, Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she doesn't believe Omar "understood the full weight of her words" as a member of Congress.

"I feel confident that her words were not based on any anti-Semitic attitude, but that she didn't have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people, where these words have a history and a cultural impact that may have been unknown to her," said Pelosi.

The speaker said a resolution would be brought forward to condemn anti-Semitism without mentioning Omar by name. She said Omar may have to further "explain what she meant" with her recent comments.

On Monday, Omar faced a petition from a group of leading Jewish organizations to have her removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The most recent outcry came after Omar suggested last week that supporters of Israel have an "allegiance to a foreign country" over the United States.

"I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country," Omar told activists in a Washington, D.C. cafe. "I want to ask why is it OK for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, of fossil fuel industries, or big pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobbying movement that is influencing policy."

Stewart said on "America's Newsroom" that Republicans have been quick to condemn their own members for offensive statements.

"It's not asking too much for the leadership of the Democratic Party to do the same thing," said Stewart, adding he "respectfully disagrees" with Pelosi's argument that the issue is not about Omar specifically.

"Of course it's about her and the comments she made. That's what started this piece of legislation, but frankly the Democratic Party just isn't willing to take a stand on this."

He said Jewish Democrats are likely wondering what is happening in the party after multiple instances of Omar making comments perceived by many to be anti-Semitic.

Watch the remarks by Pelosi and Stewart above.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Radical Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib announced that she is going forward with impeachment proceedings against President Trump. What will she be impeaching President Trump for? She isn't sure yet. The Michigan Congresswoman joined a group of protesters

Dan Bongino

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) today and expressed her confidence that the freshman Congresswoman’s recent anti-Israel comments were “not based on any anti-Semitic attitude.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reacts to Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar's Israel remarks: "I do not believe that she understood the full weight of the words. … I feel confident that her words were not based on any anti-Semitic attitude” https://t.co/xWkFWNXMEt pic.twitter.com/wgTfhHdqay

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) March 7, 2019

“I do not believe that she understood the full weight of the words. … I feel confident that her words were not based on any anti-Semitic attitude,” she told reporters today.

Omar has come under fire in recent weeks for numerous anti-Semitic comments. Most recently, the congresswoman claimed that lawmakers who support Israel “hold an allegiance to a foreign country.”

In February, she claimed that Jewish advocacy group, AIPAC, paid off members of Congress for their support.

The House will vote today on a resolution “opposing hate,” after progressive Democrats opposed original plans to vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism in response to Omar’s incendiary rhetoric.

Fox News reports:

A senior House Democratic source told Fox News the resolution is expected to be introduced and voted on later Thursday, but said the text is still being finalized. Fox News is told the resolution is being drafted by Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin and Louisiana Rep. Cedric Richmond, both Democrats.

A Democratic source told Fox News on Wednesday that Pelosi has been “taken aback” by the growing dissent and anger among rank-and-file Democrats over the resolution — highlighting Pelosi’s tenuous grip on control over the House and underscoring the growing power of the party’s nascent far-left progressive wing.

Pelosi reportedly walked out of a meeting Wednesday with Democrat House members, setting down her microphone and telling attendees, “Well, if you’re not going to listen to me, I’m done talking.”

rollcall

Published  1 month ago

Some House Democrats have expressed reservations about going after Donald Trump’s children in their oversight investigations into the president’s administration, 2016 campaign and business empire.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not one of them.

“They are investigating certain subjects. Whoever falls into that net, falls into the net,” the California Democrat told reporters Thursday.

The House Intelligence, Judiciary, Oversight and Financial Services Committees have all opened investigations touching on Trump’s personal finances and how they may have influenced his campaign and administration. The Intelligence Committee has also reopened its probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, and possible ties to Trump’s campaign.

Pelosi said any investigations that involve Trump’s children, like Ivanka Trump or her husband Jared Kushner, would be prompted by allegations from other witnesses and in media reports that they have violated the law or ethical norms — not by their familial relationship to the president.

“They are advisers to the president. They have security clearance,” Pelosi said. “This is not [Trump’s] children at home.”

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

Yes, Rep. Ilhan Omar is a problem. But the fact that the Democratic Party refuses to condemn her anti-Semitic rhetoric is a disaster.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

David Duke is publicly defending Ilhan Omar in the wake of a series of antisemitic statements that have rankled the Democrat Party nationally.

WayneDupree.com

Published  1 month ago

I remember when President Trump was elected all the Democrats were crowing that it was going to be the end of the Republican Party. Less than three years and the Democrat party is spiraling down the toilet of anti-Semitism, bigotry, racism, and plain out and out stupidity and Nancy Pelosi who wanted to make history to become Speaker Of the House once again is going down with it.

Democrats will never hold themselves accountable. This has been known for years, but just this year they have made it obvious to anyone paying attention. There is no accountability for politicians involved in blackface, sexual abuse, anti-semitism, desire to kill babies after birth, just to name a few.

I’ll be interested to see how many American Jews still vote for Democrats. I was shocked to see how many voted for the party that doesn’t support Israel. Clearly, I don’t understand the rationale behind supporting the party that doesn’t believe in Israel’s future.

Pelosi defended Rep. Ilhan Omar in the video below when she said this:

“I don’t think that the Congresswoman is, perhaps, appreciate the full weight of how it was heard by other people, although I don’t believe it was intended in any anti-Semitic way,”

“But the fact is that’s how it was interpreted, we have to remove all doubt. As we have done, over and over again.”

Hey Dems, you created this monster, good luck dealing with what you’ve created.

Unfortunately, the rest of us have to deal with it too. Now I know how Germans who were against Hitler felt in the 1930s. This is how fascism starts, with fanatics like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar. I would laugh at how the Dems have lost control but unfortunately, there is nothing funny about catering to Anti-Semites, embracing a platform that excludes God, and cheering for abortions after birth. The modern Democrat party is dangerous.

This is going to result in losses to the Democratic party and I won’t shed a tear. The number of people that say, “I didn’t leave the Democratic party, the Democratic party left ME” is going to increase. Antisemitism and Infanticide and the failure to condemn these infractions are the cornerstones of their demise.

IMPORTANT => We’re being censored by social media and need your help to continue to fight against the opposition media lies.

The Republicans rebuked Steve King and they didn’t make excuses to “tolerate” so-called White Supremacy, one of the latest boogeymen from the left. Nor did they expand it into a negotiation on how King should be punished.

Omar committed an ethical infraction. The Old Democrat Party would have removed her from her committee assignment and/or censured her. They wouldn’t have made it a bargaining issue with Omar and her sympathizers. She did the deed. The discussion should not be about every offense the Dems can dream of that might be against one of their victimhood pawns.

Pelosi wanted the speakership so bad and now she’s fighting the tiger she grabbed by the tail. Be careful what you wish for.

Please consider making a donation to WayneDupree.com

and help our mission to make the world a better place

If you find inaccurate information within this article, please use the contact form to alert us immediately.

NOTE: Facebook and Twitter are currently censoring conservative content. We hope they will reverse their policy and honor all voices shortly. Until then, please like our page on Facebook and PLEASE check the Wayne Dupree homepage for the latest stories.

Having problems finding a source for real news links in real time, click on Whatfinger.com. Visit, bookmark and share this resource and then tell your friends and family.

CNS News

Published  1 month ago

Speaking at a news conference on voting rights with Rep. Lloyd Dogget (D-Texas) in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said immigrants “make America more American,” and we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said. “And that, unless you're blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

Speaker Pelosi spoke on the importance of passing H.R. 1, the “For the People Act of 2019,” “to lay the foundation to pass the Voting Rights Act, strengthened after the actions of the Supreme Court, which significantly weakened it,” she said.

Below is an excerpt of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s remarks:

“In the campaign, the candidate that I, the president that I quoted the most was Ronald Reagan. Does that surprise you? Maybe. But Ronald Reagan said this: ‘This is the last speech I will make as President of the United States. And I have a message I want to communicate to the country I love.’ He went on to talk about the Statue of Liberty and what it means to the world – that beacon of hope, what it means to people who have come here and seen that statue welcoming them – he said, our ancestors, our grandparents, our parents.”

“We, in California, see people coming from a different direction, but the same welcome. You see them coming, many from the south, southern border, but should be the same welcome. He went on to say, though, after talking about the Statue of Liberty: ‘the vital force of America’s preeminence in the world is every new generation of immigrants who come to our country. And when America fails to recognize that as our vital force, America will fail to be preeminent in the world’ – preeminent in the world.

“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families. And that, unless you're blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

Please support CNSNews today! [a 501(c)(3) non-profit production of the Media Research Center]

Or, book travel through MRC’s Travel Discounts Program! MRC receives a rebate for each booking when you use our special codes.

BOOK NOW

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

February was yet another stellar month for the U.S. economy. The unemployment rate dropped to 3.8 percent, the number of employed Americans once again reached an all-time high and wages continued to increase sharply.

Yet, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement claiming that “February’s abysmal jobs numbers are a stark warning from an economy being hollowed out by the GOP’s devastating special interest agenda.” Her statement is a perfect example of what happens when a politician focuses on a single metric as the means to garner a political advantage. In reality, even though the labor market added fewer jobs than expected last month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) report indicates that – for American workers – the economy is still roaring.

In February, the number of people working increased by 255,000 while the number of people unemployed declined by 300,000. Labor force participation, the number of people working or actively looking for work, was over 63 percent for the 3rd consecutive month. The last time that happened was July - Sept. of 2013.

ANDY PUZDER: AOC’S SOCIALIST ANTI-AMAZON VENDETTA TAKES AIM AT VIRGINIA

The unemployment rate decreased by an impressive 0.2 of a percentage point compared to January, just 0.1 higher than the 50-year low reached last year. February marked a full year during which the unemployment rate was at or below 4 percent every month. The last time that happened was February of 1969 - January of 1970.

With the demand for workers high, average hourly earnings increased by 3.4 percent, representing the biggest pay bump for any 12-month period since the end of the Great Recession and the 7th consecutive month that year-over-year wage gains were at or above 3 percent.

Regrettably, Speaker Pelosi glossed over the positive indicators in the BLS data to fixate on February’s anomalously small job-creation figures. Although the 20,000 new jobs the economy created last month fell short of expectations, there are several reasons to take that figure with a grain of salt.

For example, employment in the construction industry declined by 31,000 jobs in February following a robust increase of 53,000 jobs in January – due in part to record level snowfall in the Northern Midwest and the unusual polar vortex that hit the U.S. in late January and extended into early February. It literally froze many construction projects for weeks. This extreme weather also helps explain why job growth in the hotel and restaurants sector was flat in February after adding an impressive increase of 89,000 jobs in January.

At the time, one investment publication warned that the polar vortex could have “a meaningful economic impact” because “life-threatening temperatures should deter even the most serious shoppers and committed construction workers, to say nothing of people indifferent between eating leftovers and going out to restaurants.”

Despite the abnormally bad weather, the number of people working meaningfully increased. That may seem counter-intuitive as job creation was below expectations. Part of the explanation is the number of jobs created and the number of people employed are derived from two separate BLS surveys. Nonetheless, with economic growth increasing the demand for workers, the number of people working can increase even when the number of jobs does not.

For example, as business improves, part-time jobs often turn into full time reducing the need for employees to work two part-time jobs to get by. When an employee quits a part-time job to take advantage of a full-time position, it opens that part-time position up for someone else. The result wouldn’t be an increase in the number of jobs created for the month (there would still be two jobs), but it would increase the number of people employed from one to two.

The result should show up in the numbers as more people working full time and fewer people working multiple jobs. According to the BLS, in February, 322,000 more people were working full time and 209,000 fewer people were working multiple jobs. That indicates an improving, as opposed to “abysmal,” jobs market.

Not surprisingly, the February data reflect a continuation of the same positive trends we’ve been seeing since shortly after President Trump took office and began implementing the pro-growth policy agenda that America so sorely needed – tax cuts, deregulation and a focus on domestic energy.

One thing is absolutely clear, the U.S. economy is still strong. President Trump’s policies have fundamentally improved economic conditions throughout the country, and despite Speaker Pelosi’s protestations to the contrary, nobody has benefitted more than the American worker.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

During a news conference on Tuesday with Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated that immigrants “make America more American,” and that we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

What exactly did she mean by that?

SPECIAL OFFER: Free Trump 2020 Hat While Supplies Last

The Speaker of the House went on to say, “So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families. And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

Pelosi continued her speech and even quoted Ronald Reagan in an attempt to portray the message that Reagan’s words showed that he was a supporter of illegal immigration.

President Reagan must be rolling over in his grave.

“In the campaign, the candidate that I, the president that I quoted the most was Ronald Reagan. Does that surprise you? Maybe. But Ronald Reagan said this: ‘This is the last speech I will make as President of the United States. And I have a message I want to communicate to the country I love.’ He went on to talk about the Statue of Liberty and what it means to the world – that beacon of hope, what it means to people who have come here and seen that statue welcoming them – he said, our ancestors, our grandparents, our parents. We, in California, see people coming from a different direction, but the same welcome. You see them coming, many from the south, southern border, but should be the same welcome. He went on to say, though, after talking about the Statue of Liberty: ‘the vital force of America’s preeminence in the world is every new generation of immigrants who come to our country. And when America fails to recognize that as our vital force, America will fail to be preeminent in the world’ – preeminent in the world.”

Reagan was referring to LEGAL immigrants, not ILLEGAL ones.

When talking about people coming from the south, Pelosi is referring to the illegal aliens that are crossing our border at record numbers.

The Speaker of the House is openly encouraging criminal actions that negatively impact our country and falsely using Reagan’s words to encouraged her twisted agenda.

The whole purpose of her speech was to portray the message that people coming across our southern border are making America more American and how we shouldn’t suppress their vote.

VOTE NOW: Should Trump BLOCK The ISIS Bride From Entering The USA?

The Speaker fails to clarify if she is discussing legal or illegal immigrants but there is no data that suggests that legal immigrants’ votes are being suppressed so it seems to be clear that Pelosi is talking about illegal aliens.

The only reason Democrats like Pelosi care so much about immigration, is because of the votes they gain.

Check out what Donald Trump Jr. posted on Twitter:

And there it is folks. What we all knew but no one would say. It’s only about votes for Democrats.

Speaker Pelosi: We Should Not Be ‘Suppressing the Vote of Our Newcomers to America’ https://t.co/XFBUfNlLDs

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) March 7, 2019

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Dan Bongino

Published  1 month ago

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) attempted to defend Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) by downplaying the significance of the pain of families of Holocaust survivors.

According to the Hill, Clyburn spoke with reporters yesterday and lamented the fact that many media reports on the Congresswoman’s anti-Semitic comments did not mention the fact that she fled violence in Somalia and was a Kenyan refugee before she made her way to the United States.

Clyburn told reporters, “There are people who tell me, ‘Well, my parents are Holocaust survivors.’ ‘My parents did this.’ It’s more personal with her … I’ve talked to her, and I can tell you she is living through a lot of pain.”

Omar has come under fire in recent weeks for numerous anti-Semitic comments. Most recently, the congresswoman claimed that lawmakers who support Israel “hold an allegiance to a foreign country.”

In February, she cliamed that Jewish advocacy group, AIPAC, paid off members of Congress for their support.

On Monday, some of the country’s leading Jewish organizations demanded that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) be removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee for her anti-Semitism, according to an exclusive report by the Washington Free Beacon.

In a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY), the group writes that Omar’s recent comments, anti-Semitic tweets, as well as her address before the Islamic Relieve USA in February are grounds for her removal from the influential committee.

“In light of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s recent anti-Semitic tweets, statements, and address before Islamic Relief USA on Saturday, February 23rd, we, the undersigned organizations, request that you immediately remove her as a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee,” they write.

“We hope you will continue to demonstrate your commitment to the high moral standards of your office by removing Rep. Omar, a woman who has repeatedly exhibited strong biases against the State of Israel and the Jewish people, from this critically important and sensitive committee,” the letter states.

House Democrats have delayed a vote condemning anti-Semitism after progressive lawmakers like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) came to the defense of Omar.

The resolution was supposed to be introduced today and condemned anti-Semitism after Omar sparked outrage with her incendiary, anti-Semitic rhetoric.

According to Fox News, the resolution was going to state that the House “rejects anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.”

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Fox News host Judge Jeanine Pirro went ALL IN on trying to expose who House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) might be working for when it comes to border security.

Pirro risked everything when it comes to bracing herself for massive amounts of backlash, because some of her comments during a recent Opening Statement titled “Refusal to come up with a compromise is putting politics over people” could land her in very hot water.

Get Your FREE ‘Peace Talks’ Coin Before They’re Gone For Good

Border security is a big deal for Americans. Pirro appears to be strong on supporting border security, just like many Republicans and members of the Democratic Party alike.

However, the Democrats have recently resorted to calling the border crisis made up, make-believe, fantasy and acting like it doesn’t exist.

Fact: February 2019 had the highest number of undocumented immigrants wishing to cross the border in 12 years. Numbers don’t lie. Democrats can’t hide from concrete evidence.

VOTER POLL: Should Abortion Be Banned FOREVER?

Pirro’s opening statement goes right after Pelosi for how she’s handling the situation at the border of U.S. and Mexico.

To remind everyone, Trump signed the spending deal and declared a national emergency to get funding for his border wall, as reported in mid February.

“President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action — including a national emergency — to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement.

Now this is where Pirro heats up and blasts Pelosi for who she might work for.

At some point in her nearly 10-minute video discussing President Trump’s new border security deal, Pirro asked a very simple question about who Pelosi works for. Does Pelosi work for illegal immigrants or does she work for Americans?

It’s a simple question and Pirro nailed it when she boasted the bravado to come out and ask this.

“Are you working for Americans or illegals? Or is it that you just don’t give a damn? You vacation in Hawaii. Your buddies vacation in Puerto Rico during a shutdown and you plan a jaunt to Europe while federal employees are trying to save every dollar to buy groceries. Admit it — you don’t give a damn,” Pirro said.

She added: “Nancy, you are a hypocrite, a political operative… Your mantra: Destroy the president of the United States. ‘To hell with the taxpaying hard-working Americans. Let them eat cake. I got a junket to go on, an ego to assuage, an electorate to ignore.”

Will Nancy Pelosi ever respond to Pirro?

Probably not.

When some Democrats are presented with questions that would show them in a bad light, they often deflect the question and change the subject.

Pelosi will address the border situation in a way that paints a pretty picture for Democrats while trying to show the president as “Orange Man Bad.”

Trump Train

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) on Wednesday, telling reporters that while Omar had made anti-Jewish remarks in recent weeks, she had not been “intentionally antisemitic Read More….

Pelosi’s remarks were reported by Jake Sherman of Politico, after a meeting of House Democrats “erupted into a full-scale brawl” over disagreements about a resolution condemning antisemitism, according to the Washington Post. Pelosi had planned a vote on the resolution Wednesday, but party leaders postponed even a watered-down version after some members objected. Democratic Party leaders could not say if or when a vote would happen.

Pelosi’s contention that Omar had not been “intentionally antisemitic” contradicts a recent timeline of events, which suggests that Omar was well aware that her comments about Israel were perceived to have crossed a crucial line

Read More….

In late 2018, local Jewish leaders in Minnesota staged an “intervention” with Representative-elect Omar to express their concerns over her past rhetoric, including a statement in 2012 that “Israel has hypnotized the world.” Their purpose was to educate her about why her remarks were offensive, according to local press.

On Feb, 10-11, 2019, Omar tweeted that pro-Israel members of Congress had been paid to support Israel, singling out the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobby group that neither donates to candidates nor endorses them. After an outcry, Democratic leaders condemned her remarks and Omar apologized — though she continued attacking AIPAC and it took her two weeks to delete her tweets Read More….

After Omar’s apology, local Jewish leaders in Minnesota reached out to her in an effort to explain to her that her rhetoric was offensive to them. The meetings were held quietly and were not publicized until later.

On Feb. 27, at a meeting of supporters in Washington, DC, Omar complained about the controversy over her antisemitic remarks, and accused pro-Israel Americans of having “allegiance to a foreign country.”

On March 1, House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) condemned Omar’s latest remarks, saying that Omar had used a “vile anti-Semitic slur” in impugning his, and others’, patriotism.

On March 3, Omar — having been informed by her own constituents and Democratic Party leaders repeatedly that her rhetoric was antisemitic — doubled down: “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee,” she tweetedRead More….

Pelosi’s deputy, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), denied in January that Omar is antisemitic. After she apologized for antisemitic remarks in February, he suggested that the caucus would take “further action” if she persisted with her hateful views. On Wednesday, he said the House might not vote on a resolution against antisemitism before the end of the week, as initially planned. He did not say when a vote might take place.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino crushed liberal Fox News contributor Geraldo Rivera for championing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s socialist policy ideas, which even Geraldo admits are “totally impractical” and “far-fetched.” Bongino clashed with Geraldo during a heated segment on Sean Hannity’s show. Geraldo says people shouldn’t criticize Ocasio-Cortez and her hare-brained ideas because we shouldn’t discourage young […]

elderofziyon

Published  1 month ago

Health care executive and national Tea Party leader Michael Johns, a former White House speechwriter and Heritage Foundation policy analyst.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday did not call for Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) to apologize for her latest anti-Jewish remark, overruling House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY), who demanded the freshman congresswoman apologize for her “vile antisemitic slur” last week.

Speaking before reporters on Capitol Hill Thursday, Pelosi said she doesn’t believe Omar suggesting pro-Israel groups pressure lawmakers into hold “allegiance” to a foreign country was made with “any antisemitic attitude.”

“I understand how advocates come in with their enthusiasms, but when you cross that threshold into Congress, your words weigh much more,” the California Democrat replied when asked if she believes Omar should apologize.

Speaking last Wednesday night at a forum at a Washington, D.C., bookstore with fellow freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Omar said she fears everything the pair says about Israel is construed as antisemitic because they are Muslims. She said that fact prevents a “broader debate” about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. “I want to ask, ‘Why is it okay for me to talk about the influence of the [National Rifle Association], or fossil fuel industries or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing policy?’” she then asked.

Last Friday evening, Engel criticized Omar for trafficking in anti-Jewish tropes and called on the Minnesota Democrat to apologize for her “vile antisemitic slur.”

“I welcome debate in Congress based on the merits of policy, but it’s unacceptable and deeply offensive to call into question the loyalty of fellow American citizens because of their political views, including support for the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Engel said. “Her comments were outrageous and deeply hurtful, and I ask that she retract them, apologize, and commit to making her case on policy issues without resorting to attacks that have no place in the Foreign Affairs Committee or the House of Representatives,” he continued.

Pelosi’s soft response comes as House Democratic leadership readies a resolution condemning “all hate” — no longer singling out antisemitism. The resolution was expanded to include other forms of hatred after Democrats expressed concern that a narrow resolution would bring unwanted attention to Omar, who has already apologized several times for antisemitic remarks.

Earlier this year, Omar apologized for a 2012 tweet in which she claimed Israel had “hypnotized” the world and committed “evil doings.” The freshman congresswoman apologized in February for suggesting that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) bribed Republican lawmakers into supporting the Jewish state.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was "taken aback" this week by the growing dissent and anger among rank-and-file Democrats over a possible resolution to formally condemn anti-Semitism, a Democratic source told Fox News on Wednesday -- highlighting Pelosi's tenuous grip on control over the House and underscoring the growing power of the party's nascent far-left progressive wing.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar refused to address questions on Wednesday about accusations she’s anti-Semitic in light of the drama over a planned resolution on Capitol Hill condemning bigotry.

Conservative Tribune

Published  1 month ago

Trump infuriated Palestinians, and their supporters in the U.S.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

The more Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tries to make nice with the radical, hard-left wing of the party, the more she opens herself up as a target to these same forces. Look no further than Women’s March co-chair Linda Sarsour, who called Pelosi a “typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work […]

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Henry Rodgers, DCNF

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul said 10 Republican Senators will vote for the resolution to terminate President Donald Trump’s national emergency for border wall funding Monday afternoon.

Paul told a group of reporters on Capitol Hill that he thinks 10 Senators will vote for Texas Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro’s resolution, which the Texas Democrat believes will would end Trump’s national emergency.

Rand Paul tells reporters he thinks there are 10 Republican senators who will vote against the emergency declaration. pic.twitter.com/jjunBtM6YE

— Emily Cochrane (@ESCochrane) March 4, 2019

This comes as Paul said he will join a group of three Republicans who have expressed concerns with Trump’s declaration for a national emergency, saying they do not believe the president should be allowed to override Congress to such a degree Saturday.

“I can’t vote to give extraconstitutional powers to the President,” Paul said, to the Bowling Green Daily News Saturday. “I can’t vote to give the President the power to spend money that hasn’t been appropriated by Congress,” he continued. “We may want more money for border security, but Congress didn’t authorize it. If we take away those checks and balances, it’s a dangerous thing.”

Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine are in the group of three.

Murkowski said Tuesday she would vote for the resolution, making it clear that the bill will pass the Senate due to support from these Republicans.

Collins said Wednesday she supports a lawsuit challenging Trump’s national emergency, adding that she plans to vote for the congressional resolution.

Democrats in the House of Representatives introduced the resolution Friday to block Trump’s national emergency that could allow him to build a wall on the southern border.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to her colleagues Thursday, telling them they need to “move swiftly to pass this bill.”

This comes just days after Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a 2020 hopeful, listed of a number of issues for which she would declare a national emergency if elected president, including “climate change, gun violence, student loan debt — right off the top. That’s what we ought to be working on.”

Trump will still have the option to veto the resolution if passed by the Senate.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Blunt Force Truth

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is still triggered by the 2016 presidential election.

During a puff piece aired by Alabama’s WZDX, Pelosi was asked, “Women across the country were traumatized at the loss for Hillary Clinton. Do you remember what that night was like for you personally?”

“It was like getting kicked in the back by a mule constantly,” she responded. “It was physical— it was so unbelievable that not only would Hillary Clinton not succeed in winning, but that Donald Trump would be president of the United States.

“I thought that was just impossible to happen,” Pelosi said, “but it did.”

Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.

twitchy.com

Published  1 month ago

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

House Democratic leaders are struggling to contain the controversy over Rep. Ilhan Omar‘s comments criticizing Israel, with the caucus fighting behind closed doors over whether — and how — to respond.

Tensions ran high at a caucus meeting Wednesday as some Democrats privately vented that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team had failed to adequately respond to the escalating political crisis, with too little outreach to their own rank-and-file.

Freshman Rep. Jahana Hayes stood up and confronted Pelosi directly, arguing that she shouldn't have to learn about the Democratic Caucus’ official response from MSNBC. The Connecticut Democrat said she now has to vote on a resolution that she’s barely read, without a private briefing from leadership, according to five sources.

Pelosi countered that the Democratic measure to condemn anti-Semitism is not final, though text had been circulating and a vote had been tentatively planned for Wednesday. That vote was postponed amid a last-minute backlash from progressives in the caucus.

The speaker also said that Democratic leaders were forced to respond quickly over the weekend — a task made trickier with Omar on a congressional delegation trip to East Africa over the weekend.

Pelosi then said, “We'll if you're not going to listen to me, I’m done talking,” and then sat the microphone down and walked out of the room, the sources said.

A senior Democratic aide disputed that it was a tense exchange, saying that Pelosi was merely trying to explain why things unfolded the way they did over the past few days.

Hayes later said in an interview that she was already walking out of the room and did not hear Pelosi’s final comments.

“I’m not interested in legislating through the media and social media,” Hayes said, noting when she received a copy of the draft resolution it wasn’t even clear which lawmakers were the lead authors. “I know that leadership has the ability to tighten up the process and do something about it.”

Still, that private moment of frustration reflects widespread anxiety in the caucus over how to handle the latest bout of remarks from Omar — one of the first Muslim women to serve in Congress — after she suggested that pro-Israel advocates had “allegiance” to Israel. The remarks offended multiple top Democrats, who said it was assuming painful, decades-old stereotypes that Jews had “dual loyalties.”

Multiple Jewish lawmakers, including Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) stood up in the caucus meeting to explain why Omar’s latest remarks were so offensive and potentially dangerous. But other Democrats — including a Jewish lawmaker — stood up to defend their colleague and say they didn’t see what she said as so offensive.

Omar did not speak in the meeting, multiple sources said, although she was spotted chatting with some Democrats one-on-one and received hugs from others.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), who is Jewish, said Omar has personally apologized to her, which she said ended with a friendly embrace.

“I do not believe that Ilhan Omar is anti-Semitic. I absolutely believe that she has become, as a result, a target. I think the Republicans love that, and frankly, I think the media loves to exploit the divisions,” Schakowsky said.

“I think we ought to stay off of social media to have these conversations,” Schakowsky said, referring to multiple spats that have broken out between members, including an exchange between Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) over the weekend.

Democratic leaders have rushed to rewrite a resolution condemning anti-Semitism that was initially aimed at Omar’s remarks last week. That measure, which is expected to reach a floor vote Thursday, is now being written to include broader language to condemn other forms of hate speech.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus had spoken out loudly against a measure aimed at Omar’s comments at a time when Omar herself has been the target of anti-Muslim speech.

“It’s not just the Congressional Black Caucus. Many members of the Democratic caucus are concerned,” Rep. Karen Bass said of the previous draft of the resolution. “We want to make clear that we stand against the general rise of hatred.”

“I also think frankly that it puts her at risk.” Bass said.

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

Three Senate Republicans are expected to vote “yes” for a resolution in an attempt to terminate President Donald Trump’s national emergency for border wall funding.

The group of three Republicans expressed their concerns with Trump’s declaration for a national emergency, saying they do not believe the president should be allowed to override Congress to such a degree. In the group are Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine.

“As a U.S. senator, I cannot justify providing the executive with more ways to bypass Congress,” Tillis wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post. “As a conservative, I cannot endorse a precedent that I know future left-wing presidents will exploit to advance radical policies that will erode economic and individual freedoms.”

Murkowski said Tuesday she would vote for the resolution, making it clear that the bill will pass the Senate due to support from these Republicans.

Collins said Wednesday she supports a lawsuit challenging Trump’s national emergency, adding that she plans to vote for the congressional resolution.

Democrats in the House of Representatives introduced the resolution Friday to block Trump’s national emergency that could allow him to build a wall on the southern border.

Democratic Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro introduced the resolution, which he said will pass the House, as 222 cosponsors have jumped on board. Castro sent out a tweet saying his resolution would terminate Trump’s national emergency. Democrats only need 218 supporters to pass the resolution.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to her colleagues Thursday, telling them they need to “move swiftly to pass this bill.” (RELATED: House Introduces Resolution To Block Trump’s National Emergency)

This comes just days after Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a 2020 hopeful, listed of a number of issues for which she would declare a national emergency if elected president, including “climate change, gun violence, student loan debt — right off the top. That’s what we ought to be working on.”

Trump will still have the option to veto the resolution if passed by the Senate. The resolution is expected to be voted on in the House Tuesday.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) on Wednesday, telling reporters that while Omar had made anti-Jewish remarks in recent weeks, she had not been “intentionally antisemitic.”

Pelosi’s remarks were reported by Jake Sherman of Politico, after a meeting of House Democrats “erupted into a full-scale brawl” over disagreements about a resolution condemning antisemitism, according to the Washington Post. Pelosi had planned a vote on the resolution Wednesday, but party leaders postponed even a watered-down version after some members objected. Democratic Party leaders could not say if or when a vote would happen.

Pelosi’s contention that Omar had not been “intentionally antisemitic” contradicts a recent timeline of events, which suggests that Omar was well aware that her comments about Israel were perceived to have crossed a crucial line:

In late 2018, local Jewish leaders in Minnesota staged an “intervention” with Representative-elect Omar to express their concerns over her past rhetoric, including a statement in 2012 that “Israel has hypnotized the world.” Their purpose was to educate her about why her remarks were offensive, according to local press.

On Feb, 10-11, 2019, Omar tweeted that pro-Israel members of Congress had been paid to support Israel, singling out the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobby group that neither donates to candidates nor endorses them. After an outcry, Democratic leaders condemned her remarks and Omar apologized — though she continued attacking AIPAC and it took her two weeks to delete her tweets.

After Omar’s apology, local Jewish leaders in Minnesota reached out to her in an effort to explain to her that her rhetoric was offensive to them. The meetings were held quietly and were not publicized until later.

On Feb. 27, at a meeting of supporters in Washington, DC, Omar complained about the controversy over her antisemitic remarks, and accused pro-Israel Americans of having “allegiance to a foreign country.”

On March 1, House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) condemned Omar’s latest remarks, saying that Omar had used a “vile anti-Semitic slur” in impugning his, and others’, patriotism.

On March 3, Omar — having been informed by her own constituents and Democratic Party leaders repeatedly that her rhetoric was antisemitic — doubled down: “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee,” she tweeted.

Pelosi’s deputy, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), denied in January that Omar is antisemitic. After she apologized for antisemitic remarks in February, he suggested that the caucus would take “further action” if she persisted with her hateful views. On Wednesday, he said the House might not vote on a resolution against antisemitism before the end of the week, as initially planned. He did not say when a vote might take place.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Photo: file

Welcome to the State of New York

Published  1 month ago

Fulfills Promise to Sign Red Flag Bill—A Central Part of Governor's 2019 Justice Agenda—Within First 100 Days of New Legislative Session

Legislation Prevents Individuals Who Show Signs of Being a Threat to Themselves or Others from Purchasing or Possessing Guns

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo, joined by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, today fulfilled his promise to sign the Red Flag Bill, a key component of his 2019 Justice Agenda, within the first 100 days of the new legislative session. The Red Flag Bill, also known as the extreme risk protection order bill, prevents individuals who show signs of being a threat to themselves or others from purchasing or possessing any kind of firearm. This legislation builds on New York's strongest in the nation gun laws and makes New York the first in the United States to empower its teachers and school administrators to prevent school shootings by pursuing court intervention.

"The United States loses more people to gun deaths than most developed nations. The first year of President Trump's administration, we lost 40,000 people to gun deaths - the highest number in 50 years. New York led the way by passing the strongest gun safety laws in the nation, but more must be done to end this carnage," Governor Cuomo said. "Today New York is proud to pass the first-in-the-nation Red Flag Bill that empowers school teachers to do something when they believe something bad is going to happen. We are empowering teachers not by giving them guns like the President wants - but by arming and empowering them with the law, so when a teacher or family member sees there is a problem, they can go to a judge and get a court-ordered evaluation. The Red Flag Bill will save lives and doesn't infringe on anybody's rights and it is common sense."

"It is a great honor to join Governor Cuomo, survivors and advocates as New York makes history by enacting this landmark gun violence prevention legislation," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "These bills are bold and far-reaching, containing strong, comprehensive solutions to save lives and end the crisis of senseless gun violence in America. Leaders in the State House and in the U.S. House must continue to work together to ensure that no other family is forced to endure the tragedy and heartbreak of gun violence, whether in our schools, in our places of worship, on our streets or in any place."

"I traveled to schools across the state with Governor Cuomo this past summer to push for common sense gun safety measures," said Lieutenant Governor Kathy Hochul. "Signing the Red Flag Bill into law will further our efforts to combat gun violence and keep guns out of the hands of people who can harm themselves and others. While the federal government has failed to protect Americans, New York is leading the way and enacting policies to help stop the senseless gun violence happening in our society and to help save lives."

No law currently exists in New York State that enables a court to issue an order to temporarily seize firearms from a person who is showing red flags, like violent behavior, or is believed to pose a severe threat of harm to himself, herself, or others unless that person has also been accused of a crime or family offense. In addition, no state in the nation currently empowers its teachers and school administrators to prevent school shootings by pursuing court intervention.

The Red Flag Bill provides all necessary procedural safeguards to ensure that no firearm is removed without due process while ensuring that tragedies, like the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, are not repeated. In this mass shooting, the shooter was reported by multiple sources to be disturbed and dangerous yet was allowed to purchase and possess deadly firearms. In fact, more than half of all perpetrators of mass shootings exhibit warning signs before the shooting, according to a recent analysis. In these cases, an extreme risk protection order could have prevented countless, needless deaths.

The scourge of gun violence throughout the nation is one of the most pressing issues of our time. Currently, the U.S. has the highest homicide-by-firearm rate among the world's most developed nations. In the most recent year of data, gun deaths rose to their highest level in fifty years.

Governor Cuomo previously advanced the legislation to keep guns away from individuals who pose a danger with the launch of a statewide campaign to pass the Red Flag Gun Protection Bill in June of 2018. The campaign included a series of bus tours to schools across the state to stand in solidarity with students, teachers and school administrators who support the bill and other common sense gun reform.

Under Governor Cuomo's leadership, New York has passed the strongest gun control laws in the nation, including the SAFE Act which keeps guns out of the hands of convicted felons and the dangerous mentally ill, ensures private gun sales are subject to a background check, bans high-capacity magazines and assault weapons, and toughens criminal penalties for illegal gun use. The Governor also recently enacted a law targeting the well-known link between domestic abuse and deadly gun violence.

The United States loses more people to gun deaths than most developed nations. The first year of President Trump's administration, we lost 40,000 people to gun deaths - the highest number in 50 years.

Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins said, "It is our responsibility to protect our communities, our schools, and to keep all of New Yorkers safe from gun violence. Following years of inaction on common sense gun safety legislation, the State Senate passed major gun safety bills including Extreme Risk Protection Orders. I thank Governor Cuomo for signing this common sense legislation into law. Once again, our state will serve as an example to the nation on smart gun laws."

Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie said, "Our thoughts and prayers after a tragedy are not enough. The Assembly Majority has a long history of fighting for common sense reforms to prevent gun violence, and I am proud we were able to work with our Senate colleagues and finally make this and other reforms the law of the land. I know we will continue working together to ensure we have the strongest and smartest laws to address the root causes of gun violence, and make New York a safer place for everyone."

Senator Brian Kavanagh said, "After many years of advocating for Extreme Risk Protection Orders in the Assembly and, more recently, the Senate, I'm proud to see the ERPO bill officially signed into New York law. By limiting access to guns for those who pose a demonstrable danger of harming themselves or others, we're taking a huge leap forward toward preventing gun violence in New York. With strong gun laws, smart policing, and effective community intervention strategies, we're working to make New York safer. I thank Senate Leader Andrea-Stewart Cousins, Speaker Carl Heastie, Assembly sponsor JoAnne Simon, and all the advocates who have worked tirelessly to get us to this day, and Governor Andrew Cuomo for signing this critical, life-saving legislation into law."

Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon said, "Too often, we are able to see the warning signs that an individual close to us poses a risk of serious harm to themselves or to others, but lack a mechanism to prevent tragedies such as interpersonal gun violence or suicide. This legislation gives family members, law enforcement, and school personnel the tools they need to prevent gun violence tragedies before they happen. With over one hundred people losing their lives every day to gun violence, we must do more to prevent these tragedies. Thank you, Governor Cuomo, for your commitment to gun safety."

Daily Wire

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has lost control of her party over Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-CA) anti-Semitism scandal, according to numerous prominent pundits.

The Daily Wire reported that "on Wednesday, asked by a reporter about comments made by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) that have widely been interpreted as anti-Semitic, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has assiduously avoided the idea of taking Omar off of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, answered that she did not think Omar’s comments were 'intentionally anti-Semitic.'"

The Washington Examiner reported that Pelosi said that the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which Omar is a member of, would be writing the resolution.

Late on Wednesday, The Daily Beast reported that after pressure from far-left Democrats, "leaders appeared to change course, asking the House Foreign Affairs Committee to draft a resolution that rebuked 'all hate.'"

The apparent lack of control by Pelosi caught the attention of many notable pundits, relevant figures in media and politics, and notable social media accounts, who accused Pelosi of losing control to freshman.

John Podhoretz: "Congratulations to Nancy Pelosi, puppet of freshmen"

Josh Jordan: "It's amazing to see someone as skilled and experienced as Pelosi get completely outmatched by a bunch of first term House reps who refuse to condemn antisemitism within the party."

Stephen Miller: "It took less than 3 months for Pelosi to lose control of her party. Just wild."

"Watching Pelosi deal with this is like watching Boehner & MConnell deal with Ted Cruz, except there are 4 of him and all 4 are raging anti-semites," Miller added. "She’s lost the party."

Arthur Schwartz: "Pelosi seems to have lost control of her conference. Along with her spine."

Ben Shapiro: "Pretty obvious who's running the party at this point, and it ain't Pelosi"

"Pelosi and company have decided to support the most anti-Semitic wing of the party in order to shore up a political coalition," Shapiro later added. "There is no principle here, just rank partisan interest."

Former New York State Democrat Dov Hikind: "After getting pushed around by freshmen reps in the House, it’s clear Pelosi is the leader in name only. And a feckless one at that. She couldn’t even pass a toothless resolution condemning vile antisemitism. Shame on @SpeakerPelosi, @AOC, @IlhanMN and Shame on the Democrats!"

Dana Loesch: "So with the failure to hold Omar accountable for her repeat anti-Semitic Tweet storms, Nancy Pelosi has shown she’s lost control of the House — and her party. Meet the new Democrats/Socialists."

Fox News reported that "Pelosi is 'taken aback' by the growing dissent and anger among rank-and-file Democrats over a possible resolution to formally condemn anti-Semitism," according to a Democratic source, which highlighted "Pelosi's tenuous grip on control over the House and underscoring the growing power of the party's nascent far-left progressive wing."

Fox News added that "Pelosi even reportedly walked out of a meeting Wednesday with Democrat House members, setting down her microphone and telling attendees, 'Well if you're not going to listen to me, I’m done talking.'"

The Democratic source told Fox News: "Here we are again, fighting with ourselves. I've spent another week dealing with this and not on policy."

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Linda Sarsour, co-leader of the embattled Women’s March, attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as House Democrats draft a resolution condemning antisemitism following blowback from Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) latest anti-semitic remarks.

Omar became the center of controversy after suggesting last week that lawmakers are pressured by pro-Israel groups to take a pledge of “allegiance to a foreign country.”

“I want to ask, ‘Why is it OK for me to talk about the influence of the [National Rifle Association], or fossil fuel industries or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing policy?’” the Minnesota Democrat asked during a forum at a bookstore with fellow freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).

Some of Omar’s allies are furious with the latest attempt by Democrats to punish the freshman congresswoman for her repeated antisemitism.

“Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men,” Sarsour wrote in a blistering Facebook post. “God forbid the men are upset — no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

Late Tuesday evening, Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) announced the resolution condemning antisemitism was updated to include language condemning “Islamophobia.” The text was added following an outcry of support from Omar in the House.

The freshman congresswoman has yet to comment on the resolution, which is expected to be unveiled Thursday.

House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY) scolded Omar last Friday for suggesting that pro-Israel politicians hold “allegiance to a foreign country” and demanded the freshman congresswoman apologize for her “vile antisemitic slur.”

“I welcome debate in Congress based on the merits of policy, but it’s unacceptable and deeply offensive to call into question the loyalty of fellow American citizens because of their political views, including support for the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Engel said in a statement. “Her comments were outrageous and deeply hurtful, and I ask that she retract them, apologize, and commit to making her case on policy issues without resorting to attacks that have no place in the Foreign Affairs Committee or the House of Representatives,” the New York Democrat continued.

Even if Omar apologizes yet again, the wheels are in motion to recruit a primary challenger to run against her in 2020.

“She is rapidly making herself a pariah in Congress, rather than an effective representative for her constituents,” state Sen. Ron Latz said of Omar’s recent comments regarding Israel.

Months prior, Omar apologized for a 2012 tweet in which she claimed Israel had “hypnotized” the world and committed “evil doings.”

In recent weeks, the Minnesota Democrat apologized for suggesting the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) bribes Republican lawmakers into supporting the Jewish state. She only did so after House Democrat leadership issued a statement of condemnation and called on her to apologize.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

The 2020 presidential election is officially gearing up and the Democratic Party is imploding. Radical, extreme far-left socialists have now taken over. And any Democrat who doesn't fall in line and support this their left-wing vision will get thrown down to the curb by Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY.

All of America needs to see this group of hyper-partisan freshmen lawmakers. They are now leading the way, and they set the agenda. Nancy Pelosi is terrified of them.

The group is led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who, according to a report from The Washington Post, warned her fellow Democratic lawmakers not to vote with Republicans or she will put them on a list to be primaried in the next election. Welcome to Congress.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEAN HANNITY.

No surprise there. Political intimidation is always a key component of socialism. And AOC needs as much support as she can get for her insane Green New Deal, which promises to totally reshape America by putting an end to all fossil fuels, combustion engines, nuclear energy, airplanes, and yes, cows, because of flatulence and carbon dioxide.

It also promises to provide everything is free. You don't have to worry another day in your life. Free government healthy food, free day care for your kids, free housing, free college education. Forget about K-through- 12. Free universal health care ... free, free! You also get guaranteed vacations, universal guaranteed income and a guaranteed retirement -- even for people unwilling to work.

But like any other socialist, Ocasio-Cortez is really just interested in improving her own quality of life and redistributing the wealth among those in her own inner circle. According to a brand-new bombshell FEC complaint, Ocasio- Cortez's chief of staff is now accused of illegally moving nearly a million dollars in campaign contributions to his own private companies, and in doing so, shielding the cash from all election-related reporting. In other words, Ocasio-Cortez is under fire. Her chief of staff could have used those donations for anything without reporting it, including maybe big payments to themselves, their family, their friends.

We already know, based on a separate FEC complaint, that Ocasio-Cortez's boyfriend, was funneled thousands of dollars from a political action committee set up by this very same chief of staff. But really, who can blame him for taking the money? After all, it's incredibly expensive to keep up with the jet-setting lifestyle of the freshman socialist congresswoman.

On Monday, we first showed you how Ocasio-Cortez, who wants to ban all air travel, loves flying on airplanes between New York and D.C. Now, there's something called Amtrak that she could use instead. It goes pretty much every hour on the hour between D.C. and New York.

It is a very scary picture inside this new radical Democratic Party. And as the 2020 primary season kicks into high gear, it has become very clear that it will be a contest to see who can present the single most radical, most extreme, most socialist vision for America's future.

But she chooses not to do that. Ocasio-Cortez prefers the convenience of flying, especially since we, the American people, are picking up the bill.

AOC told us the world was going to end in 12 years if we didn't make all these drastic sacrifices and changes right now. But then, with socialists, it's always, 'Do as I say, not as I do.' That's why she has no problem taking planes over trains, why she prefers riding in a gas guzzler over public transportation. It's why Ocasio-Cortez probably doesn't want you to know that her very own mother left the great state of New York because of its incredibly high taxes. It's why Bernie and Hillary and Joe Biden and Al Gore all take private jets, and we catch them all the time. The hypocrisy is just rampant.

And keep in mind, socialism is only one component of this radical extreme Democratic socialist party and their agenda. In fact, many of the same far left lawmakers pushing socialist policies are also spreading vile, hateful, rabid anti-Semitic views all throughout the halls of Congress.

Look at Minnesota Congresswoman Illhan Omar, once again facing more backlash after yet another anti-Semitic comment on Twitter. First, she proclaims that Israel is evil and "hypnotizing the world," and then she suggested support for Israel was just because of Jewish money or, as she put it, "all about the Benjamins." And most recently, she pushed the longtime anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that her colleagues support Israel because they have a dual allegiance to the country.

Now, for the second time, the House of Representatives has been forced to consider passing a resolution reminding some Democrats that anti-Semitism is bad and will not be tolerated. Well, that's not stopping Congresswoman Cortez from defending her anti-Semitic colleague on Twitter writing, "We called resolutions on sexist statements, a good chunk of Congress will be gone. Jump to the nuclear option every single time? Leaves the room or some corrective action? I'm asking everybody that we practice calling in before calling out."

So, I guess this is sort of a socialist birds of a feather flocking together? Even when one of them is absolutely obsessed with hating the world's only Jewish state, our closest ally in the region, the only democracy in the region, Israel.

And meanwhile, far left anti-Semitic bigot and self-proclaimed women's rights leader, Linda Sarsour, is backing up her radical friends on Capitol Hill, slamming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's decision to put forth a resolution against anti-Semitism. She called the speaker, " a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the work of power white men." Wow.

And you know what? Pelosi is afraid to take a stand because that freshman group, they can unseat her pretty quickly. It is a very scary picture inside this new radical Democratic Party. And as the 2020 primary season kicks into high gear, it has become very clear that it will be a contest to see who can present the single most radical, most extreme, most socialist vision for America's future.

Adapted from Sean Hannity's monologue from "Hannity" on March 5, 2019.

Sean Hannity currently serves as host of FOX News Channel’s (FNC) Hannity (weekdays 9-10PM/ET). He joined the network in 1996 and is based in New York. Click here for more information on Sean Hannity.

Conservative Review

Published  1 month ago

House Democrats reportedly have postponed, perhaps indefinitely, a vote on a second resolution condemning anti-Semitism in the last two months, following complaints from high-profile anti-Semites that it unfairly maligned anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., even though the resolution did not even mention her by name.

UPDATE: Hoyer says no date has been set for vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism and other forms of hate. Of @IlhanMN, he says: "I don't think she's anti-Semitic."

— Sheryl Gay Stolberg (@SherylNYT) March 6, 2019

House Majority Leader Hoyer says it hasn’t been decided if there will be a vote this week on the anti-Semitism resolution following Rep. Omar's comments: “We haven’t set a time.” – @AlexNBCNews

— NBC Politics (@NBCPolitics) March 6, 2019

The resolution condemning anti-Semitism was drafted after Rep. Omar engaged in another series of anti-Semitic tweets targeting Israel and Jews. This isn’t a particularly new phenomenon. The Somali refugee has a long history of espousing anti-Semitism.

When asked about her comments Tuesday, Rep. Omar appeared to pretend to be on the phone in order to dodge questions from reporters.

Video: Rep. Ilhan Omar declines to answer questions from reporters about the House resolution to condemn anti-Semitism pic.twitter.com/eCv1IgWFiR

— Ashley Killough (@KilloughCNN) March 6, 2019

Although Rep. Omar has been unwilling to defend her anti-Jewish rhetoric, a number of anti-Semitic individuals and groups in Congress and elsewhere have come to the forefront to defend her.

Islamic supremacist and anti-Semitic activist Linda Sarsour, a leader of the Women’s March, took to social media this week bashing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as a “white feminist upholding the patriarchy.” Sarsour lashed out at critics of Ilhan Omar. “We stand with Representative Ilhan Omar,” Sarsour wrote as part of a lengthy Facebook post.

Sarsour was joined by some in Congress, such as anti-Semitic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and high-profile socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., who tweeted support for their embattled colleague.

The terror-tied Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), other Islamist outfits, and anti-Israel extremist groups held rallies calling on supporters to step up and defend Rep. Omar.

Earlier Wednesday, Conservative Review’s Nate Madden pointed out that the anti-Semitism resolution was already being watered down to the point that it was completely unattached to Rep. Omar and no longer exclusive to anti-Semitism.

“The reprimand aimed at Omar doesn’t even mention the freshman congresswoman by name,” Madden writes. “[Rep. Steve] King’s did. But even that version wasn’t watered down enough for many Democrats, who also wanted the resolution changed to include other kids of religious bigotry, resulting in a big intraparty disagreement on Tuesday.”

For now, the prominent Islamist and anti-Semitic activists appear to have succeeded in putting off the congressional resolution.

Sign up to get The Dossier in your inbox twice a week.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Speaker Pelosi bowed to her radical wing on Wednesday. Instead of passing a resolution to condemn Democrat anti-Semite Ilhan Omar, the Democrat leader will rewrite the resolution to omit Omar’s name. Now the resolution will include bigotry and prejudice of all kinds. Apparently, their need to be inclusive and politically correct trumped the need for […]

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi still hasn’t gotten over President Donald Trump winning the election over two years ago.

While speaking with a local news outlet in Alabama, a reporter asked Pelosi, “Women across the country were traumatized at the loss for Hillary Clinton. Do you remember what that night was like for you personally?”

“It was like getting kicked in the back by a mule constantly,” Pelosi said.

Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat – Just Cover Shipping

“It was physical— it was so unbelievable that not only would Hillary Clinton not succeed in winning, but that Donald Trump would be president of the United States,” she added.

Pelosi continued, “I thought that was just impossible to happen. But it did.”

The reporter, who narrated the video as part of the network’s “Celebrating Women” series for Women’s History Month, said toward the end of the clip that Pelosi only ran for re-election in 2018 because she was still angered that Trump won the 2016 election over Hillary Clinton.

“A victory for Hillary Clinton would have meant Pelosi could retire, knowing initiatives like the Affordable Care Act were secure,” the report said.

Last week, Pelosi suffered several face spasms and brain glitches when trying to argue that Trump’s national emergency declaration is unpatriotic.

While speaking in New York City alongside Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo at a bill signing event on gun control, the California Democrat claimed that Democrats are going to do everything imaginable to block Trump from using funds to build the wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The President’s power grab usurps that constitutional responsibility and fundamentally violates the balance of power envisioned by our founders. To defend our democracy, the House will pass congressman Castro’s privileged resolution to terminate the emergency declaration tomorrow,” Pelosi said.

“I salute congressman Castro for his work leading up to the moment so that we are ready. He is chair of the House Congressional Hispanic Caucus, he’s a distinguished member of Congress from state of Texas, which has the longest border with Mexico. But this isn’t about the border,” she added.

Pelosi continued, “This is about the Constitution of the United States. This is not about politics, it’s not about partisanship, it’s about patriotism. And so, again, once we pass this resolution, we will send it over to the Senate. All members, as I said, have taken the oath of office. We would be delinquent in our duties if we did not resist, we did not fight back to overturn the President’s declaration.”

Aside from something clearly being wrong with Pelosi, her comments on argument that Trump’s national emergency declaration being unpatriotic will not sit well with many Americans who want the southern border secured.

US Liberty Wire

Published  1 month ago

President Trump, in his first public remarks about the invasive investigations launched by House Democrats, just checkmated Nancy Pelosi.

Trump will not comply with requests for information he said, citing Obama’s precedent of doing the same, and indicated he will fight the investigations tooth and nail.

Trump will cite executive privilege when necessary and will outright refuse to comply where precedent allows.

From The Hill: President Trump on Tuesday signaled the White House will not comply with a barrage of congressional investigations, accusing Democrats in the House of launching the probes to hurt his chances of winning reelection in 2020.

“It’s a disgrace to our country. I’m not surprised that it’s happening. Basically, they’ve started the campaign. So the campaign begins,” Trump told reporters at the White House after signing an executive order on veterans’ suicide prevention.

“Instead of doing infrastructure, instead of doing health care, instead of doing so many things that they should be doing, they want to play games,” he continued.

Trump suggest he was unwilling to comply with the House Judiciary Committee’s requests for documents related to 81 of his associates, citing what he said was former President Obama’s handling of congressional probes during his time in office.

“They didn’t give one letter. They didn’t do anything. They didn’t give one letter of the requests,” he said.

From Seanhannity.com:

Rep. Steve Scalise unloaded on the Democrats’ never-ending “witch hunt” against the President this week; saying they’re simply trying to “appease their base” and have no interest in finding the facts.

“What you’re seeing on full display is the laying of the foundation to impeach the President by the Democrats. They don’t want to get the facts, they first want to know what their endgame is. Their endgame is to impeach the President whether or not the facts back them up,” said Scalise.

“This is beyond a witch hunt. This was all supposed to be about collusion with Russia. There’s been no collusion found… They’re trying to find any excuse to appease their base who wants the President impeached,” he added.

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

Post by @theamgreatness.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar must be removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee over her anti-Semitic rhetoric, says House Minority Whip Steve Scalise.

In recent weeks, Omar (D-Minn.) has drawn strong bipartisan criticism for her comments about Israel and U.S. support of the Jewish state.

House Democratic leaders plan to bring to the floor Wednesday a resolution condemning anti-Semitism.

And on Monday, Omar was met with a petition to have her removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee, a move Scalise (R-La.) believes is necessary.

The petition, pushed by a group of leading Jewish organizations, was addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), who chairs the committee.

"The resolution only addresses a piece of the problem. She continues to display anti-Semitic remarks, comments. These are her beliefs," Scalise said on "America's Newsroom" Tuesday. "So, if they really are serious about addressing the problem, Nancy Pelosi has to remove her from the Foreign Affairs Committee."

He pointed out that as a member of the committee, Omar receives intelligence briefings on U.S. foreign policy, including the relationship with Israel.

"Why would you have her on a committee that important, that sensitive to our foreign policy if she has those kind of ant-Semitic beliefs, unless you're willing to tolerate it?" Scalise said. "And it shouldn't be tolerated. She ought to be removed immediately from the Foreign Affairs Committee."

Watch the "America's Newsroom" interview above, and see Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) weigh in on the Omar controversy below.

True Pundit

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at her press briefing on Thursday brushed aside questions about whether she believed President Donald Trump had violated campaign finance laws and indicated that her primary concern at this point was that, in her view, the president was “undermining the Constitution” with his declaration of a national emergency on border security.

Pelosi’s briefing came one day after the president’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, testified in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

“Right now what I’m concerned about is the president’s undermining of the Constitution of the United States with his, again, ill‑advised declaration,” Pelosi said. “I think he is totally wrong.’

On Tuesday of last week, the House voted 245 to 182 to approve a resolution to reverse Trump’s declaration of a national emergency. For that resolution to take force, it would need to pass the Senate and then both chambers would need supermajority votes to override a presidential veto.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Moderate Democrats are fuming over New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s closed-door warning last week that Democrats who vote with Republicans are "putting themselves on a list" – a comment interpreted as a primary challenge threat.

Ocasio-Cortez has since downplayed her comments, made in the wake of 26 Democrats joining Republicans to vote for a provision requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement to be notified if illegal immigrants attempt to purchase guns.

OCASIO-CORTEZ WARNS OF 'LIST' FOR MODERATE DEMS WHO VOTE WITH REPUBLICANS

Still, some House Democrats aren’t happy with her talk of a “list.”

“I don't think it's productive,” Michigan Rep. Dan Kildee said Saturday on Fox News’ “Cavuto Live.”

He added, “I don't think we should be interfering with one another's politics. The people who elected us get to make those choices.”

New Jersey Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer, a co-chairman of the Problem Solvers Caucus, said Ocasio-Cortez’s use of the word “list” was “Nixonian.”

“Being unified means ensuring that Democrats aren’t primary-ing other sitting Democrats,” Gottheimer told The Washington Post. “Since when is it okay to put you on a Nixonian list? We need to have a big tent in our party or we won’t keep the House or win the White House.”

The brouhaha began last week when two-dozen moderate Democrats broke from their party's progressive wing and sided with Republicans on a legislative amendment having to do with illegal immigrants and guns.

In a closed-door meeting afterward, according to The Washington Post, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi scolded her wayward center-leaning colleagues, telling them: "We are either a team or we’re not.”

Ocasio-Cortez then told fellow Democrats that those who voted with Republicans were "putting themselves on a list." Ocasio-Cortez later claimed she wasn’t talking about a list for primary challenges.

“I didn’t say that they were putting themselves on a list for primaries," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. "I said that by Dems distinguishing themselves by breaking off on procedural…votes, they were inadvertently making a list of targets for the GOP and for progressive advocates on their pro-ICE vote.”

Reacting to Ocasio-Cortez's comments, one party strategist who works for moderate Democrats argued Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t “respect” the views of other Democrats who don’t embrace her progressive politics.

“My main gripe about AOC is that while I respect her voice in the party, I don't think she respects mine or anyone else's who differs with her on policy or comes from a different political electoral reality,” said John Anzalone, a Democratic pollster in Alabama.

There’s been speculation since she was elected to Congress that Ocasio-Cortez could get involved in Democratic primary fights in 2020, especially with the group Justice Democrats signaling plans to primary incumbent Democrats they see as insufficiently progressive. Ocasio-Cortez has been aligned with that group.

It's a tactic that has been embraced by some conservative groups and politicians on the right, especially during the 2010 and 2012 elections, when incumbent lawmakers in the House and Senate were ousted in primaries by conservative challengers.

Fox News’ Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

The Democrats’ Dilemma

03/05 10:55 am

What Ilhan Omar and Dean Phillips tell us about the future of the Democratic Party.

Zero Hedge

Published  1 month ago

Update: House Democrats voted Friday to defend localities that allow illegal immigrants to vote in their elections, turning back a GOP attempt to discourage the practice. As The Washington Times reports, the vote marks a stunning reversal from just six months ago, when the chamber - then under GOP control - voted to decry illegal immigrant voting.

“We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in,” Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and hero of the civil rights movement, told colleagues as he led opposition to the GOP measure.

Texas Republican. Rep. Dan Crenshaw raged:

“It sounds like I’m making it up. What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?”

As we detailed earlier, using carefully chosen words in what appears an attempt to hide the truth, House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi admitted this week at a news conference on voting rights with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) in Austin, Texas on Tuesday, that Democrats want illegal immigrants to be able to come into the nation freely, across their open borders, in order to rig elections for the Democrats.

As CNSnews.com reports, Speaker strengthened after the actions of the Supreme Court, which significantly weakened it,” she said.

.@SpeakerPelosi - We Should Not Be ‘Suppressing the Vote of Our Newcomers to America’ #tcot #ccot #TuesdayThoughts #TuesdayMotivation https://t.co/kTKwondtvL

— CNSNews.com (@cnsnews) March 5, 2019

Specifically, Pelosi said immigrants “make America more American,” and we should not be “suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

“So, when we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.

“And that, unless you're blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America.”

She then quoted former President Reagan out of context to support her argument:

“In the campaign, the candidate that I, the president that I quoted the most was Ronald Reagan. Does that surprise you? Maybe. But Ronald Reagan said this: ‘This is the last speech I will make as President of the United States. And I have a message I want to communicate to the country I love.’ He went on to talk about the Statue of Liberty and what it means to the world – that beacon of hope, what it means to people who have come here and seen that statue welcoming them – he said, our ancestors, our grandparents, our parents.”

As President Trump's son Donald Jr noted: "And there it is folks. What we all knew but no one would say. It’s only about votes for Democrats. "

Additionally, we note that friend-of-AOC, Rep. Ayanna Pressley may have outdone Pelosi with her latest stunt, an attempt to lower the federal voting age to 16.

“I am honored & excited to be introducing my very 1st amendment on the House floor, an amendment to #HR1, the #ForthePeopleAct. My amendment will lower the voting age from 18 to 16, allowing our youth to have a seat at the table of democracy. #16toVote,” she said.

I am honored & excited to be introducing my very 1st amendment on the House floor, an amendment to #HR1, the #ForthePeopleAct. My amendment will lower the voting age from 18 to 16, allowing our youth to have a seat at the table of democracy. #16toVote pic.twitter.com/67IzCtUh8k

— Rep Ayanna Pressley (@RepPressley) March 6, 2019

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said the United States must not suppress the vote of newly arrived legal immigrants.

rollcall

Published  1 month ago

House Democratic leaders will call up a vote condemning anti-Semitism — a move meant to respond comments made by Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Axios

Published  1 month ago

The national open internet rules were revoked by the FCC back in 2017.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

People spoke openly of Obama's 'Jewish problem' in 2008. He went on to normalize Israel critics with dubious motivations and terror connections.

NBC News

Published  1 month ago

Analysis: No, the speaker won't move to impeach the president if she doesn't have the votes — but her committees are doing the work right now.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Late Tuesday, one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 13th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 10 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled him out of order. And, for the second time in a row, Democrats cut off a pro-life congressman’s microphone — preventing Rep. Smith from issuing a few seconds of comments criticizing Democrats from blocking the bill.

As shown in the video below, Smith’s mic is immediately muted after the chair denies the request for a vote to stop infanticide.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told Democrats on Monday to get ready to pass the Dream Act that will provide a pathway to citizenship for “millions” of so-called Dreamers.

In her “Dear colleague” letter, Pelosi said that “in the weeks ahead,” she will bring the Dream Act to the floor along with the Equality Act, which will provide civil rights protections to the LGBT community.

Roll Call reported last week that Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) will be the lead sponsor of the “Dream and Promise Act of 2019” and is scheduled to introduce the bill on March 12. Pelosi said she has reserved bill number H.R. 6 for the “Dream and Promise Act,” which will reportedly give a pathway to citizenship to “millions of Dreamers” in addition to the “roughly 800,000 who have had legal protections under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [DACA] program.”

In addition, the bill will also reportedly extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to those from Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti, and El Salvador while providing Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) protections for refugees from Liberia.

Last year, Pelosi said one of her top priorities for this Congress would be the the Dream Act for “patriotic Dreamers.” In September of 2017, Pelosi even indicated that President Donald Trump “would sign” it if Congress sends him a bill.

“We made it very clear in the course of the conversation the priority is to pass the DREAM Act. That we want to do it in — obviously it has to be bipartisan. The president said he supports that, he would sign it,” Pelosi said then. “We have to get it passed. That’s our high priority.”

Sean Hannity

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has reportedly had enough with the fresh-faces of the Democratic Party; storming out of a meeting Wednesday after left-wing lawmakers rallied-around embattled Rep. Ilhan Omar.

“House Democratic leaders are struggling to contain the controversy over Rep. Ilhan Omar’s comments about Israel, with the caucus fighting behind closed doors over whether — and how — to respond,” reports Politico.

“We'll if you're not going to listen to me, I’m done talking,” Pelosi responded, before *literally* dropping the mic & walking out of the room. https://t.co/PYwha8O25o

— Melanie Zanona (@MZanona) March 6, 2019

“Well if you’re not going to listen to me, I’m done talking,” Pelosi told her colleagues before storming out of the room.

Read the full report at Politico.

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump said Monday that Rep. Ilhan Omar's suggestion that pro-Israel lawmakers have an allegiance to a foreign country marks a "dark day for Israel," piling onto the Minnesota freshman ahead of her second formal rebuke by the House in recent weeks.

“Representative Ilhan Omar is again under fire for her terrible comments concerning Israel,” the president wrote on Twitter, pointing out that a slew of Jewish advocacy groups had urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) to remove Omar from the latter's high-profile committee.

The president said Omar’s comments, which accused pro-Israel lawmakers of showing “allegiance to a foreign country,” were “a dark day for Israel!”

It’s been less than a month since Omar first came under fire from Democratic leadership for separate comments referring to the pro-Israel advocacy groups that were roundly condemned as anti-Semitic.

The House is expected to vote Wednesday on a resolution drafted by Pelosi and other Democratic leaders that would condemn anti-Semitism, though a draft measure does not single Omar out.

While Democrats have not backed down from calling out and criticizing their colleague, Republicans have argued that greater retribution is necessary. GOP legislators have followed the lead of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), demanding she be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee and comparing her remarks to racist comments by Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King, whose embrace of white supremacist rhetoric led to him being stripped of his committee assignments earlier this year.

Omar, who is one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress, has not shied from her most recent comments in the same way she did last month when she offered an apology and pledged to engage in a conversation about anti-Semitic tropes with her colleagues.

But she also garnered sympathy from the same lawmakers criticizing her this week after an Islamophobic poster inside the West Virginia state capitol appeared to link Omar's election to Congress last year to the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

You won’t hear about it on MSNBC but the liberal left today is a complete disaster. Sure, Republicans have their own issues getting along but the vast majority of Republicans at least support Trump in 2020. 93% according to some polling. On the Democrat side, no one knows what is going on and there certainly isn’t any kind of consensus on who the nominee will be in 2020.

Part of the problem is that the liberal fringe of the party has basically taken over and that leaves people like Nancy Pelosi looking like moderates which is pretty crazy to think about.

One of the biggest trouble makers on the far left is Linda Sarsour and she just went after Nancy Pelosi for trying to tone down some of the anti-Israel talk that’s been going on in liberal land.

From The Daily Caller:

Women’s March co-chair Linda Sarsour attacked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi Monday night as a “typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men,” in response to a House resolution condemning anti-Semitism.

House Democrats announced the resolution Monday after Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s latest anti-Israel comments, which critics — including other Democrats — have denounced as anti-Semitic.

“This is why we wanted Congresswoman Barbara Lee to be the Speaker of the House and ‘progressives’ were like ‘nah, Pelosi is a leader and omg you should see how she claps. What a clap!’” Sarsour wrote in a lengthy Facebook post.

“Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos,” she wrote.

You know things are upside down in the world when Nancy Pelosi is actually coming across as reasonable.

Washington Examiner

Published  1 month ago

Democrats seeking the party's 2020 presidential nomination are starting to come out in defense of Rep. Ilhan Omar, and in the process, they are normalizing anti-Semitism.

Leading Democratic candidates Sens. Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren have all come out defending Omar and pointing fingers at her critics, despite a series of statements she has made targeting Americans Jews.

Omar has been unrepentant over statements she made lamenting the influence of Jewish money in politics and questioning whether Jews were more loyal to Israel than America. The bigoted statements perpetuated classic anti-Semitic stereotypes, but that is now what's considered acceptable in the Democratic Party— as long as it gets subsequently laundered as mere criticism of Israel.

Sanders said "We must develop an evenhanded Middle East policy which brings Israelis and Palestinians together for a lasting peace. What I fear is going on in the House now is an effort to target Congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that debate."

Harris echoed this, saying, "There is a difference between criticism of policy or political leaders, and anti-Semitism" and also arguing, "I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk."

Warren also went a similar route, declaring, "Branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians."

This, of course, is rubbish. Omar was not criticizing specific Israeli policies when she said, "it's all about the Benjamins." She wasn't talking about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when she said, "I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” She was spewing out hatred for Jews.

And cowardly Democratic presidential candidates, worried about being out of step with the party's resurgent Left, are afraid to stand up in the face of attacks against the minority in the United States that has been by far the leading victim of religiously motivated hate crimes for decades, despite representing just about 2 percent of the population.

What's especially amazing about the Democratic Party's excuses for Omar is that she has actually improved her standing within the party by being more unabashedly anti-Semitic.

Last month, in the face of anti-Semitic tweets, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., demanded that Omar apologize, and specifically condemned her remarks as anti-Semitic. "Congresswoman Omar’s use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel’s supporters is deeply offensive,” she said in a joint statement with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. “We condemn these remarks and we call upon Congresswoman Omar to immediately apologize for these hurtful comments.” A big song and dance followed about how Jewish members were educating Omar about anti-Semitism.

Yet, after she followed up with more anti-Semitic comments, instead of coming down harder on Omar, Democratic leadership is backing off. Pelosi is now pushing the idea that Omar's comments were not " intentionally anti-Semitic." Yes, I'm sure she just accidentally stumbled upon statements that happen to echo longstanding anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish money and influence, and Jewish dual loyalty.

Democrats tried to push a sham resolution generically condemning anti-Semitism that didn't include Omar. But that proved too controversial within a caucus that is increasingly comfortable with anti-Semitism. So it's now unclear if any resolution is going to come up for a vote at all, at least not without substantial changes condemning other forms of hate in a way that further waters down any statement it would be making about Omar.

All along, I've noted that this isn't primarily a story about Omar, who we know is an anti-Semite. It's about whether Democrats care about combating anti-Semitism.

The signal leading Democrats are sending is not only that anti-Semitism will be tolerated within their party, but the more unapologetic somebody is about their anti-Semitism, the more likely they are to be defended.

Spectator USA

Published  1 month ago

When Ilhan Omar says that there’s too much money in American politics, she’s stating the obvious. That’s why I support her brave campaign against the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Realtors, the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America, General Electric, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Business Roundtable, the AARP, and Boeing.

These are America’s top 10 lobby groups, ranked by total spending over the last 20 years. In 2018, the US Chamber of Commerce spent $94.8 million on lobbying. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, spent $21.7 million and surged to Number Eight on the charts. The America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) ranked Number 157, and spent $3.5 million. Who knew you could buy America so cheaply?

Ilhan, that’s who. In 2012, only Ilhan was wise enough to see that ‘Israel has hypnotized the world’. Now, only Ilhan is bold enough to say that American support for Israel is ‘all about the Benjamins’, rather than a mass of reasons religious, strategic, cultural, and sentimental. And only Ilhan has the integrity to double down, and say, ‘I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK to push for allegiance to a foreign country.’

The 19th-century British prime minister Viscount Palmerston said that great powers have interests, not friends. Omar’s notion that the greatest power in history is somehow beholden to a faraway state the size of New Jersey is a delusion. So is her notion that Israel, a state which has taken to best part of seven decades to set up a railroad network, possesses diabolical powers to ‘hypnotize’ the world. So is her idea that Israel’s supporters, Jewish and not, operate by making congressmen and senators ‘pledge allegiance’, like a militia in a failed state. This last might be Omar’s biggest delusion of all. She actually believes that promises mean something in politics.

Omar’s private thoughts are nobody else’s business. It’s not as if the doctors, Jewish ones probably, have ever dissected a brain and noted hypertrophy of the Jew-hating lobe. Words and deeds are what matters, especially in public life. In which case, anyone who claims that Omar isn’t, to use Nancy Pelosi’s formulation, an ‘intentional’ Jew-hater isn’t listening. Omar has herself apologized for what she admitted was the ‘ugly sentiment’ of her ‘hypnotized’ imagery. It took seven years, but shortly after entering Congress, she disavowed that ‘anti-Semitic trope’ as ‘unfortunate and offensive’. She also apologized ‘unequivocally’ in February after the ‘Benjamins’ episode. Her defense was that she was ignorant of the ‘painful history of anti-Semitic tropes’. She intended it; she just didn’t know what it meant.

Omar didn’t know that the language in which she expressed her malignant delusions was in the lineage of Jew-hatred in its Christian and European forms. Until she entered the national stage, she’d had no need to know. Omar’s malignant delusions are commonplace in the Arab and Muslim world from which she comes. They are commonplace among the leadership of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Hamas-friendly front organization for the Muslim Brotherhood which supported her Congressional campaign. And they have become commonplace on the left of the Democratic party.

Democrats now protest that the whites and the right have their racists too. In other words, they’re saying that two wrongs make a right. This is playground logic, and it ignores the imbalance between the two kinds of anti-Jewish racism. Firstly, no Republican leader ever posed for the cover of any other national outlet with Steve King, or Omar’s new Twitter chum David Duke. Secondly, the Republican leadership, no doubt hypnotized by the Benjamins tucked in Ivanka Trump’s suspender belt, is hostile to the white racist fringe, and the white racist fringe detests the Republican leadership. Thirdly, the white racists are nothing if not candid about their beliefs and their intentions towards the Jewish people. Ilhan Omar isn’t even honest.

Omar said she was against BDS when running for the House and then revised her position as soon as she won her set. She denounces Israel and Saudi Arabia, who oppose the Muslim Brotherhood, but not Turkey or Qatar, the Muslim Brotherhood’s sponsors. She may be ignorant, but she knows exactly what she is doing. She is furtive and duplicitous, and she is successfully importing the language and ideas of racism into a susceptible Democratic party.

The buffoons who lead the Democrats are allowing Omar to mainstream anti-Jewish racism. The Democratic leadership tried to co-opt the energy of the post-2008 grassroots, to give its exhausted rainbow coalition an infusion of 21st-century identity politics. The failure to issue the promised condemnation of Omar shows that a European-style ‘red-green’ alliance of hard leftists and Islamists is co-opting the party. This, like the pro-Democratic media’s extended PR work for Rashida Tlaib and that other left-Islamist pinup Linda Sarsour, reflects a turning point in American history.

The metaphysical, conspiratorial hatred of Jews is a symptom of civilization in decline. So the inability of the Democratic leadership to call Omar a racist reflects more than the moral and ideological decay of a political party. Americans like to believe in their exceptionalism, and American Jews like to say America is different. We’re about see if those ideas are true.

Dominic Green is Life & Arts Editor of Spectator USA.

Sean Hannity

Published  1 month ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi caved to pressure from the radical wing of the Democratic Party Thursday; confirming her resolution against all “forms of hatred” has nothing to do with Rep. Ilhan Omar.

“It’s not about her,” Pelosi said of Omar during her weekly press briefing. “It’s about these forms of hatred.”

“I feel confident [Ilhan Omar’s] words were not based in an antisemitic attitude, but that she didn’t have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and cultural impact that might have been unknown to her,” she added.

"I feel confident [Ilhan Omar's] words were not based in an antisemitic attitude, but that she didn't have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and cultural impact that might have been unknown to her," Pelosi said pic.twitter.com/ak3O895zb6

— POLITICO (@politico) March 7, 2019

Read the full story at Fox News.