So I Guess the New Democratic Party Platform Is Violence?

THAT'S WHAT I'M SCREAMING

By:               John Dempsey

So I Guess the New Democratic Party Platform Is Violence?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traditionally, political parties have a platform to convince voters to vote for their side. The left no longer has a coherent message for the American people. Instead, Democrats have taken their party away from politics and moved their position to revenge, assault, and chaos.

Since 2016, the left has been in a state of shellshock. Democrats began blaming Russia’s president for Trump’s victory. Attorney General Jeff Sessions stepped aside to allow Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to oversee the allegations that Trump somehow coordinated with Putin to win the general election even though former President Obama said it was impossible. Former FBI Director Robert Mueller was selected to lead the investigation with a team of attorneys. Mueller and his investigators have been unable to find any evidence of collusion with Russia, despite the left-wing hype.

The longer Mueller’s fruitless…

View original post 399 more words

Advertisements

Levi Strauss & Co. To Donate $1 Million+ To Anti-Gun Groups

Socialism is not the Answer

(Screenshot NRA-ILA)

The president and CEO of Levi Strauss & Co., Chip Bergh, has announced that the iconic company, “a pioneer of the American West,” will donate more than $1 million to gun-control groups to help end “America’s gun violence epidemic,” a step the NRA denounced as a “particularly sad episode in the current surge in corporate virtue-signaling.”

In his announcement, through a commentary in Fortune magazine, CEO Bergh stated that Levi’s is “known the world over as a pioneer of the American West and one of the great symbols of American freedom.”  Nonetheless, “as business leaders with power in the public and political arenas, we simply cannot stand by silently when it comes to the issues that threaten the very fabric of the communities where we live and work…. [D]oing nothing is no longer an option.”

Bergh then reveals that Levi’s has…

View original post 397 more words

Western Civilization No Longer Exists

Flyover-Press.com

To be truthful, there is nothing left of Western civilization, and the fault is not Russia’s, China’s, Iran’s, or Venezuela’s. It is our own. We are an insouciant people, unconcerned, ignorant, worried only about unimportant things, kept ignorant and confused by a media that serves only the One Percent. The American people, indeed the people of the West, have no awareness that they are headed into total destruction… by societal collapse.

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)It is shocking to some when I say, “I hate White people.” Why? Because we are the only race on earth that has ever actively participated in its own genocide.

Beginning with our “great wars” (I and II), the two greatest gene pools on earth (the Anglos and the Saxons) slaughtered each other by the millions. And who was always the first over the top of the trench? The leaders. There is no way of knowing how many cures…

View original post 672 more words

The Eerie Trump Derangement Syndrome escalating in academia

Jim Campbell's

Comment By Jim Campbell

October 18th, 2018

Nothing Eerie about it whatsoever it was taken from Obama’s play book even though it’s unlikely it exists in the Trump administration at all.

Written originally by Obama’s underlings.

This is the typical type of bilge water the left is hoping true Americans will swallow.

Think about it, what is and who makes up so-called academia?

Those who had an knew they could never make it in the real world and opted for acting as higher life forms over their students they brainwash.

That’s not going to happen.

Whenever Obama moved his lips he was lying, nothing has changed with the exception that the former occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue nevertold the truth or accomplished anything that benefited all Americans.

When we think about division in America, only Obama comes t0 mind.

Front Page Magazine

October 18, 2018

Jack Kerwick

All of…

View original post 1,016 more words

Real-World Examples of How the Minimum Wage Destroys Jobs and Hurts Workers

International Liberty

Politicians can interfere with the laws of supply and demand (and they do, with distressing regularity), but they can’t repeal them.

The minimum wage issue is a tragic example. If lawmakers pass a law mandating wages of $10 per hour, that is going to have a very bad effect on low-skilled workers who can only generate, say, $8 of revenue per hour.

You don’t need to be a libertarian to realize this is a problem.

Catherine Rampell leans to the left, but she warned last year in the Washington Post about the danger of “helping” workers to the unemployment line.

…the left needs to think harder about the unintended consequences of…benevolent-seeming proposals. In isolation, each of these policies has the potential to make workers more costly to hire. Cumulatively, they almost certainly do. Which means that, unless carefully designed, a lefty “pro-labor” platform might actually encourage firms to…

View original post 792 more words

The mugging of America by Progressive/Democrats: 24-7X7

Jim Campbell's

Comment By Jim Campbell

October 12, 1017

Here we go again, the Sr. dowager Senator from California has put her foot in her mouth again.

If Republicans could get their acts together and start pulling on the same end of the rope this malfeasance on the part of the Trump haters could be brought to a halt, if not just temporarily.

After the sanctuary city of San Francisco expanded voting to illegal aliens in some local elections, desperate California lefties now want to fraudulently boost its Congressional representation and federal funding by continuing to include illegal aliens in their census.

Now leading the charge is none other than the disgraced Senator San Fran Feinstein herself, who seems confused by the fact those of us who are citizens might not want people from other countries vote on who represents us.

Surprised?

The video below has a slight leftward tilt to it.

View original post 479 more words

Judicial Watch Uncovers More Classified Material on Hillary Clinton’s Unsecure Email System

Socialism is not the Answer

New emails appear to be among those Clinton had attempted to delete or had otherwise failed to disclose

Federal Court Hearing Scheduled for Thursday, October 11, to discuss documents State Department continues to hold, review possible Judicial Watch challenges

Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced today that it received 288 pages of newly uncovered emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that were transmitted over her unsecure, non-“state.gov” email system, three of which contain classified information.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, after the State Department failed to respond to a March 4, 2015, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)) seeking:

All emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State, as well as all emails…

View original post 985 more words

She said nothing

Jim Campbell's

Author unknown;

H/T  General Wood

September 26, 2018

1982 – Something may or may not have happened with another 2 (or 4) teenagers at a party, she cannot remember who threw the party, where the party was held, who she was with or how she got home. She was drinking and said nothing to anyone.
1983,
1984,
1985,
1986,
1987,
1988,
1989,
1990,
1991,
1992,
1993,
1994,
1995,
1996,
1997,
1998,
1999,
2000,
2001,
2002… She said nothing.
July 25, 2003: President George W. Bush nominated Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit… She said nothing.
2004,
2005… She said nothing.
May 11, 2006: The United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary recommended confirmation. Kavanaugh subsequently confirmed by the United States Senate… She said nothing.

June 1, 2006: Kavanaugh sworn in by Justice Anthony Kennedy… She said nothing.
2007,
2008,
2009,
2010,
2011… She said nothing.
2012… She remembered ‘something’ happened…

View original post 73 more words

Bombshell: I remember Brett Kavanaugh shooting Abraham Lincoln

Socialism is not the Answer

American Thinker

By Ed Straker

I’ve always thought, as most people do, that John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln at Ford’s Theater on April 4, 1865.  But after spending six days talking with lawyers from the Democratic Party to help me refresh my memory, I’ve come to realize that it wasn’t John Wilkes Booth at all, but rather Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

I had no memory of this happening as recently as last week, but today, it is as clear as day.  I remember Kavanaugh coming up from behind the president of the United States and aiming a pistol at him.  Only I’m not sure it was at Ford’s Theater.  It might have been at Ford’s Theater, but it might also have been on the Mall, or in the White House, or on Capitol Hill.  I’m a little hazy on the day, too.  It might have been April 4, 1865, but it also could have…

View original post 387 more words

The Kavanaugh-Ford Hearing Will Be A Craven, Pointless Spectacle

Senate Democrats have managed to reduce Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation to an absurd show trial that no one can win.
John Daniel Davidson

By

At the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing today, suppose both Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford testify under oath. Suppose they each stick to their story. Ford says the drunken sexual assault happened as she has described, and Kavanaugh once again categorically denies that he has ever done such a thing or was even at the party in question. Suppose also that both Ford and Kavanaugh give stirring, emotional performances.

What is the Senate Judiciary Committee supposed to conclude from that? What are individual senators supposed to do about it afterwards? Make a decision on the basis of who gave the best performance? Do they calculate the political optics of voting for or against an embattled nominee? Do they simply go with their gut?

Whatever they do, they are not going to be able to decide on the basis of facts, such as they are, or anything like evidence. They will not even be able to decide on the preponderance of evidence, which is the standard in a civil as opposed to criminal trial, because no substantive evidence of any kind has been presented amid all the accusations swirling around Kavanaugh in recent days. The Judiciary Committee has bent over backwards just trying to get sworn statements from Kavanaugh’s accusers.

What is likely to happen today is a kind of grand farce: a real-life reenactment of a Title IX rape tribunal on steroids—and not on some left-wing college campus but in the U.S. Senate, supposedly the “world’s greatest deliberative body,” now reduced to a kangaroo court before the eyes of a gazing world.

Regardless of what happens, this much is certain: no one wins. When this is over, one side is going to believe that the other has committed a great travesty of justice. If Senate Republicans confirm Kavanaugh, the left will forever claim that the GOP ignored “credible claims” from women and put a rapist on the Supreme Court.

If Democrats manage to defeat Kavanaugh’s nomination, Americans on the right will not only be furious that Republicans caved, they will be inclined to believe that future allegations of sexual misconduct are nothing more than political weapons, and that conservatives seeking high office cannot expect the presumption of innocence, due process, or anything close to a fair hearing.

The ‘Evidence’ Is Nothing But He-Said, She-Said

Consider the documents each side has submitted to the committee as evidence. Kavanaugh’s legal team handed over pages from his 1982 calendar for the months of May, June, July, and August. Perusing it, anyone can see young Kavanaugh had quite a busy life that summer. But as an analysis by the New York Times showed, the calendar doesn’t disprove Ford’s sexual assault allegations. Although Kavanaugh listed myriad social engagements, outings, sporting events, movies, and so on, he could have attended a party that summer without listing it in his calendar.

Ford’s legal team has submitted four signed declarations, from her husband and three friends, claiming that Ford told them about the alleged sexual assault. But as with Kavanaugh’s calendar, these declarations don’t amount to much. The events Ford describes supposedly took place 36 years ago, yet she never mentioned them to anyone—not her parents, not her friends, not even her husband—until 2012, when it came up during a couple’s therapy session.

So far, there’s no corroborating evidence contemporaneous with the allegations, and therefore no way to weigh these declarations beyond he-said, she-said, they-said.

Democrats will doubtless point to the other accusers who have come forward in recent days. On Sunday, The New Yorker published an account by a woman named Deborah Ramirez, who attended Yale with Kavanaugh and claims that he exposed himself to her at a drunken dormitory party, “thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.”

The problem is, like Ford’s allegation, no contemporaneous witnesses have come forward to corroborate the story. In addition, Ramirez never mentioned the incident to anyone at the time, and came forward “after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney.” The New Yorker contacted several dozens of classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh yet were unable to confirm that Kavanaugh was even at the party. Two students Ramirez claims were there denied any memory of the party. Those former students, along with two others who were close to both Kavanaugh and Ramirez at Yale, issued a statement saying that they never heard of anything like the incident alleged by Ramirez.

On Wednesday, another woman came forward, Julie Swetnick, with an even more salacious accusation: that Kavanaugh and his friends targeted high school girls with drugs and alcohol at parties where “trains” of boys would gang-rape girls. Swetnick claims to be a victim of one such drugging and gang-rape, and claims Kavanaugh was present at the party where it happened (Swetnick’s statement notably falls short of accusing Kavanaugh of participating in the gang-rape, only alleging that he was at the party where it happened).

This latest allegation—published on Twitter by Swetnick’s celebrity attorney, Michael Avenatti—is, like the others, uncorroborated. That’s odd, because the claim here is that there was a serial gang-rape cult in the early 1980s in Washington, D.C., made up of high school and college students, including Kavanaugh, and that these gang-rape parties happened repeatedly. Moreover, Swetnick claims that she went to these parties as an adult—10 of them!—and never did anything besides “avoid the punch.”

It’s a crazy story—so crazy, in fact, that if it were true there would be plenty of witnesses, including multiple perpetrators and victims, who could confirm it. Alas, the New York Times could not independently corroborate even one of her claims, and said Avennati declined to make her available for an interview.

The Hearing Will Not Clear Up Anything

For his part, Kavanaugh denies all of this categorically, as he has since the beginning. He says he’s never even heard of Swetnick, let alone met her, and that the accusations of Ford and Ramirez are false, nothing but a smear campaign.

Whether these accusations are true or not, Senate Democrats have gotten what they wanted out of them. They are now calling on the confirmation process to be suspended while the FBI conducts a “thorough investigation.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer thinks Kavanaugh should withdraw from consideration, and on Wednesday afternoon the 10 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee asked President Trump withdraw Kavanaugh’s nomination.

Senate Democrats are right about one thing: this hearing is not going to clear up anything. There will be no justice at the end of it, for anyone. Neither the senators on the Judiciary Committee nor the American people will be able to say that they have seen enough evidence to be able to judge these claims fairly, because the claims are allergic to evidence and the hearing itself is a farce.

By dragging out these decades-old allegations in the eleventh hour, Senate Democrats have conjured a Kafkaesque nightmare plucked from the pages of “The Trial,” in which a person’s entire life can be destroyed by an accusation. They have done this as part of their resistance to the Trump administration, but in the process they have reduced their deliberations to mere spectacle, with the entire country watching.