Visit Counter

Monday, May 30, 2016

Perplexing






So I'm sitting at home watching FOX right. They just announced Killary needs only 73 more delegates and she's the nominee. So it begs the question…what is the FBI waiting for? I'm sure they know by now if they are going to file charges. Why wait until she takes the next step in becoming the nominee? Doesn't that disrupt everything even further? Or is this a clear signal she's getting off Scott free?




Refreshing...but you'll never hear these words.












Share/Bookmark

Memorial Day in perspective








And to think tranny's and illegals are more highly regarded than our Vets.
How in the fuck do you compare waiting in line at Disneyland to a Vet seeking a doctor's appointment? In fact, the waste of skin in the WH is more concerned about the health and well-being of the Gitmo dogs than our Vets!











Share/Bookmark

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Family of Kate Steinle files lawsuit over deadly shooting on San Francisco pier








If this had been a white police officer who fired his weapon at a suspected perpetrator, missed, the bullet then ricocheted and killed 17-year-old DeMarcus Jones there would have been a $6 million payday for his family. 

Guess the Steinle family doesn't know how the system works. Did they expect Barry to send his team of bloodhounds to SF sniffing out the situation like they did for Trayvon, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray etc...I mean c'mon your daughter was white! Did they assume, in what was a total failure, our masterful government was going to protect their daughter from an illegal who already had been deported 5 times? 

Open and shut case, right?
 
They won't see a dime. 
And who is partially to blame… the worthless Republican Congress who won't put an end to sanctuary cities.

BTW..sanctuary cities which are in direct violation of federal law would slowly disappear if when their "citizens" kill someone and there's a $10 million payout.

-------------------------------------------





Relatives of the woman shot to death on a San Francisco pier last year filed a lawsuit Friday saying the illegal immigrant accused in the killing should have been in custody if not for a series of mistakes by city and federal workers.

The killing of Kate Steinle in July 2015 and the arrest of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez put San Francisco's leaders on the defensive as critics and outside politicians called for a change in the city's sanctuary law. Despite national outrage, San Francisco's Board of Supervisors on Tuesday upheld those protections for people in the country illegally.

The sheriff at the time of the killing, Ross Mirkarimi, is named in the lawsuit, along with ICE and the Bureau of Land Management. Mirkarimi previously defended the release of the suspect, a repeat drug offender and habitual border-crosser.

Frank Pitre, the lawyer for Steinle's family, said the lawsuit points out "failures at every level." 

"We're approaching the one year anniversary of Katie's death and it is a particularly difficult time for the family." 

He said a seven-time convicted felon was able to obtain a BLM officer's handgun due to negligence and ICE agents did not pursue his deportation.

The murder case and the broader immigration issue made waves in the presidential race. Donald Trump vowed to scrutinize existing "sanctuary city" policies while Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders indicated their support for the rules.

Lopez-Sanchez pleaded not guilty in January to second-degree murder and other charges in the death. His lawyer, Matt Gonzalez, said the charge was too harsh because the shooting was inadvertent.

Steinle was shot in the back during an evening stroll with her father and a family friend along San Francisco's popular waterfront on July 1. She died in her father's arms.

Lopez-Sanchez told police that he found a gun wrapped in a T-shirt under a bench on the pier and that it fired accidentally when he picked it up. The weapon belonged to a Bureau of Land Management ranger, who reported it was stolen from his car in downtown San Francisco in June.

Ballistic experts testified at a September preliminary hearing that the shot ricocheted off the pier's concrete surface before striking Steinle.

"A champion marksman could not accurately hit a target after first striking a concrete surface," Gonzalez said.

Prosecutors say the second-degree murder charge is appropriate. If the judge dismisses the case, the district attorney could refile less-severe charges.

Lopez-Sanchez was in the country illegally after being released from a San Francisco jail despite a request from federal immigration authorities that local officials keep him in custody for possible deportation. Lopez-Sanchez was previously deported five times to his native Mexico.

Earlier this week, San Francisco officials upheld the city's strict sanctuary protections for people who are in the country illegally. 

Why?

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously for a measure that clarifies when city workers, including police officers, can notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement of a person's immigration status. Generally, the defendant must be charged with a violent crime and is someone who has been convicted of a violent crime within the past seven years.

The measure, however, also grants San Francisco's sheriff leeway to contact immigration authorities in the limited cases of defendants charged with a felony if they have been convicted of other felonies in the past.

San Francisco and other municipalities across California have enacted so-called sanctuary policies of ignoring requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold inmates thought to be in the country illegally for deportation proceedings.

Why...are they fucking crazy? 









Share/Bookmark

Friday, May 27, 2016

And the winner is......


Recently there was an amateur art contest in the Netherlands, and people were invited to create a work of art depicting the current era of multiculturalism in Europe — a depiction of their experience in the modern ‘melting pot’. This was the winner:








Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Pocahontas back in the news







'Populist' Senator Elizabeth Warren made a quarter-million dollars flipping houses


Pocahontas... direct quote: 

“Donald Trump was drooling over the idea of a housing meltdown because it meant he could buy up a bunch more property on the cheap,” Warren said. “What kind of a man does that? Root for people to get thrown out on the street? Root for people to lose their jobs? Root for people to lose their pensions? Root for two little girls in Clark County, Nevada, to end up living in a van? What kind of a man does that?

“I’ll tell you exactly what kind,” Warren continued. “A man who cares about no one but himself. A small, insecure money-grubber who doesn’t care who gets hurt, so long as he makes some money off it. What kind of man does that? A man who will never be president of the United States.”



(Kind of makes you want to puke)

------------------------------------------



House flipping is commonly defined as the practice of buying and selling a home within six months, as the future senator did with the Hickman property. Warren held onto at least four other properties for longer periods, sometimes waiting a year before relinquishing ownership and, at other times, as long as seven years.

Warren bought two homes after they'd fallen into foreclosure. And though she spent money fixing up the Hickman home before selling it, records suggest she sold others at a significant profit without making any meaningful upgrades.

In 1993, Warren bought a foreclosed property on N.W. 14th Street in Oklahoma City for $4,000. National Review attempted to contact the couple who had owned it. No phone number or email could be found on record for them, and they did not respond to a letter mailed to their last known address, in Colorado. No public records could be found elaborating on the events that led to the foreclosure of their home. 

In 2004, Warren transferred the home to her brother, John Herring, and his wife, who sold it for $30,000 in 2006, a 650 percent increase over what Warren initially paid for it. Neither Warren nor her brother filed any permits to make improvements. 

In June 1993, Warren bought another foreclosed property in Oklahoma City, this one on West Wilshire Boulevard, for $61,000 from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Because properties purchased from HUD are sold as is, and because foreclosed homes can have damage ranging from simple poor upkeep to stripped copper, "the only reason you do that is for profit," says Steve Stout, residential field supervisor at the Oklahoma County Assessor's Office.

A year after buying the foreclosed property on West Wilshire Boulevard, Warren also bought the house next door for $72,000. Despite filing no building permits to renovate at either property, Warren pocketed $34,000 in profits when she sold the first house in December 1994, and she and her husband, Bruce Mann, made an additional $32,000 when they sold the one next door in 1998.


How can she reconcile her populist rhetoric with flipping houses? She can't, of course, which is why she has refused to comment on the NRO story. Populists like Warren can't stand to be exposed as hypocrites, and given her lecturing and hectoring about the rich preying on the poor and middle class, it just wouldn't do to have it be known that she was as greedy and grasping as any enthusiastic capitalist out there.






Share/Bookmark

Liberal hypocrisy at its finest










Share/Bookmark

Friday, May 13, 2016

Gives new meaning to... 'Can't find your ass with both hands'





Remember:

These are the class of people who are on the right side of history. The people who will exercise their right in November to vote for Hill-Zilla or the "Socialist" obviously possessed with all the knowledge they'll ever need in making this intelligent decision.  

Millennials...the future of America.

video
Video 245




I've been getting flak  lately about Republicans sitting out the election is a vote for Killary. They say no it's not "they're voting their conscience" .

Your candidate didn't win so you're not voting for Trump is one thing, actively campaigning against the GOP nominee IS  another. This ain't rocket science. If a significate number in the base of the GOP, who always vote Republican, decide to "sit it out" in effect they're voting for Killary.

It’s either Trump or Clinton. There is no “Messiah” coming to save the GOP. Didn’t we already experience the second coming in 2008? 

Trump was not my first choice either. Worse case scenario if he's a total disaster he could be impeached. 

I mean, it’s not like he’s a Democrat.








Share/Bookmark

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Chaos Theory and unexpected catastrophic consequences....





On a tip from Ed Kilbane





In Chaos Theory, the butterfly effect is the name given to the sensitive connection between initial conditions in which an insignificant event in one state in non-linear systems can result in sometimes catastrophic events in the universal state. 

In other words, although unlikely, it is possible for a butterfly flapping its wings in Texas to cause a typhoon in the Japanese Sea. 

Case in point, in mid-20th Century America, an 18-year-old hippie freshman in a Honolulu college had sex with an older alcoholic Kenyan on a student visa, who had a wife and child back in Africa. 

And this less than significant event started the collapse and dissolution of the United States of America.






Share/Bookmark

Sometimes you just can't make up your mind












Caitlyn Jenner considering ‘de-transitioning’ ‘in the next couple years,’ author claims

 (I didn't know what this procedure should be called until my friend Ed suggested  Addadickbacktome)




---------------------------------------------





A Kardashian family biographer claims Caitlyn Jenner is experiencing regret over transitioning from male to female. Citing multiple sources close to the star, Ian Halperin told The Wrap that Jenner is considering transitioning back to male “in the next couple years.”

Halperin said while doing research for his book “Kardashian Dynasty: The Controversial Rise of America’s Royal Family,” several sources indicated Jenner is unhappy.

“One source confirmed to me Caitlyn has made whispers of ‘sex change regret,’ hinting she might go back to being Bruce Jenner,” Halperin told the entertainment website.

The biographer said Jenner, 66, is allegedly interested in transitioning back for relationship reasons.

“She’s still into women and wants to meet the right one,” Halperin stated.

The idea that Jenner has had apprehensions over the life change is nothing new. Back when Jenner graced the cover of Vanity Fair, the former Olympian described a panic attack following the transition.

The Vanity Fair profile detailed: “During the first full day of recuperation… She was undergoing something that had never happened before in 65 years of life: a panic attack… The panic attack lasted about 15 seconds, but a single thought continued to course through her mind: ‘What did I just do? What did I just do to myself?’”

Halperin the transition has been “very hard” for the star.

“She’s thrilled she has raised awareness about how transgender people have long been discriminated against but I think there’s a chance she’ll de-transition in the next couple years,” the writer said. “I don’t think it would surprise anybody in her inner circle. It has been much harder than she anticipated. My heart goes out to her and I know her true friends will be there to support her on whatever path she chooses.” 



Share/Bookmark

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Some Republicans have said they won't support Trump




They better think again.







Justice Scalia's seat is vacant. Ginsberg is 82 years old, Kennedy is 79, Brewer is 77, and Thomas is 67. 

Nowadays, the data shows that the average age of a Supreme Court retirement or death occurs after 75.

These are 5 vacancies that will likely come up over the next 4-8 years. 

The next President will have the power to potentially create a 7-2 Supreme Court skewed in their ideology.

Think about that ... 7-2. 

If the next President appoints 5 young justices, it will guarantee control of the Supreme Court for an entire generation. 

And 7-2 decisions will hold up much more over time than 5-4 decisions which are deemed to be lacking in mandate.

Hillary has made it clear she will use the Supreme Court to go after the 2nd Amendment. 

She has literally said that the Supreme Court was wrong in its Heller decision and that the Court should overturn and remove the individual right to keep and bear arms. Period.

Everyone declaring that they won't vote for a particular candidate, if he turns out to be the GOP nominee, please realize this: If Hillary Clinton wins and thus gets to make these appointments, you surely will never see another Conservative victory at the Supreme Court for the rest of your life.






Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

"Being president is not a reality show"





I almost forgot about this one.

With hard-hitting interviews like this, I can see how a president's job can be so challenging. He has to stay on his toes! 


Here he is with green-lipped bathtub cereal girl:


video
Video 243



Via:






video
Video 244


She's worthy of one second of a president's time?
Bet you couldn't watch it to the end.








Share/Bookmark

Mystery: Emails From Hillary’s Top Geek Are M.I.A.



“It’s hard to believe that an IT staffer who set up Hillary Clinton’s reckless email server never sent or received a single work-related email in the four years he worked at the State Department,” Raj Shah, the deputy communications director for the RNC, told The Daily Beast.

If I didn't know better I would say Lois Lerner has a twin brother working at the State Department.

In view of the fact she deleted over 31,000 suspicious emails while under subpoena and the DOJ is clearly in the tank for her... 



Is the FBI and the DOJ on the same wavelength? Why didn't the FBI seize the emails long ago? After all that has transpired why would the FBI allow/trust the State Dept to be forthcoming with the truth?



Here she goes into her innocent "Shirley Temple" routine. 




video
Video 242


...When it come to servers I'm so naive I thought you could wipe it clean with a cloth... 

The truth is instead of using the State Dept server she PAID thousands out of her own pocket for a private server.
Why?

---------------------------------------








Bryan Pagliano set up and maintained Hillary’s Clinton’s private email server. But somehow, there’s no record that Pagliano ever sent Clinton an email while he worked for her at the State Department.


Those are the surprising, if preliminary, results from a lawsuit seeking information about State Department staffers linked to the former Secretary of State’s server, according to court documents filed Monday.


The absence of any email written or received by Pagliano, who worked for Clinton at the State Department and was the technology director of her 2008 presidential campaign, suggests an attempt to obscure his role in the controversy over Clinton’s private server, said a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, which filed the lawsuit in March.






“It’s hard to believe that an IT staffer who set up Hillary Clinton’s reckless email server never sent or received a single work-related email in the four years he worked at the State Department,” Raj Shah, the deputy communications director for the RNC, told The Daily Beast.


“Such records might shed light on his role in setting up Clinton’s server, and why he was granted immunity by the FBI,” Shah continued. “But it seems that his emails were either destroyed or never turned over, adding yet another layer to the secrecy surrounding his role.”


Since the beginning of the email saga 14 months ago, Pagliano has played a central but mysterious role. The Justice Department has given him immunity as part of a law enforcement investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information on the Clinton email server. Pagliano has reportedly been cooperating with investigators and is likely to know key facts about how the server was set up, who had access to it, and what precautions were taken to protect sensitive information. 


Clinton’s campaign didn’t comment for this story. But a State Department spokesman objected to the RNC’s characterization of the reason no email records were found. “It is standard practice for the Department to decline comment on matters in litigation. That said, the Department disagrees with a number of assertions made in today’s filing, and will be responding in court,” department spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeau told The Daily Beast.


Trudeau explained that the department has searched for copies of Pagliano’s emails in a backup known as a .pst file, but that officials couldn’t locate one for the period of time that covers Clinton’s tenure as secretary. But the department has found a .pst file for Pagliano’s work at the department as a contractor after Clinton left office, Trudeau said. That period is beyond the scope of the RNC’s lawsuit.


It’s not clear why some backups for Pagliano’s emails were found but not others. A small number of emails to and from Pagliano have also been found in the records of other State Department employees and Clinton aides with whom he corresponded.


The State Department has also previously released one email that Pagliano sent to Clinton in 2012. It's not clear why that email wasn't turned over to the RNC. 


“The Department acknowledges that we must work to improve our systems for records management and retention,” Trudeau said. “As part of this ongoing effort, the Department is now automatically archiving Secretary Kerry’s emails as well as the emails numerous senior staff.”


A lawyer for Pagliano didn’t respond to a request for comment.


The court filing Monday wasn’t the first time the department acknowledged having no email records of the time Pagliano worked for Clinton at State. Last year, Politico reported that the department told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley it was unable to locate a backup of Pagliano’s emails.


But the RNC’s allegation that Pagliano or the State Department may have taken steps to keep the emails from public view underscored the significant role that the email controversy is likely to play in the presidential election.


The RNC has filed six lawsuits under the Freedom of Information Act seeking emails of Clinton and her aides, information about potential conflicts of interest between Clinton’s work as secretary and her family’s foundation, as well as information about training that department employees received on how to handle classified information.


Reviews of thousands of emails that Clinton turned over from her private server to the State Department have found information that some officials say is classified, though it wasn’t marked as such when it was disseminated.


Presumed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has taken to calling his rival “crooked Hillary” in stump speeches, has made the question of Clinton’s honesty and transparency a central part of his campaign.


And a federal judge ruled recently that a watchdog group that has sued for information about how the email server was set up may interview former top Clinton aides, including her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and Huma Abedin, one of her closest assistants. 


Pagliano’s work for Clinton has also been a subject of scrutiny for congressional Republicans. Last December, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley told Secretary of State John Kerry that getting more details about Pagliano was his committee’s “highest priority request.”


Pagliano, for reasons he has never explained, invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify before the Judiciary Committee.


Pagliano has a long history with Clinton. After running technology for her 2008 campaign, he went to work for her political action committee. For his services setting up the email server Clinton used exclusively as secretary, Pagliano was paid directly by Clinton and her family.


Pagliano then came to work for Clinton at State but continued to be paid by the Clintons to maintain the server, the Washington Post reported. Pagliano didn’t list the outside income on mandatory financial disclosure forms.


For its part, the State Department may still find some of Pagliano’s emails, which are the subject of other lawsuits, as well.


“We are continuing to search for Mr. Pagliano’s emails which the Department may have otherwise retained,” Trudeau said. When it comes to FOIA [the Freedom of Information Act], the State Department works diligently to produce all responsive records in our possession.”






Share/Bookmark

Obama official says he pushed a ‘narrative’ to media to sell the Iran nuclear deal






Rhodes pulls a Jonathan Gruber! As you're reading this remember Rhodes brother is the head of CBS news. I thought all along he was the one who pushed, "it was the video" to the "literally know nothing reporters". And now I'm sure of it.

------------------------------------------





One of President Obama's top national security advisers led journalists to believe a misleading timeline of U.S. negotiations with Iran over a nuclear agreement and relied on inexperienced reporters to create an "echo chamber" that helped sway public opinion to seal the deal, according to a lengthy magazine profile.

Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, told the New York Times magazine that he helped promote a "narrative" that the administration started negotiations with Iran after the supposedly moderate Hassan Rouhani was elected president in 2013. In fact, the administration's negotiations actually began earlier, with the country's powerful Islamic faction, and the framework for an agreement was hammered out before Rouhani's election.

The distinction is important because of the perception that Rouhani was more favorably disposed toward American interests and more trustworthy than the hard-line faction that holds ultimate power in Iran.

On Friday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest disputed the notion that there was anything misleading about the administration's advocacy of the agreement. 

"I haven't seen anybody produce any evidence that that's the case," he said at his daily briefing. "I recognize there might be some people who are disappointed that they did not succeed in killing the Iran deal. Maybe these unfounded claims are the result of sour grapes. The truth is, the administration, under the direction of the president, engaged in an aggressive campaign to make a strong case to the American people that the international agreement to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon enhanced the national security of the United States."



White House press secretary Josh Earnest addressed claims that one of President Obama's top security advisers, Ben Rhodes, promoted misleading information about the Iran deal. "I haven't seen anybody produce any evidence that that's the case," Earnest said. (White House) 

(aka... sending in another liar to cover for the first one)



Rhodes, 38, said in the article that it was easy to shape a favorable impression of the proposed agreement because of the inexperience of many of those covering the issue.

"All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus," he said. "Now they don't. They call us to explain to them what's happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That's a sea change. They literally know nothing."

Rhodes set up a team of staffers who were focused on promoting the deal, which apparently included the feeding of talking points at useful times in the news cycle to foreign policy experts who were favorably disposed toward it. "We created an echo chamber," he told the magazine. "They [the seemingly independent experts] were saying things that validated what we had given them to say."

The manager of the White House's Twitter feed on Iran, Tanya Somanader, said one reporter, Laura Rozen of the Al-Monitor news site, became "my RSS feed. She would just find everything and retweet it." 

Rozen, in an email, said she does not know Somanader and that David Samuels, the author of the magazine piece, did not ask her about the staffer's claim before publishing his story. "As I read it, [Somanader] says my Twitter feed was a source of info for her . . . Samuels seems to mischaracterize that to say the opposite."

She said she has had a long interest in U.S. policy on Iran and covered "over 20 rounds of the Iran nuclear deal negotiations" over four years. "I do retweet lots of info, from lots of sources" — including, she noted, the Russian Ministry of Defense, "which I hardly expect most to take at face value or as an endorsement." She maintained that her coverage of the Iran nuclear diplomacy "was certainly not done as a favor to or in support of any administration."

Rhodes's assistant, Ned Price, told the newspaper that the administration would feed "color" — background details — to their "compadres" in the press corps, "and the next thing I know, lots of these guys are in the dot-com publishing space, and have huge Twitter followings, and they'll be putting this message out on their own."

In the article, Rhodes speaks contemptuously of the Washington policy and media establishment, including The Washington Post and the New York Times, referring to them as "the blob" that was subject to conventional thinking about foreign policy. 

"We had test-drives to know who was going to be able to carry our message effectively, and how to use outside groups like [the anti-nuclear group] Ploughshares, the Iran Project and whomever else. So we knew the tactics that worked," Rhodes says. Speaking of Republicans and other opponents, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Rhodes adds that he knew "we drove them crazy."

In the piece, he also casts doubt on the moderate nature of Iran's regime: "I would prefer that it turns out that Rouhani and [Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad] Zarif are real reformers who are going to be steering this country into the direction that I believe it can go in, because their public is educated and, in some respects, pro-American. But we are not betting on that."

Rhodes's boss, President Obama, has been a strong and consistent advocate for the agreement with Iran, which requires the country to curtail its nuclear program — notably its ability to produce fissile material that could be used in nuclear bombs — in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. He reinforced the misleading administration timeline in announcing the agreement last July. "Today, after two years of negotiations, the United States, together with our international partners, has achieved something that decades of animosity has not," he said then.

Rhodes's freewheeling and cynical comments reminded several White House and national security reporters of an infamous 2010 story in Rolling Stone magazine in which Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and aides mocked civilian government officials, including Vice President Biden. McChrystal apologized for the comments but later tendered his resignation, which Obama accepted.

The Times article notes that Rhodes is a published short-story writer and aspiring novelist who is a skilled "storyteller."

"He is adept at constructing overarching plotlines with heroes and villains, their conflicts supported by flurries of carefully chosen adjectives, quotations, and leaks from named and unnamed senior officials," Samuels wrote. "He is the master shaper and retailer of Obama's foreign-policy narratives."

And what is to be gleaned from the last two paragraphs? "The literally know nothing" MSM is still only too happy to put their head on the chopping block if it serves their Master.






Share/Bookmark