~ Featuring ~
Trump Is Right to Protect Americans From 
the International Criminal Court
by Marc A. Thiessen  
scumbag/liar-nObama Was Wrong on Oil
We Did ‘Drill Our Way Out of the Problem.’
by Nicolas Loris
{ } ~ When gas prices topped $4 per gallon in May 2011, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama said, “We can’t just drill our way out of the problem.”... Throughout his presidency, scumbag/liar-nObama stated some version of that sentiment every time he wanted to push to subsidize alternative energy sources. More than seven years later, human ingenuity, technological innovation, and the power of the free market have proven him wrong. To the benefit of American families across the country, the United States is now the largest global producer of crude oil. According to a report from the federal government’s Energy Information Administration this week, U.S. crude oil production surpassed that of Saudi Arabia and Russia. When scumbag/liar-nObama made his statement in May 2011, U.S. monthly production was 174 million barrels (5.67 million barrels per day). In June 2018, monthly production stood at 320.23 million barrels (10.67 million barrels per day). The dramatic increase in supply shows drilling is not just a “bumper sticker” slogan, as scumbag/liar-nObama called it in his weekly address in February 2012, but a path to energy independence, prosperity, and jobs...
What would dummycrats-Dems do
with the House Armed Services Committee?
by Travis J. Tritten
{ } ~ A dummycrats-Democrat takeover of the House in November would not only shift the fortunes of the Trump administration... it would also make Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., one of the most powerful voices on defense policy in Washington. Smith, an 11-term congressman in a solidly blue district, has been the top dummycrats-Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee minority since 2011. If pollsters are right and  dummycrats-Democrats manage to flip the chamber, Smith is in line to finally take the chairman gavel under the new majority — and realign defense priorities. Smaller defense spending, a more limited role for the U.S. military in the world, and fewer nuclear weapons are central to the vision Smith has laid out for Armed Services. “We are not in a fiscal position to have the size of defense budget that a lot of people envision when they start spinning out all of these nightmare scenarios about everything that we have to be prepared for,” Smith said this month when asked about his priorities if he holds the committee gavel... Don't be stupid America.
Peter Strzok’s FBI Mistress Lisa Page
Worked for liar-Clinton, According to Text Messages 
{ } ~ According to Fox News, a newly uncovered text message chain seems to confirm that FBI lawyer Lisa Page... one of the two lovebirds whose texts have cast doubt on the objectivity of the Department of Justice’s investigations surrounding the 2016 election — claims that she interned for one of the liar-Clintons. “Get inspired and depressing reading that article about how scumbag/liar-nObama approached the mail room,” Page said in a text to Strzok on Jan. 19, 2017 — the last full day of the scumbag/liar-nObama administration. “Needless to say, it was very different when I interned there under liar-Clinton.” The article she was discussing was a New York Times piece that described the kind of mail the outgoing president would receive. “At the beginning of his first term, President Barack scumbag/liar-nObama said he wanted to read his mail. He said he would like to see 10 letters a day. After that, the 10LADs, as they came to be called, were put in a purple folder and added to the back of the briefing book he took with him to the residence on the second floor of the White House each night,” the article, titled “To scumbag/liar-nObama With Love, and Hate, and Desperation,” read. “Choosing which letters made it to the president started here in the Executive Office Building adjacent to the White House, in the ‘hard-mail room,’ which had the tired, unkempt look of a college study hall during finals — paper everywhere, files stacked along walls, bundles under tables, boxes propping up computer monitors dotted with Post-its, cables hanging.”...
US ends last of aid to Palestinian civilians,
defunding coexistence programs 
{ } ~ The US will cut all aid to programs that bring together Palestinians and Israelis, in a move that will bring to an end all American funding of Palestinian civilians... The New York Times reported Friday. The White House has decided to no longer support coexistence programs, as part of its general move to punish Palestinians for their refusal to engage with the administration, the report said. The annual support for the programs through USAID, at $10 million, constitutes a quarter of the total funds for such efforts, the Times said. The programs include joint soccer games, farming efforts and other reconciliation projects. USAID will continue, however, to support programs that bring together Israeli Jews and Arabs. The agency said it is “currently unable to engage Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza as a result of the administration’s recent decision on Palestinian assistance.” But it added that it would continue “support for civil society working on these issues within Israel.”...
JW Videos of the Week
Farrell Calls on President Trump to Fire Deputy AG Rosenstein Now
Tom Fitton’s Weekly Video Update – September 14, 2018
Inside Judicial Watch: The liar-Hillary Clinton Email Scandal is NOT Over!
Tom Fitton on Kavanaugh Letter: Why Didn't Sen. Fein-stein Bring it Up During Hearings?
Is Trump Correct about Hurricane Death Toll in Puerto Rico? Judicial Watch Investigates

Trump Is Right to Protect Americans From the International Criminal Court

by Marc A. Thiessen 


Should an unaccountable United Nations court, created by a treaty to which the United States is not a signatory, and that the Senate has not ratified, be allowed to investigate, try and imprison American citizens?
               Unfortunately, this is no longer a theoretical question. In November, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague, Fatou Bensouda, announced she was seeking a formal investigation into alleged war crimes committed by U.S. military forces and CIA officers in Afghanistan. Bensouda — a Gambian lawyer who is answerable to no government or institution — claims unbridled power to investigate, charge and prosecute American citizens, no matter what the U.S. government says. A pretrial chamber of the court, made up of judges from Hungary, France and Benin, reportedly will approve her request in the coming days.
               Who gave these foreign magistrates the right to try U.S. citizens, whose government never assented to the court’s jurisdiction through our own democratic institutions? No one. And, yet, they are preparing to exercise this supranational power for the first time.
               That will not happen if the Trump administration has anything to say about it. In a speech this week to the Federalist Society, national security adviser John Bolton delivered a stark warning to the ICC: “If the court comes after us … this administration will fight back to protect American constitutionalism, our sovereignty, and our citizens. No committee of foreign nations will tell us how to govern ourselves and defend our freedom.” Should the court act against U.S. citizens, Bolton said, the United States will bar ICC judges and prosecutors from entering the country, sanction their funds in the U.S. financial system and prosecute them in the American criminal-justice system.
               I know something about the ICC, because I was present at its creation. In 1998, as a staff member for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I attended the Rome conference where the treaty was negotiated. The committee’s chairman, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) warned that, unless checks were placed on the ICC prosecutor’s unfettered discretion to prosecute U.S. citizens — including a U.N. Security Council “screen” that would permit the United States to veto cases going forward — the Rome treaty would be “dead on arrival” in the Senate. When those protections were rejected, Helms introduced the “American Servicemembers’ Protection Act” to bar U.S. cooperation with the ICC and to punish the court for any efforts to prosecute Americans. The measure was approved in 2002 by a bipartisan 75-to-19 vote. So not only has the Senate not ratified the ICC treaty, it has explicitly authorized the president to use “all means necessary” — including military force — to shield American citizens from ICC prosecution.
               We were told back then that all of this was unnecessary, and that the idea a rogue ICC prosecutor would ever go after Americans was ridiculous. The court would focus on grievous human-rights abuses by the world’s tyrants, not on democracies with robust and transparent legal systems capable of policing their own citizens. That was a lie.
               Not only is the ICC threatening Americans, it has our democratic ally, Israel, in its crosshairs. In 2015, Bensouda opened a preliminary investigation of Israel for actions defending itself against Palestinian terrorist attacks in the West Bank and Gaza — despite the fact that the court has no jurisdiction because Israel is not a party to the treaty, and because Palestinian territories cannot be a “state party” to the treaty considering they are not a “state.” In May, the Palestinian Authority’s foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, traveled to The Hague to hand over a criminal referral against Israel and to urge the court to indict and prosecute Israeli officials.
               The ICC is not just a threat to U.S. citizens and our democratic allies — it is a hindrance to democratic change. Since the end of the Cold War, almost every peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy has involved some form of amnesty. The existence of the ICC makes it more difficult to convince dictators to step down, because the option of safety in exile has effectively been eliminated. Without a credible guarantee that they will remain unmolested abroad, dictators may well decide they are better off holed up in their palaces. The lesson to tyrants such as Venezuela’s Nicol s Maduro, Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, or Iran’s ayatollahs is clear: If the people rise up, it is safer to fire on the crowds than to flee.
               By taking on the ICC, the Trump administration is not just protecting U.S. citizens and American sovereignty — it is striking a blow for democracy across the world.

~The Patriot Post

Views: 20


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

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Rudy Tirre on September 17, 2018 at 7:23am

It seems the scumbag-Soros gangs are up and shouting but for no reason other than to get their way and having the liberals keep on having their power over us. Its not going to happen. Get out and vote conservatives.

Comment by Bonnie Somer on September 17, 2018 at 4:47am

This is why the left is in a panic.   their nwo and global govt is in jeopardy unless they can destroy us

when i watched the bannon special on OANN.  it was great.   At one part there was a group SHOUTING NO TRUMP NO WALL NO USA AT ALL.   NOW IF THAT DOES NOT BRING US TO THE POLLS IN THE MID TERMS GOD I DO NOT KNOW WHAT WILL.




Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert


OMG!! -> Government Now Wants To Seize Your Car For Going 5MPH Over The Limit

We’ve discussed this on and off for several years now. Civil asset forfeiture is a legal process that allows the government to seize assets and cash from citizens without any due process or judicial oversight.

You don’t even have to be charged with a crime. You are assumed guilty unless you can somehow prove your innocence.

Of course, not everyone has this ability… if you aren’t local, state, or federal law enforcement, this is called stealing, and you go to prison.

But the government is actually a bigger problem than common thieves.

A 2015 report showed that law enforcement used civil asset forfeiture to steal more from US residents than every thief, robber, and burglar in America combined.

About $4.5 BILLION worth of cash, cars, homes, and other property is taken by civil asset forfeiture each year – hundreds of millions more than common criminals steal.

And it happens at every level. Your local cop can use civil asset forfeiture just like your state trooper. And then any one of the armed agents of the US government—from the FBI to the Fish and Wildlife Service—can rob you for whatever reason they want.

This travesty continues to grow because the cops who take your stuff get to keep it. Police departments and government agencies around the country depend on civil asset forfeiture to boost their budgets.

Cops will literally keep some of the cars they take as squad cars. And they make a fortune auctioning off the houses, boats, and anything else they confiscate.

Obviously this gives cops an incentive to steal, whether or not they actually think the property was used in a crime, or acquired illegally. Remember, civil asset forfeiture adds billions every year to their bottom line.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case of civil asset forfeiture.

Tyson Timbs was convicted of selling a small amount of drugs to an undercover police officer. He was sentenced to house arrest, and paid about $1,200 in fines.

But then police used civil asset forfeiture to take his $42,000 Land Rover which Timbs purchased with money from a life insurance policy after his father died. The money did not come from selling drugs, or any other illegal activity.

Timbs sued, and the case made its way to the Supreme Court, because every lower court in Indiana said the forfeiture was perfectly legit.

The case revolves around whether or not the seizure of the Land Rover was an excessive fine under the 8th amendment, and whether or not this protection against excessive fines applies to state governments.

And the public got some crazy insight into the government’s position.

The Indiana Solicitor General was arguing in favor of civil asset forfeiture when Justice Stephen Breyer asked him a hypothetical.

Breyer asked, if a state needs revenue, could it force someone to forfeit their Bugatti, Mercedes, or Ferrari for speeding? Even if they were going just 5 miles per hour over the speed limit?

And the utterly appalling answer from the Indiana Solicitor General was, yes.

That’s right… the official government position is that they can steal any amount of your property in “connection” with any crime whatsoever, no matter how trivial the crime may be… even exceeding the speed limit by 5 miles per hour.

This is how overbearing and authoritarian the government has become in the land of the free.

This is how much power your local cop has… and the power only grows as you go to state, and federal officials.

If there is any solace in any of this, it is that the other Supreme Court Justices were reportedly laughing at this exchange.

The justices seemed incredulous that Indiana’s top lawyer was using such absurd assertions and flimsy reasoning in his arguments.

So, for now, we can keep our cars if we get pulled over for speeding. But that may not always be the case…

Depending on how this is ruled, it could pave the way for even more egregious abuses of power… or it could curb the practice, and reign in these thieves in uniforms.

Just understand where the government is coming from. These politicians, bureaucrats and officers think they can do whatever they want. Absolutely anything goes, with no limitation whatsoever.

And that makes it a little tough to feel like you really live in the land of the free.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service