Discussion Central

Information

Discussion Central

Members: 37
Latest Activity: Aug 20, 2015

We want to use YOUR discussions for Sharing!

Have you seen a great story and wondered 'why doesn't Command Center have this story up?'.  You'd like to see what other people say about it but just don't know how to get it up on this site.  WE want you to post discussions!  WE want to SHARE your discussions!  

But, Dee....how?  Easy! Just follow these steps:

First, go to your page.  You can post directly from your page! Just look for this upper portion of the page:

Click on "Discussion" and this box will pop up:

When you get this box, add your headline: You can make your own headline or copy and paste the one already on the story.  You can upload a picture by clicking on the little picture as shown below:

If you are looking for a good picture, try google images.  Many times, there are pictures that can be simply copied and pasted into the discussion.  Unfortunately, this is a trial and error experience!  If you don't want to add a picture, we do have a default that will come up when we share your discussion. 

It is up to you, but I bet you can locate a better picture for your discussion than our default!

Would you like to add a video to your discussion?  

Once you click on the video icon, you will see this:

You just copy and paste the embed code for your video.  Do note, there are some videos that simply will not work in our format.  If you locate one and it doesn't work, try to find the same video on youtube because youtube videos will always work with the NING platform. 

The picture below shows you where to locate the embed code on youtube: Click Share (with the red line under it) and embed-the code pops up for you!

Just copy the code and paste it into the video box.  Click Save and you have added a video to your discussion!  It will look like this:

You will not see the video yet!  You will see the box.  Add any text that you want above or below the box. If a video is all you want to add with a few lines of text, then select the category your discussion belongs in by clicking the down arrow next to 'Tea Party' under category, select the appropriate category and you are ready to hit 'Start discussion' which adds your work to the site.

Your Final Product:

But, what are those other button for?

When you click on it, you will see this box:

It isn't used often, but it might be useful for you.

What's with the paperclip?  When you click on it you will get the following box:

Select 'Chose File' and you can attach documents that you have in your computer. After the document is uploaded, just click okay to add it to your discussion.  This is an example of a document that I uploaded:

Congressman Rob Bishop, the gentleman from Utah who kindly provided Americans with the documents that showed the Obama administration was planning another federal land-grab, has come through again.

Read the entire document:  BLM%20Treasured%20Landscapes.pdf 

Bishop’s office has release the entire BLM document titled “Treasured Landscapes” of which only pages were released a few months ago. It lays out what some consider a sweeping and detailed plan for changing the way the federal government manages land over the next 25 years.

More on the buttons:

HTML also allows you to add videos or other HTML coded information.  It also allows you to get the HTML coding of the discussion that you just posted for use in other places.

This is the embed code for Madison Rising's Star Spangled Banner posted as html code:

Click the HTML icon to turn off the feature and see what your discussion will look like (yes, you will see the yellow box and not the video)

Add text or click 'start discussion' to post the story to the site!

What if you want to just add a video?  Let's go back to your page and this time we will click on 'Video'.  Simply drop in the embed code or the link from youtube (I selected the link to add the video this time) into the box and click 'add video'.


Paste the embed code of link into the box:

 Click Add Video and you end up with the following finished product!

Links are incredibly important! 

COPYRIGHT LAWS:

When entering either a blog or discussion, please keep in mind there are copyright laws which protects the author's original materials. This includes, but not limited to publications, emails, videos, etc.  If you are going to use large portions of copyrighted material, then it must be sited. In other words show the web or book address so anyone can look it up.

You can add your link to a word by highlighting the word and then clicking "Link" which brings up this box.  Add your link in the box under the word and save it.

The word you selected should turn blue indicating that the link is attached.  Your readers will then be able to click on the word and be directed to the appropriate link.

Or, you can do it the easy way! Just copy and past the link directly into the discussion box as seen below: 

This will be the final results:

Tags:

Notice the TAGS at the bottom.  You will want to think of the subject/topics to enter here that would direct other members when they do a SEARCH to find related articles.  Enter each subject and separate them with a comma.  If you do not want the words to be separated, for
example:  Tea Party Hot News, you must type it as follows:  Tea_Party_Hot_News.  I try to enter TAGS first because otherwise I tend to forget them.  This is very important information for others who researching particular subjects, so please try to remember to enter the TAGS.

Your discussion is ready!  Share it with your friends!  Then, post a link to in the comments of this group so we can consider it for a share with all our members. 

 

Members (37)

 
 
 

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service