~ Featuring ~  
Dems Block Scalise's Pro-Gun Testimony
by Thomas Gallatin  
Lou Dobbs and John Solomon Discuss 
scumbag-Adam Schiff Meeting With Fusion GPS
by sundance
{} ~ In February and March 2017 House Speaker Paul Ryan forced HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes to step aside from leading the house intelligence committee investigation... because Nunes went to the White House SCIF to review executive office documents giving the possible impression of a conflicted relationship with the White House. In February 2019 HPSCI Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff is outlined as having inappropriate contact with a witness testifying to the house intelligence committee; however, it is virtually guaranteed House Speaker Pulosi will not make a similar demand. Lou Dobbs and John Solomon discuss the issues, conflicts and hypocrisies.
Ghost Soldiers
by   Since 2002, billions of U.S. tax dollars have been spent rebuilding Afghanistan after its decades of war... A big chunk of that money  pays Afghan soldiers and police. But it turns out a lot of those troops who were paid, may not, in fact, exist. We investigate how your tax money is being wasted on "ghost soldiers." John Sopko: We've been raising this concern about ghosts going back a number of years. We first heard about it from Ashraf Ghani years ago, before he became president, he warned me about "ghosts" so we started looking three years ago. John Sopko is the Inspector General watching over the U.S. taxpayer billions spent to rebuild Afghanistan. Sharyl: When you say "ghosts," what are you referring to? John Sopko: What we're talking about are policemen, Afghan policemen, Afghan military, Afghan civil servants who don't exist or they have multiple identity cards and we're paying their salaries. By "we" I mean the United States and the international community. And we started finding out that we had no capacity to measure the number of soldiers, teachers, doctors, military people who we are paying their salaries...
The Wound in American Education
by Joseph Bottum
{} ~ The failure of American colleges to promote free speech and intellectual diversity is like an open wound. It stains the imagination, obscuring paths of investigation with a sick puss... It drains the vitality of thought, leaving the mind weakened. And it strains intellectual discourse—the Socratic ideal of conversation—by making us fearful, anxious, and self-censoring. Ideas deserve better treatment. The life of the mind requires a more nurturing care than we now give it in the multitrillion-dollar temple of education that we have constructed with America's colleges and universities. Far from disciplining its intellectual eccentrics, far from expelling its cerebral gadflies, academia ought to protect and celebrate them. Even when they are wrong, they are more rational than the dogmatists who hold right opinions without understanding the arguments that make them right. Several books on the topic have appeared over the past year and a half. With Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech, for example, Princeton's Keith E. Whittington argues that recent campus censorship reveals our colleges have lost a strong sense of why they exist. "We are in danger," he writes, "of giving up on the hard-won freedoms of critical inquiry that have been wrested from figures of authority over the course of a century." In Free Speech on Campus, the University of Pennsylvania's Sigal R. Ben-Porath claims, "An inclusive and welcoming campus is one that must recognize the necessity of free speech." In the identically titled Free Speech on Campus, UC Berkeley's Erwin Chemerinsky and UC Irvine's Howard Gillman—both senior academic administrators—argue that "there is no way to define an unacceptable, punishment-worthy idea without putting genuinely important new thinking and societal critique at risk." In Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces, Phillips Academy's John Palfrey insists, "Free expression and diversity are essential components of democracy."...
The Unpredictable Rise of China
by Daniel Blumenthal
{} ~ Since the end of the Cold War, Beijing has viewed Washington as its chief geopolitical rival, yet official Washington has only recently awakened to this strategic competition... But as American observers start to see China’s ambitions more clearly, they have also begun to misdiagnose the challenges they pose. Political scientists are discussing “power-transition theory” and the “Thucydides trap,” as if China were on the verge of eclipsing the United States in wealth and power, displacing it on the world stage. There are two contradictory problems with this view.  The first is that this is not how the Chinese themselves understand their rise. When Chinese President Xi Jinping calls for the Chinese to realize the “China dream of national rejuvenation,” he is articulating the belief that China is simply reclaiming its natural political and cultural importance. China is not, as was once said of imperial Germany after its unification, “seeking its place in the sun.” Rather, it is retaking its rightful place as the sun. The second is that it’s an open question whether China will achieve rejuvenation in the face of both a seemingly stagnating economy and party factionalism. Xi is more powerful than his predecessors, but his rule is also more fragile. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long faced a crisis of legitimacy, but Xi’s transformation of China into a high-tech police state might hasten this crisis. These factors combine to make China more dangerous in the short term but also less competitive in the longer term. This means that the People’s Republic of China perceives an opportunity for “great renewal” even as it will be less powerful than was expected. A proper diagnosis of China, then, doesn’t lead to any easy categorization: Washington will have to deal with a powerful and wealthier China that is also experiencing probable economic stagnation and internal decay...
EMILY’s List Does Not Care About Rape Victims
by Alex Griswold
{} ~ Virginia Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax remains under fire after Stanford professor Vanessa Tyson accused him of sexually assaulting her at the 2004 Democratic National Convention... As I laid out Tuesday, his response to the allegation has been bizarre and erratic, including lying about his accuser's story being debunked, threatening to sue the  Washington Post when they reported otherwise, and accusing the whole thing of being a plot hatched by fellow Democrats. Since then, it's also been reported that he privately said of his accuser "Fuck that bitch." But as the Daily Beast points out, many of the liberal and women's organizations that were vocal in campaigning against alleged conservative sexual offenders—such as Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh or President Donald Trump—have suddenly gone silent when it comes to Fairfax. Take a gander in particular at EMILY's List's excuse: But more prominent institutions, like the Democratic National Committee, NARAL, EMILY’s List and the Women’s March, have either avoided the issue or engaged cautiously. A staffer at EMILY’s List said the organization has weighed in on some sexual assault allegations, like those against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, because the people involved were in a position to affect women’s abortion rights, which is their central policy concern. Otherwise, they try to keep their focus only on electing Democratic women. This is a stunning admission from a supposedly feminist organization. Suffice it to say, if you only advocate on behalf of rape victims only in limited cases that align with your politics, you don't actually care about rape victims...
Dems Block Scalise's Pro-Gun Testimony
by Thomas Gallatin:  Seeking to peddle their fraudulently named “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019,” House Democrats refused to allow Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) to offer his testimony and perspective on their latest gun-grabbing effort. Recall that Scalise was nearly killed two years ago when a crazed leftist attacked congressional Republicans as they practiced for the annual baseball game, shooting and injuring several. Were it not for two Capitol Police officers, David Bailey and Crystal Griner, who returned fire against the assailant, Scalise and others would be dead.

In his prepared testimony, Scalise was to argue, “These new gun-control measures being proposed in H.R. 8 would not have prevented any number of recent mass violence events. … Instead, whether intentionally or not, the gun-control proposals in H.R. 8 could turn law-abiding citizens into criminals while also failing to achieve the stated purpose of reducing gun violence.”

Scalise planned to point out that the data simple doesn’t support the Democrats’ justification for their latest draconian gun-control effort, as well as to warn that it would only endanger law-abiding Americans by further encumbering their Second Amendment right to self-defense. “Every single month in America, law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits defend themselves and others against criminals who have guns,” Scalise notes. “For example,” he says, “on January 8th, a man approached a 25-year-old woman in Chicago, displayed a weapon, and attempted to rob her at a bus stop. The woman had a concealed-carry permit. She drew her own weapon and fired a shot, killing the armed robber. The owner of a nearby pharmacy said such violence happens ‘all over’ Chicago. However, in this case, the intended victim was able to defend herself with her own gun.”

Once again, rather than being honest, Democrats attempt to hide their anti-Second Amendment agenda and cloak it with disingenuous terminology like “commonsense gun-control” as they seek to further erode Americans’ constitutionally protected rights. In doing so, they weren’t about to give the floor to a real Second Amendment advocate who’s life had been saved by good guys with guns.  ~The Patriot Post

Views: 5


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by AF Branco


SICK: Anderson Cooper Says Demographic Decline Of White Americans Is “Exciting”

“It’s an exciting evolution.”

Embedded video

[Click To Watch]

CNN’s Anderson Cooper said during an interview with Univision anchor Jorge Ramos that he found the demographic decline of white people “exciting”.

“The idea that, you know, whites will not be the majority, I mean, that’s — it’s an exciting transformation of the country, it’s an exciting evolution and you know, progress of our country in many different ways,” said Cooper.

Ramos agreed that whites becoming a minority in America was inevitable and a positive development.

The Judge@V8POW

Anderson Cooper barely able to contain his excitement about Whites becoming a minority.

Not thrilled about being replaced in the country your ancestors founded: you're a "Supremacist"

Understand White People, you're already in a race war.

“There’s nothing really they can do against this incredible demographic revolution. And in 2044, everyone is going to be a minority,” he said.

The media has repeatedly asserted that even raising the “conspiracy theory” of “the great replacement” or the demographic decline of white people puts you on a par with mass shooters and terrorists.

However, it’s apparently completely fine to talk about the issue so long as you proclaim the demographic decline of whites to be a positive thing.

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service