“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”—Martin Niemoller

Poll: What do you think Obama was doing while American's were being killed in Benghazi?

Despite what some may think, the Constitution is no magical incantation against government wrongdoing. Indeed, it’s only as effective as those who abide by it. However, without courts willing to uphold the Constitution’s provisions when government officials disregard it and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, it provides little to no protection against SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions, and the like.

Unfortunately, the courts and the police have meshed in their thinking to such an extent that anything goes when it’s done in the name of national security, crime fighting and terrorism. Consequently, America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government’s interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution.

Just recently, for example, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in U.S. v. Westhoven that driving too carefully, with a rigid posture, taking a scenic route, and having acne are sufficient reasons for a police officer to suspect you of doing something illegal, detain you, search your car, and arrest you—even if you’ve done nothing illegal to warrant the stop in the first place.

In that same vein, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in a 5-4 ruling in Navarette v. California that police officers can, under the guise of “reasonable suspicion,” stop cars and question drivers based solely on anonymous tips, no matter how dubious, and whether or not they themselves witnessed any troubling behavior.

And then you have the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Hedges v. Obama, a legal challenge to the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), thereby affirming that the President and the U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals, including American citizens, based on a suspicion that they might be associated with or aiding terrorist organizations.

read more:


Views: 1012

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I do believe so!  Once the SUPREME COURT is in the pocket of the far left-IT WILL BEDONE!!

the same things are happening now as was in the 30s; remember this people , whoever doesent study history is doomed to repeat it, all the signs are there people

Are "We" recreating The Third Reich ?  no.  We're going to prevent it.

But Barack Obama is a Dedicated, Confirmed Marxist-Socialist and proven Fascist Dictator since becoming president. He shares the SAME basic Philosophy as Lenin/Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, Kim, Castro, Ho Chi Mihn, and Pol Pot.

Agreed 1000000%

In recent decades the US Supreme Court has taken the position that they are the law. That these 9 justices will determine under what law and rules we will live by. The  US Constitution says other wise, and it is time Congress stood up and challenged the Supreme Court.

First by limiting  service on the court to 20 years, or age 75, whatever comes first.

Second, by implementing states rights and specifically re-establishing the Bill of Rights, and eliminating Executive Orders which are not delineated by the Constitution.


AMEN!!! In other words...they need to do their JOBS!!!

Yea, the Supreme Court is going to say that they are the "law."  There is a grave potential danger, overreach is being done with their tinpot leader. They are going around proclaiming that "olblameacare" is the "law of the land."  They want us to bow down in submission. Yes, we are a "Nation of Laws."  However bad laws should be abolished/repealed.  Executive orders also have their limitations on the Presidents who are fit to recognize and respect the limitation, and not wield "Executive orders" like an iron fist like oblamea is doing.  The Bill of Rights and Our Constitution is still established, however the tinpot regime is doing end runs around it left and right.  oblamea is not upholding the Oath to Preserve and Protect the Constitution.  One of the reasons that he should be immediately relieved of his office!

Just remember this ...... THE MARXIST/COMMUNISTS LIE!  An oath to uphold the Constitution means nothing to these people.  They live on lies!

How much you want to bet Obama didn't swear on the bible when he was sworn in.

Everyone else in the world is warning us of this but we Americans are too busy worshiping Hollywood and a false president to see it. When you have the NSA recording everything from everyone, how can we think the NSA won't use all that info to make our elected do whatever the NSA or who controls the NSA wants. We are on a sinking ship with a simple fix but everyone is too busy for all that right now.

Perhaps the same out come for the Third Reich Obama leader will be the same as Hitler?




Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


 Kavanaugh Accuser Donated   To Hillary Clinton  10 Times,  60+ Liberal Groups 

Reportedly attempted to conceal political activity by scrubbing social media accounts

Over the weekend, a name and face were added to the previously anonymous sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which is now threatening to derail his nomination. Those looking to obstruct Kavanaugh’s confirmation certainly saved their best for last, as the prior attempts included pathetic stunts such as:

– Claiming to file perjury charges against Kavanaugh, which only Jeff Sessions would have the ability to file.

– Packing the hearings with hysterical protesters, resulting in hundreds of arrests.

– Threatening female Republicans with extortion.

– Cory Booker comparing himself to Spartacus, the escaped slave who led a revolt against the Romans.

The identity of the accuser was revealed as Christine Blasey Ford, who has agreed testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Ford reportedly made the allegations back in July in a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Feinstein waited until it was close to the vote to confirm Kavanaugh before making the accusations public.

There’s a record of Ford making the accusation in a 2012 therapy session, though Kavanaugh isn’t named in the session notes that Ford gave to the press. Ford alleges that in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh entered a room drunk, pinned her to a bed, and groped her over her clothing. Kavanaugh “categorically denied” the allegations.View image on Twitter

Fin Gomez @finnygo   NEW: Statement from Judge Brett Kavanaugh:

There is a slight discrepancy in the account Ford provided in her letter to Feinstein and in her therapist’s notes, but that could simply be due to an error on her therapists part.

There are however some other questions that need to be answered which call into question Ford’s motives.

As Grabien reported, they include:

1. Why Ford deleted her public social media accounts before revealing herself.

Ford deleted all of her public social media before she came forward, making it difficult to see the advocacy and partisanship she was engaged in the time leading up to her making her allegation public. Of course, Ford may simply value her privacy, but the act of deleting her public postings will inevitably make some wonder what she didn’t want seen.

2. That Ford may have an unrelated grudge against Kavanaugh, as his mother, once a circuit court judge, ruled against Ford’s parents.

In August 1996, Christine Blasey Ford’s parents, Paula and Ralph Blasey, were foreclosed upon. Kavanaugh’s mom, Martha, was then serving as a judge on the Montgomery Country Circuit Court, and she ruled against Christine Ford’s parents.

3. That Ford is a Democrat who donates to left-wing causes, attended the anti-Trump March for Science, and previously signed an open letter challenging Trump’s border policy.

Ford is a political activist who has made dozens of donations to left-wing causes. According to OpenSecrets, she has made more than 60 donations to liberal causes, with almost four dozen to the pro-abortion group, Emily’s List, alone. Ford also donated to the DNC, Hillary Clinton (more than 10 times), Bernie Sanders, and the progressive organizing group ActBlue.

Ford likewise attended the anti-Trump March for Science, where she wore a hat knitted like a human brain, but inspired by the feminist “pussy hats” worn at the Women’s Marches. Ford also added her name to an open letter from health professionals who argued the U.S. border policy resulting in temporary separation of some families was harmful to children’s development.

There’s no statute of limitations on sexual assault in Maryland, where she claims that the assault happened. Rather than go to the police, Ford went to Dianne Feinstein. If her accusations are true, she should immediately file a police report against Kavanaugh and take him to trial. If she doesn’t, perhaps that’s because she knows the consequences of filing a false police report.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service