Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Pat Cross Cartoons


Lawmakers Block Bill To Let Baltimore School Police Officers Have Guns    

Baltimore's state house delegates voted against supporting legislation to arm the city's school police officers.
Baltimore, MD – Just days after Baltimore lawmakers voted to allow Johns Hopkins University to form its own armed police department, they voted to kill legislation that would arm Baltimore City school police officers inside the schools.
The city’s state house delegation voted 10 to 5 on Saturday against a bill proposed by Baltimore-area Delegate Cheryl Glenn that would allow school police officers to carry weapons inside the school, The Baltimore Sun reported.
“It shows the priorities of some people who are sent down to Annapolis,” said Baltimore School Police Sergeant Clyde Boatwright, the president of the school police officers’ union. “They voted against the public school students but voted to support a private institution.”
The same elected officials voted 9 to 4 on March 12 to support an armed police force for Johns Hopkins University, The Baltimore Sun reported.
Sgt. Boatright pointed out that the school board, school police officials, and the school police union all supported Glenn’s legislation.
“Disappointment is an understatement,” he said. “The students and staff of city schools deserve better. It’s clear to me that some people that have decision-making power in Annapolis are out of touch with the reality of Baltimore.”

defensemaven.io|By Blue Lives Matter

Sunday, March 17, 2019

WHO IS THIS GUY ? I never heard of him and all of a sudden he's running for president.....

Disturbing Child-Murder Fantasy Tied to Beto O'Rourke
03/16/2019  American Action News  AAN Staff

A report from Reuters has unearthed disturbing writings, and other skeletons, from former Texas Congressman Beto O'Rourke's past.

The Daily Wire's Ryan Saavedra has more:

In a profile that also documented O'Rourke's involvement in a hacker group, Reuters reported: "it’s unclear whether the United States is ready for a presidential contender who, as a teenager, stole long-distance phone service for his dial-up modem, wrote a murder fantasy in which the narrator drives over children on the street, and mused about a society without money."

O'Rourke also reportedly wrote about murdering children by running them over with a car.

"One day, as I was driving home from work, I noticed two children crossing the street," O'Rourke wrote. "They were happy, happy to be free from their troubles ...This happiness was mine by right. I had earned it in my dreams."

"As I neared the young ones, I put all my weight on my right foot, keeping the accelerator pedal on the floor until I heard the crashing of the two children on the hood, and then the sharp cry of pain from one of the two," O'Rourke continued. "I was so fascinated for a moment, that when after I had stopped my vehicle, I just sat in a daze, sweet visions filling my head."
The upsetting anecdote is merely the latest story about O'Rourke that focuses on driving.

O'Rourke hit another vehicle then fled the scene while driving drunk on his 26th birthday. O'Rourke claimed he had only two beers, but the Washington Post estimated, based on his weight and blood alcohol content that he had six. 

So-called "Red Flag" Gun Confiscation is gaining traction in the U.S. Senate.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is openly declaring that he will hold a hearing March 26th with the intent to promote and discuss GUN CONFISCATION legislation.

Not only that, Graham stated to an anti-gun media outlet that,
"we're trying to drive states to create these [gun confiscation] laws..."

Sen. Lindsey Graham tells CNN 'Red Flag' is where we can come together
The mere fact that Graham is sitting there with Diane Feinstein is enough to question his motives

You read that right, a key Senate Republican is advocating for gun confiscation on the national level.
These gun confiscation laws bypass due process protections and allow SWAT teams to knock down your door at 5 A.M. and seize your legally owned firearms, based on a mere accusation.

A neighbor, ex-spouse, or an angry co-worker can file an ex-parte order against you, without your notice, all because they say you're "crazy" for supporting the Second Amendment.


These Muslims should be OUSTED from congress because....THEY DON'T PAY HOMAGE TO THE U.S.A. They picture with the flags of their "homeland".

House Democratic Radicals Running Amok
Mar 11, 2019

House Democrats refused to issue a singular rebuke to the anti-Semitism of one of their own, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. Meanwhile, Republicans have picked up four state legislative seats in special elections this year -- a small but hopeful sign for a party that had a relatively rough time of it in the states in 2018.

The Omar Incident: In recent weeks, Democrats showed poor political judgment by allowing socialistic freshmen in the House to set their agenda. But last week, they did much worse than that. They showed a true moral failing with their inability to call out and condemn anti-Semitism in their own ranks.

In discussing this issue, it must be said first of all that criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitism. Yes, many pro-Israel conservatives are sure to disagree with (mostly) liberal complaints over the Netanyahu government or West Bank settlements. But people of good will can disagree on such issues without disparaging anyone.

In fact, Americans have quite varied ideas about the Middle East. and although there are clear conservative and liberal tendencies, they don’t always split cleanly along ideological lines. People of all ideological persuasions differ as to how to handle Iran’s threat to Israel, or how to settle the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. And good-faith disagreements over these matters are not at all indications of anti-Semitism.

The same cannot be said, however, of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and her rhetoric about American Jews supportive of Israel as money-grubbing dual loyalists who have “hypnotized the world” and purchased the support of the U.S. Congress in a behind-the-scenes conspiracy. This rhetoric is overtly anti-Semitic. This was the reason Democratic leaders responded to with such obvious concern from the outset.

At first, they seemed to be handling things. Then it all fell apart.

The week started off well enough. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had brought a resolution to the floor indirectly rebuking Omar for her anti-Semitic comments — the second such resolution for Omar in just the first two months of her career in Congress.

Then the intersectional Left got involved, deciding that Omar, the little lamb, was being unfairly targeted. The excuses they made for her reeked of the idea that this 40-year-old member of the U.S. House is but a child. It was

One Democrat after another — including key presidential candidates like Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris — began excusing Omar’s rhetoric. And before you knew it, House Democrats had delayed and then diluted the resolution. Instead of a resolution against anti-Semitism, prompted by Omar, the House was voting on a resolution condemning the oppression (and supposed oppression) of every imaginable aggrieved group.


Image may contain: text that says 'IN 2020...... ALL 435 SEATS IN THE "HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES" WILL BE UP FOR GRABS ALL OF THEM!'

Saturday, March 16, 2019

Biden Knocks Trump On Medicare Cuts, Forgets He Proposed The Same  03/12/2019 Saagar Enjeti | White House Correspondent

Former Vice President and possible 2020 hopeful Joe Biden criticized President Donald Trump’s proposed 2020 budget for doing what his own administration asked for in their time at the White House.

Biden decried the budget, saying, “Did you see the budget that was just introduced? . . . Almost a trillion dollar cut in Medicare.”

“Why?” he continued. “Because of a tax cut for the super wealthy that created a deficit of $1.9 trillion, and now they gotta go make somebody pay for it.” (RELATED: Joe Biden’s History On Race Looms) 

The Pentagon's Missing Trillions: What You Need to Know

Dr. Mark Skidmore of Michigan State University joins us to discuss his research with Catherine Austin Fitts into the $21 trillion in unaccounted transactions on the books of the US Department of Defence and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. We discuss what we know and don't know about the subject, the Pentagon's nonsensical and inadequate excuses for the debacle, the new accounting guideline that legally allows every department of the federal government to create fake and altered books for public consumption, the recent failed Pentagon audit, the government's refusal to provide any information about the problem, the failure of congress to pursue the issue, and the failure of the press to report on it.
Prelude to a Revolution, National Popular Voting     By   Bio and Archives--March 14, 2019
If the movement in America to bypass the Constitution and directly elect the President by a national popular vote succeeds, it will destroy the American Republic.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact(NPVIC) would guarantee victory to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. To date, twelve states and the district of Columbia have agreed to the compact totaling 172 electoral votes, with Colorado and Oregon about to add 19.

If the total exceeds 270, those states will require their electors to vote for the Presidential candidate that receives the highest national popular vote count. All the states that have signed-on to NPVIC have state legislatures controlled by Democrats.
The Constitution defines our form of government as a Republic where representatives are selected by the people, and those representatives govern. The voters in each state choose their members of the U.S. Congress, and select the candidate for President that best represents the interests of their state.
Madison discusses in Federalist Paper No. 10 why we are a Republic.
The founding principle of America is that individuals have unalienable rights and that government is instituted to protect these rights. History, and common-sense, indicate that Democracies fail to protect unalienable rights because they create a sustained majority rule of popular factions and parties. And, this majority construct inevitably fails to protect the rights and property of minority factions and parties.
It is human nature that a faction, a political party, when always in control, will vote itself, and its members, government benefits as a means to maintain and grow membership. And, the minority is subject to unequal taxation and loss of property. Rights protected by the Constitution, but not favored by the majority, would disappear.

In Madison’s words:
“Hence it is that such Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property, and have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

'Pure Genocide': Over 6,000 Nigerian Christians Slaughtered, Mostly Women and Children   By Stoyan Zaimov, Christian Post 

Villagers stood at a mass grave in Dogon Na Hauwa, Nigeria, in 2010.

Church leaders in Nigeria have said that Christians are experiencing "pure genocide" as 6,000 people, mostly women and children, have been murdered by Fulani radicals since January.

"What is happening in Plateau state and other select states in Nigeria is pure genocide and must be stopped immediately," said the Christian Association of Nigeria and church denominational heads in Plateau State in a
press release last week.

The church leaders said that "over 6,000 persons, mostly children, women and the aged have been maimed and killed in night raids by armed Fulani herdsmen," which is prompting their cry to the government of Nigeria "to stop this senseless and blood shedding in the land and avoid a state of complete anarchy where the people are forced to defend themselves."

The press release also pleaded with the international community, as well as the United Natio
ns, to intervene in the Fulani attacks, fearing they might spread to other countries as well. 

Not surprizingly, the article neglects to mention that "their adoption of Islam increased the Fulanis' feeling of cultural and religious superiority to surrounding peoples, and that adoption became a major ethnic boundary marker.
HR 1 is a Democratic power grab 

  • 12 March 2019

  • On a 234-193 party line vote, House Democrats passed their top legislative priority since taking control in January -- the so-called "For the People Act." The stated intent of the measure is to “expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengthen ethics rules for public servants.”
    What the bill really is, according to National Review, is an unconstitutional power grab:
    At every turn, it grants federal regulators more power. Time and again, it renders federal election law more complex — creating a chilling effect on political communication through sheer uncertainty and confusion.
    The free-speech problems are so obvious that free-speech organizations on the left and right are united in opposition. Comprehensive analyses from the Institute for Free Speech and the American Civil Liberties Union are worth reading in their entirety and raise remarkably similar concerns.
    At a time of extraordinary public harassment, boycotts, intimidating public shame campaigns, the act would expand financial-disclosure requirements, including in some circumstances requiring public disclosure of the names and addresses even of donors who did not know about or perhaps even support the political message of the organization they funded. Donors may give money, for example, to fund one aspect of an organization’s mission only to be involuntarily exposed as a “political donor” when the organization chooses — without the donor’s knowledge or consent — to mention a politician by name in a different context. As the ACLU points out, “it is unfair to hold donors responsible for every communication in which an organization engages.”
    Moreover, in the effort to further limit “coordination” between candidates and political action committees, the bill sets forth language so broad that, as the ACLU explains, it affects communications that “merely refer to a candidate or an opponent to a candidate 120 days before an election or 60 days before a primary or a caucus.” The Institute for Free Speech’s Bradley Smith argues that, with such language, “the goal seems to be to limit discussion of candidates to the candidates and parties themselves, at the expense of the public at large.”
    There's much more at the link
    What are the bill's Senate prospects? If Majority Leader Mitch McConnell holds the line he established in his Washinton Post op-ed, then HR 1 is dead on arrival:
    From the First Amendment to your ballot box, Democrats want to rewrite the rules to favor themselves and their friends. Upending the FEC, squeezing taxpayers, attacking privacy and jeopardizing our elections are a price they’ll happily pay for this partisan power grab.
    Fortunately, the November elections that handed Pelosi the House also expanded Republicans’ Senate majority. I hope the two bodies can find common ground and build on the bipartisan successes of last Congress — but this outlandish Democrat proposal is not a promising start. My colleagues and I will proudly defend your privacy and your elections.
    It's a good start...and a reminder of how important is it to have a legislative check on the ambitions of congressional Democrats.

    The Collapse of Western Civilization

    All the signs that herald the collapse of a civilization are upon us. Watch this video by social commentator Paul Joseph Watson as he explains how great civilizations commit suicide as they descend into Godlessness, immorality, drugs, contempt for life, androgyny and the failure of education to produce great artists, thinkers and culture.

    This is depressing. And horribly true.

    If I were Trump, I would VETO every bill brought up UNTIL they approved my wall....!

    Moments After Trump Issues First Veto, Angel Mom Steps In with Incredible Statement 

    Given the fact that the Republicans have controlled at least one house of Congress since he’s taken office, President Donald Trump hasn’t had to use his veto pen. That changed Friday after both houses passed legislation that sought to overturn his emergency declaration to fund a portion of the wall along the southern border.

    “Today, I am vetoing this resolution,” Trump said from the Oval Office, according to The New York Times.
    “Congress has the freedom to pass this resolution, and I have the duty to veto it.”


    Friday, March 15, 2019