They say Trump is racist but Obama is kissing the ass of Robert Byrd who was with the KKK
Texas Democrat Al Green vowed on Friday to force another impeachment vote on the House floor next week. The announcement was made on the back of President Donald Trump’s reported description of African nations, El Salvador and Haiti as “shithole countries.”
“Congressional condemnation of racist bigotry is not enough,” Green said in a tweet. “In Congress, talk is cheap-it’s how we vote that counts. Next week, I will again bring a resolution to impeach @realDonaldTrump. I will put my vote where my mouth is.”
This is the founder of Planned Parenthood and Hillary hero.
On Thursday, The Washington Post reported that, while being briefed on immigration, Trump questioned why immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries were brought over declaring, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?”
It is not the first time Green has pushed to impeach a president. Just last month—in the largest move yet to impeach Trump—Green brought the vote to the floor.
“He has harmed the society of the United States. Brought shame and dishonor to the office of president of the United States,” Green said at the proceeding.
Representative Al Green, the Texas Democrat, speaks about articles of impeachment for U.S. President Donald Trump during a press conference on Capitol Hill, on June 7, 2017. Green has said that he will force another vote on impeaching Trump in the wake of the president’s latest controversial remarks. Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images
Although not expected to cause any traction, 58 Democrats had voted to begin proceedings, while 364 members had voted against the measure. Green has since vowed to his colleagues that he would continue pushing for another vote.
Trump has “undermined the integrity of his office with impunity, has brought disrepute on the presidency with immunity, has betrayed his trust as president,” Green’s articles of impeachment read.
While some Democrats have pushed for impeachment, party leaders have said that moving for impeachment would not help their hopes of winning back the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterms. “Now is not the time to consider articles of impeachment,” House Minority Leader Pelosi of California and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland, said in a statement.
Responding to Trump’s latest controversial comments, Democratic Senator Richard Durbin said Friday that the language used at the meeting was “hate-filled, vile and racist.”
While facing global heat and widespread commendation, Trump has denied using such language, tweeting, “Never said anything derogatory about Haitians other than Haiti is, obviously, a very poor and troubled country.”
Why in the hell is this so-called smart man sealing all his great achievements?
Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe claims in his new book that Donald Trump asked him in 2013 to get his hands on President Obama’s sealed Columbia records.
In the introduction of his book “American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News,” O’Keefe recalls meeting Trump back in 2013. O’Keefe said that he didn’t get the idea that Trump was a “birther,” but Trump did seem to believe that Obama might have misled people about being a foreign national.
“He was confident Obama was born in the United States, but he suspected Obama had presented himself as a foreign student on application materials to ease his way into New York’s Columbia University, maybe even Harvard too, and perhaps picked up a few scholarships along the way,” O’Keefe explains. “Trump had reason to believe Obama was capable of this kind of mischief.”
This fraud was Barry Soetoro in college so why in the hell did he start going by Barack Obama?
In the hopes of figuring out if Obama was participating in any misconduct, Trump allegedly asked O’Keefe to uncover Obama’s sealed records from Columbia University.
“Nobody else can get this information,” Trump reportedly told O’Keefe. “Do you think you could get inside Columbia?”
“As I explained, that was not exactly our line of work. We were journalists, not private eyes,” O’Keefe writes about the request. “At the end of our discussion, Trump shook my hand, encouraged me to keep up the good work, and half-whispered, ‘Do Columbia.’”
She is a bug-eyed fraud just like most liberals are.
The Yale University psychology professor who called President Trump “mentally impaired” appears to lack a valid license to practice psychiatry in her home state of Connecticut.
The prominent professor Bandy Lee made the headlines over the past few days when she made a diagnosis of the president as suffering from a “mental impairment” that would disqualify him from the highest office in the land.
Following Lee’s comments, the American Psychiatric Association released a statement on Tuesday warning members of its profession to refrain from making public diagnoses of public figures like Trump without a proper medical exam.
“We at the APA call for an end to psychiatrists providing professional opinions in the media about public figures whom they have not examined, whether it be on cable news appearances, books, or in social media,” wrote the APA, without mentioning Lee specifically. “Arm-chair psychiatry or the use of psychiatry as a political tool is the misuse of psychiatry and is unacceptable and unethical.”
Lee and her colleague responded to the issue in a piece to Politico on Wednesday, in which they claimed it is “perfectly OK to question the president’s mental state” because of their profession as “psychiatrists.”
The professor, who has met with lawmakers in Capitol Hill to talk about the issue, is now facing scrutiny amid allegations that she is not licensed to practice psychology in Connecticut.
Campus Reform reports that state records indicate that Lee’s “physician/surgeon” license expired some three years ago — on May 31, 2015 — and that her application for reinstatement has been pending ever since. The publication was able to produce Lee’s license details to back up the claim.
In addition to her pending physician’s license, the professor’s “controlled substance registration for practitioner” license is also lapsed, having expired last February. In other words, Lee is not legally able to prescribe medication as a medical practitioner.
Lee responded to Campus Reform’s inquiries, stating simply: “I only need one license.” She did not clarify precisely what license she has, or in which state she is registered.
As TheDC’s Joe Simonson writes, the U.S. president’s public meeting with congress shattered the narrative that he is mentally unfit to run the country.
Google Lies All The Time And The Government Should Break Up The Google And YouTube Monopoly.
Google, the most powerful search engine in the world, is now displaying fact checks for conservative publications in its results.
No prominent liberal site receives the same treatment.
And not only is Google’s fact-checking highly partisan — perhaps reflecting the sentiments of its leaders — it is also blatantly wrong, asserting sites made “claims” they demonstrably never made.
When searching for a media outlet that leans right, like The Daily Caller (TheDC), Google gives users details on the sidebar, including what topics the site typically writes about, as well as a section titled “Reviewed Claims.”
Vox, and other left-wing outlets and blogs like Gizmodo, are not given the same fact-check treatment. When searching their names, a “Topics they write about” section appears, but there are no “Reviewed Claims.”
In fact, a review of mainstream outlets, as well as other outlets associated with liberal and conservative audiences, shows that only conservative sites feature the highly misleading, subjective analysis. Several conservative-leaning outlets like TheDC are “vetted,” while equally partisan sites like Vox, ThinkProgress, Slate, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Salon, Vice and Mother Jones are spared.
Occupy Democrats is apparently the only popular content provider from that end of the political spectrum with a fact-checking section.
Big name publications like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times are even given a column showcasing all of the awards they have earned over the years.
The Robert Mueller fact check (pictured above) is a case in point for Google’s new feature.
Ostensibly trying to sum up the crux of the post, the third-party “fact-checking” organization says the “claim” in a DC article that special Counsel Robert Mueller is hiring people that “are all Hillary Clinton supporters” is misleading, if not false.
The problem is that TheDC’s article makes no such claim. Their cited language doesn’t even appear in the article. Worse yet, there was no language trying to make it seem that the investigation into the Trump administration and Russia is entirely comprised of Clinton donors. The story simply contained the news: Mueller hired a Hillary Clinton donor to aid the investigation into President Donald Trump.
Still, the Washington Post gave the claim, which came from Trump himself, its official “Three Pinocchios” rating. The method applies to several other checks. Claims concocted or adulterated by someone outside the TheDC are attributed to TheDC, in what appears to be a feature that only applies to conservative sites.
Examples of such misattribution and misrepresentation are aplenty.
For instance, using Snopes.com, an organization with highlydubious fact-checking capabilities, Google’s platform shows an article by TheDC to have a so-called “mixture” of truth.
The “claim” made, according to Snopes.com and Google, is “a transgender woman raped a young girl in a women’s bathroom because bills were passed…”
A quick read of the news piece shows that there was no mention of a bill or any form of legislation. The story was merely a straightforward reporting of a disturbing incident originally reported on by a local outlet.
And like Snopes, another one of Google’s fact-checking partners, Climate Feedback, is not usually regarded as objective.
Snopes and Google also decided to “fact-check” an obviously tongue-in-cheek article in which a writer for TheDC pokes fun at a professor saying the solar eclipse in 2017 was naturally racist.
Even Vox pointed out the absurdity of the educator’s literary tirade on Mother Nature’s purported racial prejudice, and the damage it might have done to real arguments of apparent racism. While Snopes got some flak for its choice, no one seems to have noticed the absurdity of the world’s go-to search engine providing fact-checks to purposefully irreverent content, rather than hard news stories.
Overall, such inclusion embodies Google’s fact-checking services, which, as many presciently feared, are biased, if not also downright libelous.
Google acknowledged it received an inquiry from TheDCNF, but did not fully respond by time of publication.
These 2 Metro-sexual Punks Think They Can Tell Us About Climate Change.
As Christian Toto reports in Washington Times, all the movies with environmental themes flopped.
These included:
Bladerunner 2049, where eco-systems have collapsed – presumably because of man’s selfishness, greed, and refusal to amend his carbon-guzzling lifestyle – and food can now only be grown under hermetically sealed pods.
Stupid Liberals Think We Are Killing The Earth Because We Are Greedy And Selfish. This Coming From Dumb As Self-Centered, Drug Addicted Morons.
Mother!, where the Jennifer Lawrence character apparently symbolizes Mother Earth. According to the director Darren Aronofsky: “America is schizophrenic. We go from backing the Paris climate [accord] to eight months later pulling out. It’s tragic, but in many ways, we’ve revealed who the enemy is and now we can go attack it.”
They Want You To Believe That This Skank Jennifer Lawrence Is Mother Earth!
Geostorm, where the world is all but destroyed by the weather-controlling satellites which were designed to save it. (So: quite accurate, actually by Hollywood standards. A fine and plausible depiction of the unintended consequences of idiot, well-meaning scientists who think they have the power to ‘combat’ the natural process of ‘climate change’).
Liberals Have Been Saying That This Would Happen For Years And They Have Been Wrong.
Downsizing, where the eco-friendly Norwegians develop an ingenious way of coping with overpopulation: a ray which shrinks you to a fraction of your normal size, thus enabling humans to live more sustainably and deplete scarce resources at a much slower rate.
Matt Damon And These Perverts In Hollywood Want To Tell Us About Downsizing To Save The earth When They All Fly On Private Jets And Own Several Large Homes.
Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, which opened at a measly four theaters in its first weekend and grossed $124,823.00.
Al Gore Needs His Ass Kick For Lying About Climate Change.
By its seventh week, it was doing so badly that even Captain Underpants: the Movie — released six weeks earlier — was outperforming it at the box office. Its takings were a fraction of its predecessor’s, An Inconvenient Truth.
Perhaps audiences had simply had enough of Gore’s scaremongering, as summed up in this scathing review in the Australian by Maurice Newman:
It continues the scaremongering of Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Like the first, it’s full of scary weather videos and features, Gore reminding us that we are at a tipping point with the result that our children will inherit a world of “stronger storms, worsening floods, deeper droughts, mega-fires, tropical diseases spreading through vulnerable populations in all parts of the Earth, melting ice caps flooding coastal cities, unsurvivable heat extremes, and hundreds of millions of climate refugees”. Facts don’t stand in the way of a good story. But, then, most who consider this movie a “must see” will take delight in having their fantasies and prejudices confirmed.
The movie shamelessly promotes green tech, a field in which Gore is a successful investor. His advocacy and political access are believed to have made him the world’s first “carbon billionaire”. But that’s the self-serving nature of climate-change politics. It confers wealth and privilege on its boosters. Doubters are banished.
The dire performance of these movies would seem to confirm what many of us have long suspected about the misplaced priorities of the liberals inside the Hollywood bubble.
They’ve deluded themselves that they’re in the consciousness-raising business. (Hence, e.g., the new woke Star Wars installment).
We still think they ought to be in the entertainment business.
The Duran reported back in October that one Trump hating Republican was a driving force behind the fake Trump dossier…that RINO, Anti-Trumper was and is Senator John McCain.
It has since been confirmed that McCain did deliver the infamous Trump Dossier to the FBI.
John McCain has never hidden his hatred for Donald Trump, going to outrageous lengths to derail Trump’s presidency.
It seems that the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign took over in April 2016 from a previous unnamed Republican the funding of the ‘research’ which resulted in the Trump Dossier (the Washington rumour mill says this Republican was Senator McCain).
According to The Duran’s Alexander Mercouris, it certainly look like the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign circulated the Trump Dossier to their friends in the media and in the US intelligence community, triggering the start of the FBI investigation in July 2016 and the decision in August 2016 by the CIA to report its contents to President Obama. It was those two actions taken together which were the starting point of the Russiagate scandal.
It appears that the US Congress is starting to catch on to McCain’s treasonous antics to sabotage Trump’s presidency, and flame the war fires against Russia. Via Zerohedge…
Several months ago it emerged that the Republican sponsor behind the Fusion GPS Trump project was hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, a fact which surprised many who expected that John McCain would be the GOP mastermind looking for dirt in Trump’s past. However, a new and credible McCain trail has emerged in the annals of the “Trump Dossier” after the Washington Examiner reported that the House Intelligence Committee issued a subpoena to an associate of John McCain over his connection with the salacious dossier containing unverified allegations about Trump and his ties to Russia, which many speculate served as the illegitimate basis for FISA warrants against the Trump campaign – permitting the NSA to listen in on Trump’s phone calls – and which the president yesterday slammed as “bogus” and a “crooked Hillary pile of garbage.”
In the latest twist, committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) wants to talk to David Kramer, a former State Department official and current senior fellow at the McCain Institute for International Leadership at Arizona State University, about his visit to London in November 2016. During his trip, at McCain’s request Kramer met with the dossier’s author, former British spy Christopher Steele, to view “the pre-election memoranda on a confidential basis,” according to court filings and to receive a briefing and a copy of the Trump dossier. Kramer then returned to the U.S. to give the document to McCain. McCain then took a copy of the dossier to the FBI’s then-director, James Comey. But the FBI already had the document; Steele himself gave the dossier to the bureau in installments, reportedly beginning in early July 2016.
While McCain, recovering in Arizona from treatments for cancer, has long refused to detail his actions regarding the dossier, his associate Kramer was interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee on Dec. 19. The new subpoena stems from statements Kramer made in that interview. In the session, the Washington Examiner reports, Kramer told House investigators that he knew the identities of the Russian sources for the allegations in Steele’s dossier. But when investigators pressed Kramer to reveal those names, he declined to do so.
Now, he is under subpoena which was issued Wednesday afternoon, and directs Kramer to appear again before House investigators on Jan. 11.
As the ongoing government probe slowly turns away from Trump’s “collusion” with the Russians and toward the FBI “insurance policy” to allegedly prevent Trump from becoming president by fabricating a narrative of Russian cooperation with the Trump, knowing Steele’s sources will be a critical part of the congressional dossier investigation:
“If one argues the document is unverified and never will be, it is critical to learn the identity of the sources to support that conclusion. If one argues the document is the whole truth, or largely true, knowing sources is equally critical.”
According to Zerohedge, there is another reason to know Steele’s sources, and that is to learn not just the origin of the dossier but its place in the larger Trump-Russia affair.
As the WashEx adds, there is a belief among some congressional investigators that the Russians who provided information to Steele were using Steele to disrupt the American election as much as the Russians who distributed hacked Democratic Party emails. In some investigators’ views, they are the two sides of the Trump-Russia project, both aimed at sowing chaos and discord in the American political system.
Still, investigators who favor this theory ask a sensible question: “It is likely that all the Russians involved in the attempt to influence the 2016 election were lying, scheing, Kremlin-linked, Putin-backed enemies of America – except the Russians who talked to Christopher Steele?”
On the other hand, the theory is still just a theory, for now… and as the Examiner’s Byron York correctly points out, to validate -or refute – it House investigators will seek Steele’s sources – and is why they will try to compel Kramer to talk.
