~ Featuring ~  
If D-Day Were Today, Would Millennials 
Step Up to the Challenge?
Hans von Spakovsky

Ex-Clinton Aide: If Trump Investigated scumbag 
liar-Nadler, scumbag-Schiff as They Are Him,
 He’d Be Impeached
by Randy DeSoto   
{} ~ Former scumbag/liar-Clinton pollster Mark Penn stated over the weekend... that if President Donald Trump were to employ the same investigative tactics against Democrats like Reps. scumbag liar-Jerrold Nadler of New York and scumbag-Adam Schiff of California that they are using against him, impeachment would be in order. Appearing on Fox News’  “Life, Liberty, and Levin” on Sunday, Penn, who worked for both Bill and Hillary scumbag/liar-Clinton’s campaigns, contended that Democrats in Congress are undermining the Constitution by continuing to investigate Trump. He explained to Levin that “investigations of the president, of the campaign, of the administration, of the president’s family, done with methods that were really meant to investigate people, not crimes, and things that seem to me to be way over the bounds of the Constitution.”“No one can be an effective president, or as effective as they could be, if they are under constant threats and investigations,” Penn added. The longtime Democratic political adviser recalled that after the impeachment of then-President scumbag/liar-Bill Clinton in 1998, he had hoped the country would never go through something like it again. He observed what the Democrats are doing now is “even worse” than what happened then. Penn stated that Democratic leaders are no longer engaged in “legitimate legislative inquiry” through the many subpoenas and demands for personal financial and business records.“Now saying: ‘Hey let’s get some of these tax returns — oh, let’s get the tax returns of their children, their family. Let’s go back in history,’ that’s government-financed opposition research, that’s not legitimate legislative inquiry,” the former White House aide said. Penn specifically called out House Judiciary Chairman scumbag liar-Nadler and House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Schiff for their conduct, particularly given the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller that neither Trump nor his campaign colluded with Russia...
The libertarian fight over Trump
by W. James Antle III } ~ Former Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo., took to the op-ed pages to blast President Trump, early in his term, as "the most divisive president in our history."... While that assessment is a matter of opinion, Trump has managed to drive an unfamiliar wedge between the two most libertarian members of Congress. Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., became the first member of his party to call for the president's impeachment, saying Attorney General William Barr "deliberately misrepresented key aspects" of special counsel Robert Mueller's Trump-Russia report, a document he further alleged many of his GOP colleagues on Capitol Hill never read. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., disagrees. "I think they took this great power we entrusted with them to spy on foreigners, and they directed it against Americans for partisan reasons," Paul said of the Russia investigation in an interview with Fox News. "So, I think this has to be investigated, and I think it's wrong for any Republican to think, 'Oh gosh, this is a legitimate investigation.' I think it's a very partisan investigation." Paul described the whole affair as "unlibertarian." It may be the most significant disagreement ever between these two lawmakers who both arrived in Washington after the tea party-wave election of 2010, their candidacies made possible by the GOP presidential campaigns of then-Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the Kentucky senator's father, and have nearly identical voting records today. Aside from impeachment or the origins of the Russia investigation, it speaks also to differing strategies for Republicans in the age of Trump, whether libertarian, centrist, or conservative. "Very carefully," said former Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., when asked how Republicans could navigate those choppy waters. He should know. Sanford became an outspoken critic of Trump, received the president's Twitter seal of disapproval, and then lost the GOP primary to a candidate Trump endorsed just hours before the polls closed. "Mark Sanford has been very unhelpful to me in my campaign to MAGA," Trump tweeted. Sanford said it was "surreal" to be on the receiving end of a presidential Twitter barrage, something his old House Freedom Caucus buddy Amash — the group has since condemned the Michigan lawmaker over his impeachment position — was now experiencing. Trump called Amash a "total lightweight" and a "loser." But Amash is a heavy Twitter user in his own right. It was in defense of Sanford that Amash began getting particularly assertive with the president last year...  
Why are we helping illegal immigrants 
when we can't help ourselves?
by Victor Garcia } ~ Fox News' Laura Ingraham addressed politicians who are putting America's health and well-being "at risk," specifically the government of California... "Over the weekend, we learned that California has gone from sanctuary state for dreamers to just being a sucker state for Americans. They just announced state budget deal will now give health care benefits to many adult illegals too. Those between the ages of 19 and 25 will now be eligible for California's 'Medicaid' program known as 'Medi-Cal,'" Ingraham said Monday night on "The Ingraham Angle." Democratic Gov. scumbag-Gavin Newsom proposed $98 million a year to cover low-income illegal immigrants between the ages of 19 and 25, but the state Assembly’s bill would cover all illegal immigrants over the age of 19 living in California – a proposal that would cost an estimated $3.4 billion. The state Senate, meanwhile, wants to cover adults ages 19 to 25, plus seniors 65 and older. Ingraham argued California is ignoring their homeless problem and homeless vets and instead helping in favor of illegal immigrants. "Think those homeless people including homeless vets might be able to use that money?" Ingraham said. Ingraham also pointed out that Californians will tax citizens who don't have health insurance, essentially reviving the penalty part of the Affordable Care Act. "How they're going to pay for this by the way, by taxing citizens who don't have health insurance. In other words, reviving the penalty of scumbag/liar-nObamacare," Ingraham said. The Fox News host also brought up the 500 migrants from African nations -- including the Republic of Congo -- that have been apprehended in Texas, at the Del Rio Border Patrol sector of the U.S.-Mexico border, since May 30, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The African migrants were recently sent to San Antonio, Texas while eastern Congo is experiencing an Ebola outbreak with over 2,000 cases reported...  
scumbag/liar-Clintons understated support from 
firm hired by Russian nuclear company
by John Solomon and Alison Spann } ~ The scumbag/liar-Clinton Foundation’s donor disclosure site vastly understated support that the scumbag/liar-Clinton Global Initiative received from APCO Worldwide... a global communications firm that lobbied on behalf of Russia’s state-owned nuclear company. The site, created to detect conflicts of interest for Secretary of State scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton because of her family’s various charitable efforts, shows APCO gave between $25,000 and $50,000 over the last decade. But according to interviews and internal documents reviewed by The Hill, APCO was much more generous and provided hundreds of thousands of dollars in pro-bono services and in-kind contributions to the scumbag/liar-Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) between 2008 and 2016.For instance, an internal CGI document prepared in fall 2011 lists APCO’s in-kind contribution at $275,000 for that year alone. And APCO’s annual report on its global charitable efforts boasted of a large jump in support for CGI in 2011. “In 2011, APCO significantly increased its pro-bono support for CGI and, for the first time, our team managed the press around CGI’s America meeting, as well as its global Annual Meeting,” APCO stated in a report submitted to the United Nations Global Compact. The increase in the contributions came as APCO was paid $3 million in 2010 and 2011 to work for Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear company. Rosatom paid APCO to lobby the State Department and other federal agencies on behalf of its Tenex subsidiary, which sought to increase its commercial uranium sales in the United States. In 2010 and 2011, APCO made more than 50 contacts with federal and congressional figures for Tenex, including at least 10 at the State Department, its foreign agent disclosure reports show...
UCLA Daily Bruin Censors Facts 
About Student Links to Terrorists
by David Horowitz } ~ The UCLA Daily Bruin and its editorial staff have made a mockery of the concept of a free press, opening their pages to terrorist political organizations and closing them to the opponents of terrorist propaganda and Jew hatred... The Bruin’s allegiance to the destroy-Israel left and failure to observe the core principles of journalism in a democracy was glaringly obvious in its coverage of a recent student government ruling. The resolution  passed on Tuesday, May 21, by the UCLA Undergraduate Students Association asserted that—contrary to all evidence and a long history of spreading the genocidal lies of Hamas terrorists, and harassing Jewish students and their invited speakers— the group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is not anti-Semitic. The student council further condemned the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s newest report, “An Epidemic of Jew Hatred on Campus: the Top Ten Neo-Nazi Incidents” which was distributed in newspaper form on the UCLA campus, claiming that it made “racist and demonizing accusations of campus activism against Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) being directly continuous with terrorism.” Since the Bruin failed to interview the targets of these slanders, David Horowitz immediately reached out to UCLA Daily Bruin Editor-in-Chief Jacob Preal to ask for an opportunity to respond to the resolution’s false and defamatory claims about the Freedom Center and its report. “I’d like you, in the interests of fairness and good journalism, to print this brief but to the point response I’ve written to the asinine resolution the undergraduate student association just passed condemning me and my Center,” he wrote. The response which Horowitz included in his email was this: UCLA’s Students for Justice in Palestine is a political arm of the terrorist organization Hamas, whose goal is the genocide of the Jews and the destruction of the Jewish state. Not a single sentence or phrase in the UCLA resolution addresses the evidence we have published and sourced that SJP is funded by Hamas through its front organization American Muslims for Palestine. AMP is headed by the notorious anti-Semite and jihad supporter, UC Berkeley professor Hatem Bazian, who is the co-founder of SJP. AMP’s board, as Jonathan Schanzer has shown in congressional testimony, is run by former leaders of the Holy Land Foundation which was successfully prosecuted by the US government for funding Hamas. SJP is the chief campus sponsor of BDS - a Hamas orchestrated campaign to strangle the Jewish state. Everything SJP does is designed to spread the Hamas lies that Israel is an apartheid state which illegally occupies so-called Palestinian land. The UCLA resolution is a disgraceful collection of smears designed to provide a smokescreen which will deflect attention away from these undeniable facts, which obviously SJP and its political supporters can’t begin to refute.  Everything SJP does is designed to spread the Hamas lies that Israel is an apartheid state which illegally occupies so-called Palestinian land. The UCLA resolution is a disgraceful collection of smears designed to provide a smokescreen which will deflect attention away from these undeniable facts, which obviously SJP and its political supporters can’t begin to refute...
If D-Day Were Today, Would Millennials Step Up to the Challenge?

Hans von Spakovsky

As we celebrate the courage, determination, and resolve of the “Greatest Generation” on June 6 — the 75th anniversary of the bloody Allied invasion of Normandy, France, that was the start of the liberation of Europe from Nazi tyranny and oppression — it brings to mind a crucial question.

Would today’s millennials meet the same challenge if faced with a future war, one in which the U.S. and its allies were attacked?

Would they have the grit and fortitude to fight and win to preserve the freedom and liberty of the West that they seem to take for granted and the values that too many of them seem to treat with contempt?

Have they been so coddled, pampered, indulged, and overprotected, and taught to hate what we stand for, that they would fail and let the world slide back into a Dark Age, where freedom was only a remembrance?

More than 1.6 million American military personnel participated in Operation Overlord. It was the largest amphibious assault in history, with more than 2,700 ships and 11,000 airplanes involved in the invasion.

Thousands of paratroopers and glider troops of the famed 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions jumped into chaos in Normandy the night before, greeted — as were the troops on the beaches — by overwhelming machine gun fire and artillery barrages.

The Allies secured the beaches and a toehold in Europe, but only after losing more than 10,000 killed and wounded, many in gruesome firefights with German troops.

The killed also included those who drowned before they could even get ashore to fight because of the weight of the packs and equipment they were carrying.

As authors Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen recount in “A Patriot’s History of the United States,” German “crossfire slaughtered 197 out of 205 men in a single rifle company” on Omaha Beach.

Allied troops were pinned down by the defenses barbed wire, mines, tank traps, bunkers, pillboxes, and machine gun nests that had been planned and prepared by one of the most skilled German commanders of the war, Erwin Rommel, the famed Desert Fox.

When then-Col. later Brig. Gen. George Arthur Taylor, who commanded the 16th Infantry Regiment, arrived on Omaha Beach, there were thousands of troops hunkered down in the sand dunes and along the seawall.

With the help of his brave officers and sergeants, Taylor managed to get the Americans to rise up and attack the murderous German defenses, yelling, “There are only two kinds of people on this beach. Those who are dead, and those who are going to die. Now let’s get the hell out of here.”

He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for his bravery on what Rommel had accurately predicted would be “the longest day” of World War II.

No one questions the capability, high quality, and professionalism of our armed forces today. But the young men and women who today make up our military — the Air Force, Navy, Army, and Marines — are volunteers.

They are different from so many others in our culture and society today, because they are patriots who have chosen to serve their country and to undertake the often-dangerous jobs that protect our nation from the terrorists, rogue nations, and tyrannical dictators who hate America and everything it stands for and represents.

I don’t question their determination and grit. No one who has seen the way they have fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, Mogadishu in Somalia, and the many other dangerous places of the world could doubt them — or their families, who have supported them through the hard years of repeated deployments and tragic losses.

The same goes for the many millennials who join our law enforcement agencies and persevere in those jobs despite the hostility they face from too many ignorant members of their generation. And I know many, including millennials in my own extended family who cherish the values we hold dear.

But what if we became involved in a lengthy, globe-spanning war, such as a two-front war with communist China, which has been aggressively building up its military because it appears to want to dominate the Pacific the way the Japanese did in World War II, and a resurgent Russian dictatorship or Middle Eastern terrorist state with nuclear weapons?

It seems likely that the United States would have to bring back the draft to enlarge our military forces to cope with such an enormous threat.

The 16 million Americans who volunteered and were drafted when we vastly expanded our military after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941 had grown up in the midst of the Depression.

They had risen to adulthood under very tough conditions. Many were malnourished, and those who were ethnic and racial minorities had suffered mistreatment and discrimination. Yet those Americans, including Japanese Americans and African-Americans, joined the armed forces to fight for America.

Even many Hollywood celebrities joined the war effort. That included famed actor Jimmy Stewart, who became a command pilot flying bombing raids over Europe, as did William Holden. Ed McMahon, late-night talk-show host Johnny Carson’s sidekick, was a Marine Corps fighter pilot.

Compare that with today’s celebrities in Hollywood, who constantly display their dismissive, contemptuous attitude toward America, our history, our unique culture, and the values that have made us a great nation.

Can anyone imagine any of the current hosts of late-night talk shows volunteering to help fight to protect America?

Would the millennials who are terrified by doorbells have the fortitude to fight in a long, costly, intensive conflict?

We have a generation of college students who have grown up in the luxury of modern America, yet who prefer socialism just another form of tyranny.

They complain about “microagressions” and approve of university speech codes that restrict speech and protect them from anything they don’t want to hear. They occupy as supposed adults special rooms set up for them with pillows and stuffed animals to calm and cuddle them when they get upset about the normal frustrations and conflicts of everyday life and contentious political battles.

Would these young Americans display the same courage, determination, and resolve that the young Americans of the Depression era showed if our country needed them? Would they show the same sweeping patriotism and engage in the volunteer efforts that characterized our national response following the vicious terrorist attack on 9/11?

I don’t know the answer to that.

I hope that the tenacity, patriotism, and steadfastness of the Americans who stormed the beaches at Normandy have not been lost, and that the society and culture that produced those men has survived, despite the constant attacks on it that we see in academia, in pop culture, and in our politics.

Let’s hope that we never have to find out and that our sons are never again faced with a hostile shore in a foreign land.  ~The Patriot Post  

Views: 138


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

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich


Breaking — West Virginia Lawmakers Invite Persecuted Pro-Second Amendment Counties In Virginia To Join Their State

West Virginia lawmakers introduced legislation to invite persecuted pro Second Amendment Counties to join their state.

The West Virginia Senate adopted a resolution to remind Virginia residents from Frederick County that they have a standing invite — from 1862 — to become part of West Virginia.

West Virginia freedom fighters broke away from Virginia Democrat slave owners during the Civil War.

This week West Virginia has once again invited persecuted Virginia pro 2-A counties to come join their state.

Sounds like a winning plan!

Resolution 8 reads as follows:


(By Delegates Howell, Summers, Shott, Householder, C. Martin, Hott, Graves, Cadle, Barnhart, J. Jeffries, Maynard, Phillips, Foster, Hamrick, Steele, D. Jeffries, Wilson, Waxman, Bartlett, Paynter, Linville, Sypolt, Bibby, Hill, Ellington, Higginbotham, J. Kelly, Mandt, Pack, Dean and P. Martin)

[Introduced January 14, 2020]

Providing for an election to be had, pending approval of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and a majority of qualified citizens voting upon the proposition prior to August 1, 2020, for the admission of certain counties and independent cities of the Commonwealth of Virginia to be admitted to the State of West Virginia as constituent counties, under the provisions of Article VI, Section 11 of the Constitution of West Virginia

Whereas, The Legislature of West Virginia finds that in 1863, due to longstanding perceived attitudes of neglect for the interests of the citizens of Western Virginia, and a studied failure to address the differences which had grown between the counties of Western Virginia and the government at Richmond, the Commonwealth of Virginia was irretrievably divided, and the new State of West Virginia was formed; and

Whereas, Such division occurred as the Trans-Allegheny portions of Virginia perceived that they suffered under an inequitable measure of taxation by which they bore a disproportionate share of the tax burden; and

Whereas, That this perception was further compounded by the effects of a scheme of representation by which Trans-Allegheny Virginia was not allowed to have its proper and equitable share of representation in the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, That this arrangement arguably resulted in the tax dollars of Trans-Allegheny Virginia being used to enrich the Tidewater through internal improvements which did not benefit the people of Western Virginia, while the people of the Trans-Allegheny had little to no say in how their tax dollars were allocated; and

Whereas, Though this course led to an irreconcilable division, and the subsequent formation of West Virginia, yet, the longstanding peaceful cooperation between this State and the Commonwealth of Virginia is a sign that such separation, undertaken even under the most challenging and onerous of circumstances, can, with the passage of time, yield lasting results which are beneficial to both sides; and

Whereas, In the intervening years, the same neglect for the interests of many of the remaining counties of the Commonwealth of Virginia has allegedly been evidenced by the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, Particularly, many citizens of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont contend that an inequitable measure of taxation exists by which they bear a disproportionate share of the present tax burden of the Commonwealth; and

Whereas, The people of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont also believe that, currently, a scheme of representation exists by which the citizens of Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont do not have a proper share of representation in the government at Richmond; and, consequently

Whereas, The people of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont believe that their tax dollars are used to enrich the Tidewater and Northern Virginia through internal improvements which do not benefit the people of these other parts of Virginia, while the people of these other parts of Virginia have little to no say in how their tax dollars are allocated; and

Whereas, In recent days, these tensions have been compounded by a perception of contempt on the part of the government at Richmond for the differences in certain fundamental political and societal principles which prevail between the varied counties and cities of that Commonwealth; and

Whereas, In the latest, and most evident, in this string of grievances, the government at Richmond now seeks to place intolerable restraints upon the rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution to the citizens of that Commonwealth; and

Whereas, The Legislative body of West Virginia believes that this latest action defies the wise counsel which has come down to us in the august words of our common Virginia Founders: as the government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of that tribune of liberty, Patrick Henry-who stated to the Virginia Ratifying Convention in 1788 that “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of a Signer of the Declaration and premier advocate of American independence, Richard Henry Lee-who stated in The Federal Farmer that “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of that zealous guardian of our inherent rights, George Mason-who stated that “To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of the declaimer of our independence and theoretician of our freedoms, Thomas Jefferson-who stated in his first draft of the Virginia Constitution, that “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms”; and

Whereas, The Boards of Supervisors of many Virginia counties and the Councils of many Virginia cities have recognized this dangerous departure from the doctrine of the Founders on the part of the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, These Boards of Supervisors and Councils have passed resolutions refusing to countenance what they affirm are unwarranted and unconstitutional measures by that government to infringe the firearm rights of Virginians; and

Whereas, The actions of the government at Richmond undertaken since the recent general election have, regrettably, resulted in unproductive contention and escalating a lamentable state of civic tension; and

Whereas, That, as has been proven in numerous instances, such as have been observed internationally in more recent times with the peaceful dissolutions of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union, and the creation of South Sudan, or, earlier in Virginia’s own history, with the formation of Kentucky, the peaceful partition of neighboring peoples can occur, and, is often very beneficial to both sides in reducing tensions and improving the tenor of discourse over ongoing political and societal differences; and

Whereas, Article VI, Section 11 of The Constitution of the State of West Virginia explicitly permits additional territory to be admitted into, and become part of this state, with the consent of the Legislature and of a majority of the qualified voters of the state; and

Whereas, In a spirit of conciliation, the Legislature of West Virginia hereby extends an invitation to our fellow Virginians who wish to do so, to join us in our noble experiment of 156 years of separation from the government at Richmond; and, we extend an invitation to any constituent county or city of the Commonwealth of Virginia to be admitted to the body politic of the State of West Virginia, under the conditions set forth in our state Constitution, specifically, with the consent of a majority of the voters of such county or city voting upon such proposition; and we hereby covenant that their many grievances shall be addressed, and, we further covenant with them that their firearms rights shall be protected to the fullest extent possible under our Federal and State Constitutions; and

Whereas, Providing that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall give its assent to any county or independent city presently part of the Commonwealth of Virginia having the opportunity and ability to do so, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia.

Trump Holds Rally in Milwaukee, WI 1-14-20

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service