Trump: I’ll Authorize Cancellation
Of Aide To Nations Sending Illegals

President announces plan to crack down on illegal immigration

Countries that allow immigrants to infiltrate America will no longer be eligible for US aid, President Trump claimed Tuesday.

Speaking at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration, the president touched on a few of his upcoming plans to put pressure on nations sending illegal immigrants.

“Well, I’m going to go very shortly for authorization that when countries abuse us by sending their people up – not their best – we’re not going to give any more aid to those countries. Why the hell should we? Why should we?” the president said to great applause.

Trump doubled down on his administration’s immigration enforcement on Twitter Tuesday, saying, “We must always arrest people coming into our Country illegally.”

“Of the 12,000 children, 10,000 are being sent by their parents on a very dangerous trip, and only 2000 are with their parents, many of whom have tried to enter our Country illegally on numerous occasions,” the President pointed out.

The issue has taken center stage in light of nonstop fake news mainstream media coverage of illegal immigrant children separated from their families.

Trump added that Democrat obstructionism is not helping resolve the problem, and said Dems view illegals as potential voters.

“Democrats are the problem. They don’t care about crime and want illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country, like MS-13. They can’t win on their terrible policies, so they view them as potential voters!”

Report: Haley and Trump  Stick It to UN,
Plan To Withdraw from United Nations
Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council is either proof that humorless diplomatic apparatchiks do indeed have a sense of humor or that something is seriously broken with the U.N. mechanism.

The UNHRC essentially serves one major function: wholesale grousing about the state of Israel. That probably shouldn’t surprise you when you see some of the defenders of human rights that are currently or have previously sat on the Council. The group currently features wholesale human rights violators like China, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Cuba, and Viktor Orban’s Hungary isn’t far off that gold standard.

Libya sat on the body during the reign of Gadhafi, as has Evo Morales’ Bolivia. There are innumerable  other nations on the rostrum that have a questionable dedication to democracy in human rights. In short, if you were trying to assemble a body of nations that would be an affront to human rights, you could do far worse than the motley crew the U.N. has assembled to protect them.

For the next few years, the United States was expected to be one of the two states selected to the committee from “Western European and Other Nations.” If U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley has her way, however, that arrangement isn’t going to last very long.

According to a report from Reuters, the United States is expected to withdraw from the UNHRC, citing the body’s refusal to undertake serious reforms to how it works. While it’s unclear when the withdrawal would take place, given that the Council is session is set to convene in Geneva this Monday, one source said it would be “imminent.”

The United States had requested that the body address its “chronic anti-Israel bias” — the only standing committee in the Human Rights Council is one dedicated to exploring the alleged knaveries committed by the Jewish state in Palestine — and some apparatus for keeping chronic human rights violators off of the Council.

This wouldn’t be the first time that the the United States would be boycotting the Human Rights Council. The George W. Bush administration boycotted it for several years before — surprise, surprise — the Obama administration rejoined in 2009.

The primary concern with the United States leaving the Council would be that Israel would have less support on the HRC. Just last month, Australia and the United States were the only two countries on the 47-member panel to vote no on a motion to conduct an investigation of how Israel handled Palestinian protests/riots in Gaza, a motion which accused the Jewish state of excessive force.

On the other hand, when you have 47 members on a panel and 45 of them are going to vote that way, exactly what good is the United States doing lending the panel legitimacy by its presence, especially when it has always been stacked with anti-Israel voices?

In November, Haley made it clear that the United States would be walking away if changes weren’t made.

“We’ve made clear that the Human Rights Council will either adopt these reforms or the United States will leave and fight for human rights in other forms,” Haley said. “We don’t want to walk away, but we’re ready to if these changes aren’t made.”

In March of 2017, the U.S. delegation also walked out of a UNHRC meeting as Israel came up on the agenda, yet another sign that the Trump administration viewed the Council as the joke it so clearly is.

Changes, however, weren’t to come. Part of the problem rested with the European Union, where Belgium felt that urgent situations in all countries — including Israel — should always have a place on the agenda. One wonders why this was a stumbling block, considering that Israel is the only country on the agenda, unless their reasoning was a thinly designed pleasantry meant to wallpaper over anti-Israel sentiment.

One source in Geneva disputed the characterization, noting, “We are still moving ahead with our engagement for the coming session.”

However, another source said that a withdrawal was “imminent.”

If the United States were to withdraw, Swiss Ambassador Valentin Zellweger said that it “will have a profound impact on the Council. If they withdraw, we can expect significant consequences.”

Citing the “leadership role” the Americans played in the Council, he added that, “Unfortunately I agree with them that not all members fulfil the (membership) criteria.”

That was something that could have been fixed. Unfortunately, nobody wanted to. That’s why it’s high time for the United States to leave a desperately broken body.

WikiLeaks Moves In With Kill Shot
After Crooked Hillary Trolls Comey

Crooked Hillary Clinton trolled Comey from her Twitter account Thursday afternoon after the IG report revealed Comey used a Gmail account to conduct FBI business.

Hillary tweeted: “But my emails.”

WikiLeaks utterly destroyed Crooked Hillary Clinton Friday.

In a grotesque display of unabated hubris, Hillary Clinton tweeted, “But my emails.”

WikiLeaks moved in with a kill shot early Friday morning.

“They’re here–at least the half you didn’t manage to destroy,” tweeted WikiLeaks with a link to an archive of Hillary’s emails from her private server when she was Secretary of State.

WikiLeaks did a lot of damage to Hillary Clinton’s campagin after they disseminated the DNC emails and Podesta emails during the 2016 election.

The other half of Hillary’s emails from her private server where she innocently discussed Chelsea’s wedding and Yoga were destroyed with BleachBit.

Congressman DeSantis reminded Hillary of that on Thursday in an epic smackdown.

FBI: Hillary’s Responses to Us Were ‘Hard To Impossible To Believe’

The race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton may be blissfully behind us, but ghosts of Clinton’s infamous email scandal are still haunting the former first lady.

Ever since Clinton was accused of using an unsecured email server for sensitive and even classified information, observers in the case have suspected that she was dishonest about her role in the scandal.

When the FBI, led by now-disgraced former Director James Comey, cleared Clinton of any crimes, it was widely suspected that the bureau went easy on her for political purposes, despite ample evidence that she had broken the law.

Now, it appears that Hillary Clinton was “playing dumb” in order to fool investigators … and more shockingly, it seems the FBI knew they were being played for fools, but let Clinton get away with it anyway.

According to a report from the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General, FBI officials who interviewed Clinton about the server found her claims “hard to impossible to believe.”

In other words, they believed the former secretary of state was lying to their faces, yet somehow went along with it.

“Clinton repeatedly claimed ignorance when pressed by FBI agents in a July 2016 interview about receiving multiple emails with a ‘(C)’ classification marker, according to the IG’s report on the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s private server,” The Daily Caller summarized.

“She said she did not know that the marker denoted classified information and ‘speculated it was a reference to paragraphs ranked in alphabetical order,’” that outlet continued.

Remember, this is a woman who has spent decades in government.

It would be mind-blowing if a first lady with a law degree who went on to become a U.S. senator and then secretary of state didn’t understand the difference between unclassified and classified documents — and indeed, even the FBI found that difficult to swallow.

“The unidentified agent who took the lead in questioning Clinton about her private server stated, ‘I filed that in the bucket of hard to impossible to believe,’” Daily Caller reported based on the DOJ document.

There are strong indications that Clinton feigned childlike ignorance of basic technology terms in order to evade prosecution. For example, when she was asked about her email server being mysteriously “wiped,” Clinton replied, “What, like with a cloth or something?”

Only two possibilities can explain this level of willful ignorance: Either Clinton was incompetent and shouldn’t have been entrusted with classified information and the secretary of state position in the first place, or she was putting on a childish deception act. Neither option is comforting.

Amazingly, even now-ousted Director James Comey suspected Clinton of lying.

“I can’t sit here and tell you I believed her,” Comey said, according to the DOJ report.

The DOJ document also used phrases like “strained credulity” to describe the reaction of FBI agents who interviewed Clinton. In simple terms, almost nobody seemed to actually believe her answers, yet the bureau cleared her anyway.

One reason may be political bias deep within the FBI.

There are already countless text messages from FBI officials involved in the Clinton email probe that show they were biased in favor of her and against Donald Trump, even before they had collected all of the facts.

Now, more messages show even more strong bias within the FBI.

“Four days after interviewing Clinton, (an) agent sent an instant message saying he was ‘done interviewing the President,’ in reference to Clinton,” reported Daily Caller.

The election had not happened yet. Agents responsible for investigating Clinton in a level-headed manner were already referring to her as “the president,” making their bias clear.

“Months later, on election day, the agent messaged his wife, ‘You should know; … that I’m … with her,’” continued the Caller. That’s a reference to Hillary Clinton’s campaign slogan and yet another example of a skewed investigation.

Whether within the local police department or the national FBI, investigators are expected — and indeed, required — to be professional, non-biased, and to follow evidence instead of emotions.

Shockingly, it looks increasingly certain that the once-venerated FBI took a very different approach in the Clinton email case. They revered her, put her on a pedestal, and didn’t see any problem with this obvious conflict of interest.

Rep DeSantis Drops A MOAB On
Crooked Hillary 

WATCH=> Obama Lies on TV About Hillary Clinton’s Private Email Server (VIDEO)

Crooked Hillary Clinton trolled Comey from her Twitter account Thursday afternoon after the IG report revealed Comey used a Gmail account to conduct FBI business.

Hillary tweeted: “But my emails”

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) dropped a MOAB on Hillary and absolutely lit Twitter ablaze.

In a grotesque display of unabated hubris, Hillary Clinton tweeted, “But my emails.”

DeSantis tweeted over Hillary: ‘But Bleachbit”

According to the IG report, then-FBI Director James Comey used a secret Gmail account when conducting FBI business, despite warning other agents they would be in “huge trouble” if they did the same thing.

The findings were published on page 425 of the report.The FBI admitted in the summer of 2016 Hillary Clinton used BleachBit software to hide all traces of her deleted emails.

BleachBit goes beyond simply deleting files, BleachBit includes advanced features such as shredding files to prevent recovery, wiping free disk space to hide traces of files deleted by other applications, and vacuuming Firefox to make it faster. Better than free, BleachBit is open source.

Thank you, Congressman DeSantis!

Lock her up!   President Barack Obama held an interview with Steve Kroft from “60 Minutes” in October 2015.

Kroft asked President Obama if he knew about Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Steve Kroft: Did you know about Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server?

Barack Obama: No… No.

We now know this was another Obama lie.

Thanks to the release of the IG report on Thursday we know that Barack Obama had direct contact with Clinton on private email server.

FOX News reported:

President Obama was one of a select handful of individuals who had “direct contact” with Hillary Clinton on her private email account, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz indicated in his bombshell report Thursday on the Clinton email probe.

In a footnote, the DOJ watchdog notes that “FBI analysts and Prosecutor 2 told us that former President Barack Obama was one of the 13 individuals with whom Clinton had direct contact using her clintonemail.com account.