The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘Oikophobia’ and #NeverTrump: How Can We ‘Secure the Blessings of Liberty’?

Posted on | July 22, 2019 | 4 Comments

 

What has prompted our immigration crisis? Isn’t it the same sentiment that leads Democrats (and David French, but I repeat myself) to claim Ilhan Omar is a better American than anyone born here?

“Oikophobia,” a hatred of one’s native country (and of one’s fellow citizens) is the most remarkable proof that our elite class have become hopelessly degenerate. Consider David French’s argument that, unlike those of us who were born here, “immigrant citizens have actually done something to earn their status.” Well, what had Ilhan Omar done for America when she was naturalized at age 18? Less than my father did. Dad was an Alabama farmboy when he joined the Army at age 18 and he earned the Purple Heart in France in 1944. Is David French implying that being my father’s son makes me less worthy of American citizenship than Ilhan Omar? Isn’t this insulting insinuation at the heart of the open-borders argument, the idea that all immigrants are better than any America, because Americans are the worst people in the world?

If you are a native-born American — and especially if you are white — Democrats consider you infinitely inferior to Ilhan Omar. The tone of David French’s argument suggests he agrees with this assessment, and one does not persuade people by insulting them. Why can’t French, an intelligent man and an able lawyer who once did great work in the cause of academic freedom, see why his anti-Trump arguments fail?

The problem, I think, is that French has been swept along by the same floodtide of degeneracy that produces mobs of enraged anarchists on the streets of Portland and makes college campuses unsafe even for well-meaning liberals like Bret Weinstein. The election of Trump, and the rising populist sentiment that elected him, caught our elite by surprise. They were shocked to discover that a powerful plurality of Americans — nearly 63 million voted for Trump — had never accepted the notions of “progress” that prevail among the university-educated elite and in the urban communities where the elite reside. Among the core tenets of this elite weltanschauung is a belief in the superiority of immigrants. You might notice the way they quote Emma Lazarus’s poetry as if it had more authority than the Constitution, a reverence for the “huddled masses” being essential to what amounts to a religious faith among our otherwise godless elite. When I visited the campus of Harvard with Pete Da Tech Guy in the fall of 2017, we were immediately confronted on our arrival with a protest on behalf of so-called “dreamers.” Harvard students are not nowadays notable for their dedication to moral virtue — they get drunk and screw around quite shamelessly — but they are adamantly certain that it is morally wrong to deport illegal aliens.

Many years ago, Peter Brimelow pointed out that a major problem with U.S. immigration policy is that voters have seldom gotten a chance to express their preference at the ballot box. The elite of both parties seem generally agreed in preferring immigrants to native-born Americans, the Republicans beholden to corporate interests that want cheap labor and the Democrats seeing immigrants as future Democrat voters. Public opinion surveys indicate that most Americans see the issue of immigration as a matter of numbers. A majority would approve of accepting 250,000 new immigrants annually, and even if you bumped that number up to half a million, most people would be OK with it, but what we have had for the past 20 years is an unofficial policy of almost unlimited immigration. Our immigration laws are riddled with loopholes, and enforcement has been uneven and irregular, so that the combination of legal and illegal immigrants has amounted to more than 1 million every year since the mid-1990s. A majority of Americans oppose this, but prior to 2016, they never had a real chance to express their dissatisfaction at the ballot box. They had previously been offered no clear choice; choosing between open-borders Democrats and open-borders Republicans was no choice at all, as far as immigration policy was concerned, and some Republicans (including my late Cousin John) were worse than any Democrat on the issue. Trump’s blunt talk — “Build a wall!” — appealed to voters who had long been frustrated by the refusal of the political elite to address their concerns over our immigration policy (or non-policy, to be more accurate). The potency of that populist resentment startled not only the political class, but also the journalists and pundits who had acted as publicity agents for the elite’s open-borders consensus.

Much has been made of the harsh “tone” of President Trump’s rhetoric and of his mercurial temperament. His critics among the conservative commentariat make much of the “character” issue, saying that even though Trump has enacted many policies that conservatives have long advocated, he does not function as a role model, failing to represent the responsible and thoughtful character of a true conservative.

Trump’s coarse language and erratic behavior, however, are an integral part of his success. During the 2016 primary campaign, I compared him to the NFL legend Fran Tarkenton, a scrambling quarterback whose unpredictability made him an unsolvable riddle for opposing defenses. Trump seems to operate according to some internal gyroscope, an instinct that leads him to say and do things which no political consultant would suggest, but which nevertheless produce victory. Consider his tweetstorm last Sunday against “the Squad” of freshmen Democrat congresswomen who had been at war with Nancy Pelosi. Jumping into that fight seemed to contradict every sensible precept of effective politics, and even many Trump supporters were dismayed. Yet once again, Trump’s instinct was vindicated, as even many of his opponents agreed he had succeeded in making these four young left-wing radicals the “face” of the Democratic Party. In the process, not incidentally, Trump hijacked the news cycle for an entire week, so that nothing else (e.g., Joe Biden’s debut of his health-care proposals) had any real impact. And as we approach the next round of Democrat presidential debates, Trump is riding high in the polls (his latest result in an NBC poll matching his all-time best), and Democrats are becoming demoralized.

“Trump’s going to get re-elected, isn’t he?” people keep asking Thomas Friedman, and if his liberal friends are saying this to him, what does that suggest about the success of Trump’s methods?

That success only inspires the Trump-haters to louder shrieks of indignation, because to them it is wrong for him to keep winning this way. And yet it is not really the president they hate so much as the people who elected him. What David French and the other #NeverTrump Republicans don’t want to confront — what they cannot admit, not even to themselves — is that Trump’s success is a repudiation of their own weakness, a condemnation of their abject failure. The crowd of intellectuals at National Review and the now-defunct Weekly Standard considered themselves possessors of an authority that entitled them to prescribe policy and to anoint candidates for the Republican Party. Exercising this leadership prerogative, as an elite class as secure in its authority as any feudal aristocracy, our conservative intellectuals were always eager to claim credit when Republicans won elections, but when Republicans lost, they insisted that this was never their fault. Probably their zenith of prestige was in 2005, after Bush had been re-elected, which gave credence to Karl Rove’s talk of a “permanent Republican majority” based on a so-called “center-right” coalition. That hope quickly evaporated, with military disaster in Iraq followed by Democrats recapturing Congress in 2006 and then on to the economic catastrophe of 2008 followed by the election of Barack Hussein Obama.

Insofar as a Republican majority has been revived since that low ebb of 2008, it was first because of the Tea Party — a grassroots populist movement that powered the GOP House landslide of 2010 — and eventually the populist success of Trump’s campaign. If you were directly familiar with the Tea Party movement, as I was, you know that there is considerable overlap between those who attended rallies in 2009-2010 and those who are now the staunchest supporters of Trump. While immigration was not an issue the Tea Party concerned itself with, the movement’s prominent early supporters included Michelle Malkin, author of the 2002 book Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces, and a leader in opposition to the John McCain-backed amnesty proposals. In general, the Tea Party’s populist sentiment was expressed as a distrust of the Beltway establishment in both parties, including those Republicans who had supported corporate bailouts in 2008.

Because the #NeverTrump Republicans refuse to accept any responsibility for the failures of Bush-era GOP policy — although all of them, including French, marched in lockstep in support of those policies — they are at a loss to explain how or why they have lost their influence as intellectual leaders of the conservative movement. Instead, they denounce the 63 million Americans who voted for Trump as ignorant racists, which prompts the question: Why would anyone support “conservative intellectuals” who so emphatically agree with Democrats?

(Pierre Omidyar could not be reached for comment.)

Four years ago, Vox Day observed that French and the #NeverTrump conservatives “haven’t grasped the fact that the demographic changes to the United States have not only changed the way the political game is played, but have changed the game itself.” The country that elected and re-elected Ronald Reagan by landslide margins has ceased to exist, replaced by one in which Republicans can win the White House only by razor-thin margins, and the most important reason for this change is immigration. The demographic changes that have so transformed our politics did not “just happen.” It wasn’t some impersonal trend which caused this, but rather it was a matter of policy, and National Review was on the side of open borders, having purged Alien Nation author Peter Brimelow and sidelined John O’Sullivan. Not only did National Review purge those who dissented from their open-borders agenda, but also treated as persona non grata anyone who lamented this purge. They will call you a racist if you don’t support open-borders Republicans whose policies make it impossible for Republicans to win elections. Why do the editors of National Review think we should be grateful for their services in denouncing Republican voters as racist, as if there is a shortage of Democrats willing to perform this service?

Americans have grown tired of being lectured about how racist they are. The white people delivering these lectures — e.g., Joe Scarborough, Chris Cuomo, David Brooks — seem to believe that their moral superiority to the rest of us is so self-evident that we will enjoy and be grateful for the opportunity to be “enlightened” by them. Yet they are telling us nothing we haven’t already been told a million times, long before anyone imagined Donald Trump running for president.

David French’s insistence that Ilhan Omar is better than any native-born American simply because she is an immigrant — that our inheritance as Americans is a stigma of inferiority — is insulting, and the fact that he thinks we are too stupid to notice this is even more insulting.

The authors of our Constitution explained that their purpose was to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” If we are the posterity of our nation’s Founders — if we would deserve to be known as their heirs — then we have inherited an obligation to ensure that “the blessings of liberty” are preserved intact, that they may be enjoyed by future generations of Americans. So-called “Justice Democrats” like Ilhan Omar are a threat to that heritage of liberty, and yet David French, who wishes us to believe he is a conservative, seems to think that it is “racist” to oppose them. I do not exercise any control over what President Trump puts on his Twitter feed nor do Trump supporters seek my advice on what they should chant at rallies, but I know that Donald Trump prevented Hillary Clinton from becoming president, and that his willingness to call out Omar and her “Squad” (and to be smeared as a racist for doing so) indicates a keen understanding of what it will take to prevent Democrats from taking back the White House in 2020.

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe there is something to be gained by playing “Nice Guy” with the Democrats, but if being nice were the criterion of political success, Jeb Bush might be president. And he’s not.

Get over it.



 

Category: Donald Trump, Immigration, Intellectuals

Rule 5 Sunday: Kathy Zhu

Posted on | July 22, 2019 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

The Miss World pageant organizers apparently have never heard of the Streisand Effect. On Friday, the pageant’s notional director stripped Miss Michigan, College Republican activist Kathy Zhu (@PoliticalKathy) of her title for allegedly “racist” tweets and her refusal to try on a hijab, and the result has been that a lot of people who never heard of Kathy are now aware of her and her unashamed support of President Trump – and they like her! Here she is dressed to kill for the pageant.

A lovely flower in the garden.

Appropriately enough for this sweaty week, it’s Ninety Miles From Tyranny with Hot Pick Of The Late Night, The 90 Miles Mystery Box Episode #685, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns. At Animal Magnetism, it’s Rule Five NYT Hypocrites Friday and a steamy Saturday Gingermageddon. Bacon Time serves up Rule Five Amateur Hour.

EBL celebrates Bastille Day, Serena Skov Campbell, National Hot Dog Day, Lashana Lynch, the SHADO Moon Base, Lindsay Shepherd, the new Cats movie, Luna Ladies, and Loretta Lynn.

A View From The Beach graces us with On the Boardwalk with the Notorious Gretchen Mol, Fish Pic Friday, How Prohibition Saved The Turtle, The Problems with Straw Dispensing, Queen Anne to Vote to Ban Balloon Escapes, Russiagate, For Your Eyes Only, She’d Play a Table or a Rifle Pretty Well, Too, Evolution in Action, The 10x Engineer and Just Another Palm Sunday.

Proof Positive’s Vintage Babe of the week is Rita Moreno, and at Dustbury, it’s Yuja Wang and Erica Hill.

Thanks to everyone for the luscious linkagery!

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Shop Sex & Sensuality Gifts

Category: Rule 5

Forgotten History for a Sunday in July

Posted on | July 21, 2019 | Comments Off on Forgotten History for a Sunday in July

 

Most Americans have never heard of the Battle of Kettle Creek, fought in Wilkes County, Georgia, in February 1779. The British had captured Savannah two months earlier, and in January moved upriver to take Augusta. The British began recruiting and arming local Tories. By February, Lt. Col. John Boyd led a force of about 700 Tory militia, who plundered the locals as they marched through the backcounty until they were intercepted, some 20 miles south of the Savannah River, by about 400 Patriot militia commanded by Col. Andrew Pickens.

In the battle, Boyd was killed and most of the Tories fled or were captured, while the Patriots suffered fewer than 30 casualties. One of the Patriots wounded in the Battle of Kettle Creek was a Georgia militia private named Samuel Emory Davis, a 23-year-old Augusta native whose father immigrated to Georgia from Cardiff, Wales. Samuel Davis later raised a company of mounted troops and rose to the rank of major. After the war, he married Jane Cook, the daughter of a South Carolina Baptist minister, and settled down to farm in Wilkes County, Georgia, not far from the battlefield at Kettle Creek. By 1797, the Davises had five children when Samuel made the decision to relocate his family to the Kentucky frontier, where they established a settlement about 20 miles north of present-day Fort Campbell. There the Davis family kept growing, with their 10th child being born in 1808, when Samuel was 52 years old.

Samuel Davis later moved his family twice again, first to Louisiana before finally settling in 1812 near Woodville, Mississippi. When America went to war against the British that year, three of Samuel Davis’s sons enlisted, and two were commended by Andrew Jackson for their gallantry in the 1814 Battle of New Orleans. Samuel’s oldest son, Joseph Emory Davis, became a lawyer and one of the wealthiest men in Mississippi, but it was his youngest son who was destined for historic fame. A brilliant scholar, Samuel’s youngest son was the only Protestant student enrolled in a Dominican Catholic boarding school in Kentucky. He later studied at Transylvania University in Lexington. He was 16 when his father died in 1824 and shortly thereafter, his brother Joseph helped him gain appointment to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., where he graduated in 1828. Second Lieutenant Davis was assigned to the First Infantry Regiment, stationed at Fort Crawford on what was then America’s remote northwest frontier, in present-day Wisconsin.

The commander at Fort Crawford was Col. Zachary Taylor. Four years later, the Black Hawk War broke out, ending with the defeat of the hostile tribes and the capture of Chief Black Hawk. Taylor assigned Lieutenant Davis the duty of escorting the prisoner to St. Louis. With peace restored to the northwestern frontier, it was now safe for Taylor’s family to join him at Fort Crawford, and Lieutenant Davis fell in love with the colonel’s beautiful daughter Sarah. Her father opposed this romance, not wishing his daughter to have the difficult life of a soldier’s wife, but love won out. Read more

Category: History

FMJRA 2.0: Floating

Posted on | July 20, 2019 | Comments Off on FMJRA 2.0: Floating

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Sunday: Baba Fumika
Animal Magnetism
Ninety Miles From Tyranny
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive
EBL

‘Gender Equality,’ World Cup Edition
EBL

Death by Tourism
EBL

‘Drag Queen Story Hour’ Sparks Outrage in St. Mary’s County, Maryland
Dark Brightness
A View From The Beach
EBL

FMJRA 2.0: Neon Knights
A View From The Beach
EBL

Antifa Terrorist Shot Dead After Firebomb Attack on ICE Facility in Tacoma
Bacon Time
Animal Magnetism
A View From The Beach
EBL

Tacoma Antifa Terrorist’s Manifesto Blames ‘Rich Guys’ for ‘Evil … Concentration Camps’
EBL

Aziz Ansari ‘More Thoughtful’ Now (But It’s Still Not Safe to Date Abby Nierman)
EBL

Professor William Jacobson Will Speak at DOJ ‘Combatting Anti-Semitism’ Summit
EBL

Blunder or Genius?
Dark Brightness
Bacon Time
A View From The Beach
EBL

Teenage Girl Nearly Decapitated by Jealous Loser She Met on Internet
Dark Brightness
357 Magnum
EBL

In The Mailbox: 07.16.19 (Morning Edition)
357 Magnum
Proof Positive
EBL

In The Mailbox: 07.16.19 (Evening Edition)
Proof Positive
EBL

Wes Pruden, R.I.P.
EBL

In The Mailbox: 07.17.19
A View From The Beach
Proof Positive
EBL

Is the ‘Baseless Rumor’ True? Why Don’t Journalists Do Some Actual Journalism?
A View From The Beach
EBL

In The Mailbox: 07.18.19
Proof Positive
EBL

Marianne Williamson Will Share CNN Debate Stage With Elizabeth Warren
Dark Brightness
EBL

Guatemalan Girl Was Smuggled to Iowa and Repeatedly Raped, Feds Charge
A View From The Beach
EBL

In The Mailbox: 07.19.19
Proof Positive
EBL

Top linkers for the week ending July 19:

  1.  EBL (20)
  2.  A View From The Beach (8)
  3.  Proof Positive (6)

Honorable mention to Dark Brightness. Thanks to everyone for the links!


Amazon Warehouse Deals

Try Amazon Music Unlimited Free Trial
Kindle Unlimited Membership Plans
Shop Amazon Outlet – Clearance, Markdowns and Overstock Deals

Category: FMJRA Award

Saying ‘Thank You’ to David Atkins

Posted on | July 20, 2019 | Comments Off on Saying ‘Thank You’ to David Atkins

 

Everybody had a good point-and-laugh at David Atkins’s expense, without wondering: Why would a California Democrat be so filled with loathing of “rural white evangelicals”? Was he bullied by militant Baptists as a child? Has he ever actually met any of the rural white people he says are thoroughly despised by “the vast majority of Americans”? No, he’s just a liberal who can look at the map and read the exit polls the same as you or I can, and who therefore understands which demographic category most strongly supports the Republican Party. He hates white people and Christians and rural America because they are an obstacle to the Democrats’ project of turning America into a totalitarian one-party regime where dissent from the approved opinions is forbidden.

Of course, Atkins himself is white, but he lives in Santa Barbara, an affluent seaside enclave of privilege where the media home value is over $900,000 and only 1.4% of the population is black. It’s very easy for people who live in such circumstances to imagine that they are morally superior to everyone who lives in, say, Lowndes County, Georgia, where 37% of the population is black and the median home value is $129,700.

Hillary Clinton got 61% of the vote in Santa Barbara County, whereas Donald Trump carried Lowndes County with 57.5% of the vote.

What do you think the typical resident of Lowndes County might say if David Atkins showed up in person to tell him we was “heavily subsidized, drowning in federal largesse,” a beneficiary of “overrepresentation” who has “all [his] bills paid by cities and blue states”? Whatever answer Atkins got, it probably wouldn’t be “grateful.”



 

Category: California

In The Mailbox: 07.19.19

Posted on | July 19, 2019 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: When Are We Going TO Get Our SHADO Moon Base?
Twitchy: Buzz Aldrin Catches Flak For White House Visit
Louder With Crowder: Trans “Woman” Sues Businesses For Refusing To Wax “Her” Genitalia
According To Hoyt: Common Sense & Thomas Sowell
Monster Hunter Nation: Tom Stranger The #1 Audiobook In The World, Again!
Vox Popoli: Epstein, NXIVM, & Mega

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Greatness: Miss World America Strips Trump-Supporting Miss Michigan of Her Crown Over Tweets
American Power: Trump Supporters “Must Be Confronted And Destroyed”
American Thinker: Democrats Hate America & Americans
Animal Magnetism: Rule Five NYT Hypocrites Friday
Babalu Blog: Cuban Baptist Minister Speaks With President Trump About Religious Persecution In Cuba, also, Music Video Tribute To Spy Vs. Spy Creator Antonio Prohas By His Daughter Suzi
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For July 19
Camp of the Saints: The Ongoing Danger To The Catholic Faith
CDR Salamander: Fullbore Friday
Da Tech Guy: Some Life Advice For The Modern Age
Don Surber: CNN Ignores Trump’s Rule In Chicoms’ Turmoil, also, Curing Racism
Dustbury: Absolute Zero In Real Life
First Street Journal: Pro Wrestling Deemed More Trustworthy Than Chris Cuomo
The Geller Report: Ilhan Omar Used False Name To Enter U.S., Married Brother, also, Journalist Travels To Ilhan Omar’s Homeland To Prove Somalia Is Beautiful, Gets Killed By Jihadis
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also, Winning The Straw Pole
Hollywood In Toto: LuPone Gets Ugly On Twitter, Keeps Digging
Joe For America: Deaths On Mexican Border Have Declined In First Two Years Of Trump Administration
JustOneMinute: Could This Be Peak Bernie?
Legal Insurrection: NH Voter Tells Fauxcahontas “I Have Concerns About Your Honesty”, also, Survey – Majority Of Mexicans Want Illegals In Mexico Deported To Their Home Countries
The PanAm Post: Bondholders & Emissaries Seek To Keep Maduro In Power, also, Why Support For AMLO Has Fallen By Almost Half
Power Line: The NYT Covers For Omar, also, Daily Mail Vs. Daily Beast
Shark Tank: Marco Rubio Introduces TPS Bill For Haitians
Shot In The Dark: One Day In The Star/Tribune‘s Morgue
The Political Hat: Firing Line Friday – Would Anarchy Work?
This Ain’t Hell: Friday Valor, also, Occasional Cortex Gets Schooled On Border Issues
Victory Girls: Rural White Americans Are Ungrateful Losers, Says California Democrat
Volokh Conspiracy:  Short Circuit – A Roundup Of Recent Federal Court Decisions
Weasel Zippers: Bernie Sanders Caught Paying His Campaign Staff Less Than $15/Hour, also, Congressional Security Says Threats Against #TheOddSquad Have Not Increased, Despite Their Claims
Megan McArdle: Feeling Bad About U.S. Politics? Take A Look At Britain
Mark Steyn: Populism & Globalism…At Sea

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

Guatemalan Girl Was Smuggled to Iowa and Repeatedly Raped, Feds Charge

Posted on | July 19, 2019 | Comments Off on Guatemalan Girl Was Smuggled to Iowa and Repeatedly Raped, Feds Charge

Last month — on June 5 — police in Sioux City, Iowa, found a girl wandering the streets, saying she had been raped. It turned out the girl and her father had been brought from Guatemala by a couple who had been helping smuggle illegal aliens into the United States, according to an arrest affidavit filed this month by Department of Homeland Security investigators. The girl, identified in the affidavit as “ABF,” told authorities she had been locked in a room and repeatedly raped by Cristobal Francisco-Nicolas, 37. She escaped after the door was left unlocked. The girl said her mother died when she was 3 or 4 and she had been raised in Guatemala by her aunt, but she was brought to the United States by her father, Fernando Francisco.

The affidavit portrays this as part of a smuggling scheme masterminded by Francisco-Nicolas and his wife, Amy, who had allegedly advised immigrants to bring a minor child to the U.S. with them:

The father and daughter reportedly traveled from Guatemala, through Mexico where they crossed the border into the U.S. on May 29 by walking across the Rio Grande 18 miles west of the Paso Del Norte Port of Entry in El Paso. Border Patrol agents arrested them and fingerprinted them. The agents released her and her father the following day due to processing center overcrowding, the complaint states. Officials released them on an Order of Recognizance and Supervision.
From their release in El Paso, the father and [the girl] ABF flew to Omaha, Nebraska where “Francisco” (later identified as Cristobal Francisco-Nicolas) and “Sofia” (later identified as Amy Francisco) picked them up and drove them to a house in Sioux City.
The father then reportedly “left her” with the couple in Sioux City. It is not clear where the father went or if he simply abandoned her after using her to exploit loopholes in U.S. immigration law to get past Border Patrol and immigration officials.
ABF reportedly told the investigators that Cristobal and Amy locked her in a room with a “metal bed and a bucket for bodily waste.” She stated that Cristobal began raping her and that Amy watched from the door to the locked room, the complaint continued.
After allegedly being raped five times, ABF managed to escape from the house after Amy left the door unlocked as she slept and Cristobal left for work. ABF said she fled from the house and found someone who could speak Spanish. . . .
During an interview with Amy’s father, he reportedly told investigators that Amy and Cristobal made arrangements for ABF and Fernando to travel from Guatemala to the U.S. They reportedly told Fernando that he must bring a child with him. He said they were to turn themselves in at the border and then, if released, contact Amy for flight arrangements to Iowa.
Once they arrived in Sioux City, they were expected to get a job with Amy’s assistance and help pay for rent and the food while they lived at the house. They were also to pay Amy and Cristobal and Amy back for the smuggling fees.
The other foreign nationals in the house also reportedly told investigators Amy and Cristobal helped smuggle them to the U.S. and they were also helping to pay household expenses and repaying smuggling fees, the complaint states.
All of the foreign nationals found in the house are reportedly under an Order of Supervision from immigration officials. . . .

Democrats in Congress refuse to pass any legislation that would close the loopholes in our immigration law that made this crime possible.



 

Category: Guatemala, Immigration, Iowa, Violence Against Women

Marianne Williamson Will Share CNN Debate Stage With Elizabeth Warren

Posted on | July 19, 2019 | 1 Comment

 

The lineup for the second round of Democrat presidential debates — July 30-31 in Detroit, televised by CNN — will feature Marianne Williamson on the first night, along with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Meanwhile the second night will feature a rematch between former Vice President Joe Biden and California Sen. Kamala Harris.

Second-quarter fundraising showed five candidates — Buttigieg, Biden, Warren, Sanders and Harris — raise three-quarters of the money raised by the entire Democratic field. Buttigieg’s surge in the second quarter, raising nearly $25 million, was remarkable, as was the complete meltdown of former Texas Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke’s campaign. After raising $9.4 million in the first quarter of 2019, O’Rourke’s total slumped to $3.6 million in the second quarter, when he spent more ($5.3 million) than he raised. O’Rourke’s second-quarter “burn rate” of 146% was exceeded only by New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who spent nearly twice as much (184%) as she raised in the second quarter. Having a high “burn rate” — spending more than the candidate raises — is usually a sign that a campaign has more paid staff than it can afford, which could eventually bankrupt a campaign.

Williamson’s second-quarter fundraising haul of $1.5 million came mostly (71%) from small donors, exceeding Sanders (70%) and Warren (67%) in the percentage of donors giving under $200. However, earlier this month, Williamson said she still needs 49,000 new unique donors to reach the 130,000 unique-donor threshold the DNC has announced for the third round of debates in September. Perhaps getting a celebrity endorsement from Alyssa Milano will help, and the candidate also made an appearance this week on Anderson Cooper’s CNN show.

 

Presidential candidate Marianne Williamson (D) ripped President Donald Trump on Wednesday evening for his “dangerous” rally that was out of the “fascist playbook,” warning Americans to think about how Hitler came to power in Nazi Germany.
“The president’s talk tonight was more than discouraging. The president’s talk tonight was dangerous. And it’s very important for Americans to see that talk and for all patriotic Americans, whether on the left or right, to be very clear that we don’t do that in America,” Williamson told CNN’s Anderson Cooper. “Our political opponents are not our enemies. You didn’t hear talk like that from Ronald Reagan or from George W. Bush or from George Bush Sr. when talking about Democrats. That’s not what we do here.”
Williamson, the spiritual adviser and author who has advised Oprah Winfrey, even suggested a link between Trump and the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany when speaking about the “send her back” chants directed at Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).
“And this is so far away from the traditions of democracy that when your former guests were trying to talk about has anything like this ever happened in America, the question is not has anything like this ever happened in America. We need to think about how it happened in Germany,” she continued. “We need to be very, very serious and take this very seriously because the president has said this is how he’s going to run this campaign. The way he was talking about four elected officials, these women are U.S. Congresspeople. We don’t do this in America.”

Remember: This is about Democrat primary voters. You may not believe Trump is a potential Hitler, but Democrat primary voters do.



 

Category: Debates, Democrats, Election
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin