Yesterday, the escalating communist revolution in the United States, graduated to full scale political assassination. This was left-wing terrorism. For Americans, this was a watershed moment and a wake-up call.
Some of America’s top enemies have sided with Russia in pledging to defend Syria following the U.S. missile attack on that country.
The U.S., for its part, isn’t backing down.
“We’re calling [Russia and Iran] out,” Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told CNN. “But I don’t think anything is off the table at this point. I think what you’re going to see is strong leadership. You’re going to continue to see the United States act when we need to act.”
Haley’s words were prompted by statements of support for Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad from Russia and Iran. The two governments were joined in their support for Assad by the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah, the Associated Press reported.
“Both sides [Russia and Iran] noted the inadmissibility of aggressive U.S. actions against a sovereign state in violation of international law,” a Kremlin press release stated. “[Russia’s] Vladimir Putin and [Iran’s] Hasan Rouhani spoke in favor of an objective, unbiased investigation of all the circumstances of the chemical weapons incident on April 4 in the Syrian province of Idlib.”
Russia has implied that the chemical attack – which prompted the missile strike – never happened. On Tuesday, the White House alleged that Russia had helped Syria cover up the chemical attack.
Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s prime minister, earlier said the U.S. was “one step away from military clashes with Russia”
Rouhani, Iran’s president, even called Assad to voice his support for Syria. Iran has troops from its Revolutionary Guard fighting for Assad in Syria’s civil war. The Russians have been supplying Assad with air support, artillery and technical advice.
Trump ordered the strike in retaliation for a nerve gas attack on the city of Khan Sheikhoun that killed around 70 people.
War Talk Escalates
This prompted calls from U.S. allies for Assad’s removal.
“I am very clear that there can be no future for Assad in a stable Syria, which is representative of all the Syrian people,” UK Prime Minister Theresa May said.
But some in the U.S. say the White House should think twice about more military action.
“When the Trump administration uses the words ‘regime change,’ they are talking about a military effort to remove Assad,” U.S. Sen. Ed Markey told CNN. “And that would mean putting American young men and women on the ground in battlefield conditions in order to accomplish that goal. I don’t think there’s any appetite in the United States for a massive additional military presence.”
Do you think the U.S. should try and remove Assad? Share your thoughts in the section below:
WASHINGTON – The Trump administration began the year with high hopes for a restart in relationship with Russia, but those apparently were dashed Thursday when U.S. destroyer ships fired 59 Tomahawk missiles into Syria in retaliation for that country’s use of a deadly chemical weapon that killed more than 70 of its own citizens.
“On Tuesday, Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians using a deadly nerve agent,” Trump said Thursday night. “Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”
Trump said he had ordered a “targeted military strike” on the Syrian airfield “from where the chemical attack was launched.”
“It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons,” Trump said. “There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council.”
Just a few months ago, the political establishment was joking about Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin being best friends. Now, they seem like long-time enemies – and just a few steps away from world war.
Russia’s Sputnik News labeled the chemical attack “alleged” attack, implying it never happened.
“President Putin regards the US attacks on Syria as an aggression against a sovereign state in violation of the norms of international law, and under a trumped-up pretext at that,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. “… Putin also sees the attacks on Syria by the US as an attempt to divert the international community’s attention from the numerous casualties among civilians in Iraq.”
The Russian defense ministry even said it would strengthen an air defense system within Syria to protect that country. Russia is Syria’s most powerful ally.
“In order to protect the most sensitive objects of the Syrian infrastructure, a system of measures to bolster and increase the effectiveness of the Syrian armed forces’ air defense systems will be implemented,” said ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov
Peskov said the chances for a collision or war between the two countries in Syria had “significantly increased.” He even charged that the airstrike was “carried out for the benefit of ISIS and other terrorist organizations.”
Russian also announced it was suspending a September 2015 agreement that was intended to avoid incidents between U.S. and American aircraft.
Did you support the airstrikes on Syria? Share your thoughts in the section below:
There was a joke that ran around the internet a couple of times about an old man who went up to the White House after inauguration day and asked the Marine on guard duty to see President Obama.
The Marine answered truthfully that Obama wasn’t in the White House any more and the old man moved on. But he returned the next day and the one after, making the same request and receiving the same reply.
Finally, in exasperation, the Marine asked why the old man kept asking the same question, to which he responded, saying that he enjoyed hearing the answer.
Well, I seriously doubt that happened January 21st, but there are a lot of people who are glad to see that Obama is no longer in the White House. There are also those who are not glad to see Trump in there. Both groups have a right to their opinions, but regardless of what anyone’s opinion is, Trump won the elections and he’s the president.
Sadly, few Democrats are willing to accept this, rather running around saying how Trump isn’t their president. Obviously they failed Civics 101, or they’d know that Trump is, in fact, their president, whether they like it or not.
I’m sure that those same people would rather see Obama still seated in the Oval Office, or if not him, then his surrogate, Hillary Clinton. But Hillary didn’t win, regardless of how many liberal pundits proclaimed her president even before the elections. On January 20th, Obama and his family moved out the White House to make room for the new First Family.
A Busy Retirement
Unlike other former presidents, Obama didn’t move very far away. When President Bush retired from the presidency, he went back to his home in Texas. But Obama moved just two miles down the road, into a mansion he bought during his last year in office.
That was suspicious in and of itself; as if Obama wanted to keep his fingers in politics, using whatever influence he had as a former president to try and preserve and protect his legacy.
Many Democrats still respect the former president and would gladly do whatever he asked of them, especially considering the polarization that currently exists in Congress and the nation.
Obama made it fairly clear, on a number of occasions, that he wasn’t just going to enter into quiet retirement. His first statement on that was to claim that he would be quiet, unless his successor did something that went against “American values.” Of course, just about everything that Obama himself did went against true American values, as he was trying to redefine those values the eight years he was in office.
Then there was all the political litter he scattered around his last days in office, signing executive orders, implanting his own people into the bureaucracy and a host of other activities, which were intended to do nothing more than make the job of governing more difficult for Donald Trump and make him look incompetent to the American people.
Trump is a better manager than that, and while it is costing him time to deal with Obama’s political mess, he is taking it in stride and not allowing it to delay the implementation of his campaign promises.
A few whistleblowers have actually come forth to talk about the political landmines that Obama left behind. One Lieutenant Colonel in particular, who is retired from working in intelligence, said that Obama laid “tripwires” in the intelligence community, political appointees, who were converted to career intelligence officers, and who remain loyal to Obama. These officers are exploding well-planned political bombs to undercut Trump’s presidency.
According to this source, Tony Shaffer, the takedown of Trump’s National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, was one such operation. That was not some random act or failure on the part of Flynn, but rather a planned and coordinated attack, intended to deny Trump of one of his most important advisors.
It’s unknown how many of these undercover agents Obama left behind, but you can be sure there are plenty of them. It usually takes about a year for an incoming president to work his way through all the previous president’s political appointees, replacing them; but this is even worse.
Not only does Trump have to replace Obama’s appointees, but he’s also got to ferret out the ones who have been hidden in the ranks of the civil service. It is clear where their loyalty lies, and that’s with Obama. They are apparently willing to sacrifice their careers and even the country on the altar of politics.
Perhaps Obama has given them some guarantee of employment after losing their cushy government jobs; but for whatever reason, they are not afraid to use their positions to thwart the new President.
Obama is Calling the Shots
And his minions are answering. They are ignoring their legal responsibility to the new government and the new president, choosing rather to obey Obama over Trump. This puts them in the place of obstructing anything and everything that Trump has promised to do.
It has become clear in the last couple of weeks that Obama is constructing a shadow government, which he runs from his mansion, a mere two miles from the White House. Using those appointees as a base, he’s weaving a nationwide web of activists, under the cover of his non-profit organization – Organizing for Action.
This organization, which was originally created to support Obama’s bid for the White House, represents itself as non-partisan; but it’s agenda and politics are clearly allied with the Democrat Party. Even more importantly, it is allied with Barack Obama himself, giving Obama an army of over 30,000 activists, assigned to over 200 chapters, nationwide.
This is the organization which has been hiring paid activists to participate in the supposedly spontaneous grass-roots demonstrations against Trump. Started during the election and continuing ever since, my personal belief is, these demonstrations are intended to disrupt society and put pressure on Donald Trump to resign the presidency.
Of course, that’s foolish. Trump isn’t the type to buckle under when threatened, he’s the type to shoot back. Considering that he’s carried a concealed weapon for years, I think that shooting back can be taken both literally and figuratively. He hasn’t shot anyone yet, but…
What Trump is doing was made clear by his pick for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who has already directed the Department of Justice to prosecute rioters, charging them with the vandalism and damage they cause.
That’s a whole lot different than under Obama’s reign, when Black Lives Matter and other groups were not only forgiven for their actions but encouraged by the president himself to continue causing destruction and mayhem wherever they could.
With $40 million in donations sitting in the Organizing for Action war chest and a nationwide network of minions at his beck and call, it is clear that anything Obama said about retiring from politics was just one more lie, from a man who was used to spreading lies like a farmer spreads manure.
Obama may have retired from government service, but he has definitely not retired from politics. Rather, he’s gone back to his old days of being a community organizer. Only now, he’s got a bigger community of rabble-rousers to use.
They’ve even got a training manual, where Obama tells his minions what is expected of them. Leaning heavily on the teachings of Obama’s mentor, Saul Alinsky, Obama created his own version of “Rules for Radicals,” in which he lays out in detail the plans he has to overthrow the government. The manual goes into great detail about how to disrupt Republican politicians and their events; using every opportunity possible to make them look bad in the eyes of the public.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that the sort of tactics that the left has been using? Haven’t those tactics cost them over 1,000 legislative seats in the last six years? If so, then why do they want to continue using the same tactics? Are they trying to commit political suicide or are they just not getting the fact that their tactics aren’t working?
It is clear, from what we’re seeing, Obama himself is the center of all Trump’s opposition. While Hollywood celebrities and the mainstream news media both have their part, the conductor of the orchestra is none other than the former occupant of the White House, Obama himself. He has pitted himself against the sitting president and obviously feels that he can cause Trump to topple by e volume of his noise.
Video first seen on CNN.
So while Trump is calling for unity across the aisle, Obama is still beating the drum of division. Not only that, but he’s enticed a whole bunch of other people to beat the same drum.
As long as that’s going on, we’re not going to see unity, no matter what Trump does. We’re going to see the division that Obama created continue, while Obama is busy blaming everyone else for it. At this point, there is no way of telling exactly what Obama’s end game is; but I wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t a complete overthrow of the current government, with him returning to the White House as a conquering savior.
Of course, the law doesn’t allow for that. If he keeps going the way he is going, there will come a point where he crosses the line and his actions are clearly illegal. At that point, Trump’s administration may be forced to arrest him, and suffer the consequences of such an action.
Arrested, Obama becomes a martyr to his own cause, allowing him to unify even more people against the current administration. That’s not something we want to see.
Someone on the left has to wake up to how destructive their tactics are to their own agenda, and it has to be someone who the rest of the Democrat Party will listen to. Right now, there are no clear leaders and there is no clear message.
All we have is the obstructionist message from Obama, being repeated by many others. If that’s the best they can do, the Democrat party isn’t going to survive.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
Legalization of marijuana in 28 states across the US has caused off-grid pot growers to jump for joy, but ongoing issues with depositing the large amounts of cash generated from the business, (and uncertainty on Trump’s stance) has put a damper on the industry.
Pot growing requires a lot of power and is therefore an expensive off-grid venture – cannabis is something that needs regularity, 12/12 light without interruption and regular temps – it is hard to create a stable indoor environment without large solar panels and batteries to guarantee access to power. While new technologies to assist in the process are being developed by NOW Corporation, these wind turbines, called exoPower, are still in the trial stages.
Although difficult, off-gridders like Hezekiah Allen, who grew up in rural Humboldt County and tended a small medical marijuana farm in Northern California, managed to run a profitable business for years, but was forced to bury his cash in the same way many cannabis corporations did in the past.
“I had three different safes buried on a 200-acre parcel,” Hezekiah said. “Fifteen steps from the oak tree, a lot like a pirate. I had a little map. Pretty inconvenient and not the best cash management system. Bankers on the north coast talk about mildewy money. They can tell it’s been buried.”
Times have changed. Hezekiah left his growing operation to serve full time as an advocate for marijuana farmers, and now works to get their profits out of the ground and into banks as the executive director of the California Growers Association.
“We don’t want to lie anymore, we don’t want to have to hide what we are doing,” Hezekiah said. “We want to be open and transparent about what we are and want to do. [Banking] is an area where there are some really bad behaviors being reinforced.”
Although California voters approved the legalization of recreational pot, these businesses are still faced with one major unresolved issue: banking. As marijuana is still illegal under federal law, it is also illegal for banks to work with any marijuana-related businesses. This is forcing the majority of the state’s legal cannabis community to continue to operate in the shadows, despite the state legalization.
While the Obama administration in 2014 issued stringent guidelines that allow banks to pot-related businesses if they are following state laws, most banks have not been willing to risk the lingering threat of criminal prosecution or spend the resources it takes to comply with the additional rules of business.
Rob Rowe, vice president and associate chief counsel of regulatory compliance for the American Bankers Association, said it all comes down to risk assessment – and with the added uncertainty around Trump’s stance on the matter, it doesn’t seem like the outlook will improve any time in the near future.
“Bankers have said that in the current environment, with the enforcement and examiners looking at everything bankers are doing, they aren’t really predisposed to take on anything risky,” Rob said. “And banking a marijuana business is risky.”
The medical marijuana industry has grappled with this for years in California and elsewhere. Now, entrepreneurs and conglomerates going after a slice of lucrative recreational pot sales will have to confront the banking challenge.
Costs of running business
No banking access means businesses must pay employees, bills and taxes in cash. Clients are unable to pay using credit or debit cards, and there is no way to process business loans or real estate mortgages. The company effectively has no paper trail – no official records to build credit or establish a financial identity. And these businesses – whether they be licensed recreational sellers, medical marijuana farms, or trade associations – are forced to stash a lot of cash, making them a target for violent crime.
Michael Julian, CEO and president of MPS Security, which caters to marijuana-related businesses, said business owners are forced to get creative with finding places to hide their money.
“They have tens of thousands, if not millions, of dollars,” Michael said. “And it’s not as secure in a vault in their establishment, in a closet at home, in their mattress, in the trunk of their car, whatever.”
A recent survey by the California Growers association found 75 percent of its members don’t have a bank account, and the ones who do have had three or more accounts closed in the course of doing business. A 2015 survey by Marijuana Business Daily of more than 400 cannabis professionals nationwide also found 70 percent of businesses that deal directly in marijuana operate without traditional banking services. As for firms that support the business but don’t handle the plant, 49 percent don’t have bank accounts.
The long-running conflict between the banks and the industry has been ongoing since 1996, when California became the first state to legalize medical marijuana. The conflict ballooned when recreational pot sales started in Colorado and Washington in 2012, but with more and more states entering the recreational market, including California, Massachusetts, Nevada, Maine, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia, the problem will be compounded. Adding in the states that allow medical marijuana brings the total to 28 states, plus D.C., with cannabis laws on the books.
According to experts, the only real solution is for Congress to remove marijuana from the list of Schedule I narcotics, putting the drug on par with an FDA-regulated medicine rather than heroin or cocaine. Until that happens, state-legal marijuana-related businesses are treated under the letter of the law the same as cartels trafficking methamphetamine.
Banking on marijuana
In 2013, the Obama administration released a document called the ‘Cole Memo’, which stated it would generally not prosecute marijuana businesses that were following state law and didn’t engage in certain activities, such as selling to children, crossing state lines or funding criminal organizations. In a separate memo, months later, the administration modified the way banks conducted business with state-legal operations, making it easier under new guidelines from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the federal agency that monitors banks for fraudulent activity, such as money laundering. But banks were also reminded that marijuana remains illegal under federal law and is subject to prosecution.
Under the guidelines, banks serving marijuana-related businesses must file suspicious activity reports, or SARs, so the transactions are transparent and can be tracked by the government. Three kinds of reports dictate the level of suspicion against the businesses: ‘Marijuana limited’ SARs indicate the business is following state law and no red flags suggest it is breaking any other laws; ‘marijuana priority’ suggests the business may not be following other laws and may be involved in suspicious activity; and ‘marijuana termination’ alerts to a bank account that has been shut down for suspicious activity.
The SARs must be filed when an account is opened and then quarterly after that, listing every transaction that has been made. Banks are also told to investigate and track marijuana businesses they are serving, making sure they are not violating any guidelines.
The American Bankers Association stated on its website that the level of scrutiny was “far beyond” that expected of any normal banking relationship.
“Because of the standards in place, if we do this we have to have someone almost embedded in the customer 24/7, and we’re not 100 percent certain we saw everything we need to see,” Rob said. “We’ve got to have such close tabs and use so much resources to closely monitor everything with these businesses, it’s just not economical.”
However, according to data from FinCEN, some banks have taken on the risk of working with marijuana-related businesses; in the first six months that the new guidelines were in effect, banks across America filed 502 SARs marked as ‘marijuana limited,’ according to Dynamic Securities Analytics statistics. During the same period, FinCEN received 123 ‘marijuana priority’ SARs and 475 ‘marijuana termination’.
Rob said banks generally keep quiet about it due to the perceived consequences of doing business with the volatile industry.
“Bankers will say that we know someone who is (serving a marijuana business), but it is the exception to a general policy, a one-off thing,” Rob said. “I’ve heard from dispensaries that say we don’t want to call attention to it because we had trouble getting an account and don’t want to lose what we’ve got.”
Mike Cindrich, an attorney who represents marijuana-related businesses and is executive director of the local chapter of NORML, a marijuana advocacy group, said there are ways around the banking ban on marijuana-related businesses – but he wouldn’t recommend them. One such way would be to set up limited liability corporations that are management companies providing a list of services, from payroll to accounting to bookkeeping to property management. The money from the marijuana business flows to the company – usually with a nondescript name that doesn’t disclose its ties to marijuana – and is deposited in the company’s bank account. This is technically money laundering, and illegal, but some companies have found success with the tactics. Others have been busted by banks and their accounts closed.
“When you start doing something that looks like money laundering, funneling cash from a non-profit to something that looks like an LLC, now someone is looking at felony charges,” Mike said. While he “sternly advises against it,” Mike said he could see how marijuana operators feel like they are being backed into a corner by the government.
“They’re not leaving the cannabis community with many options here,” he said. “It’s a complete nightmare for these businesses. People who don’t want to be legitimate, it’s very easy for them to not report this cash. If we want legitimacy and for these businesses to come out into the light, then we should allow full banking because it allows this money to be accounted for, taxed, tracked, traced. If this is something the feds really want to keep an eye on they’d change the banking laws altogether and make this happen.”
The cannabis industry has been suspicious of President Trump’s election, waiting to see if the new administration will address the growing legal marijuana market and how it conflicts with banking laws.
Trump voiced support for legalization but brought up some concerns about the drug during his campaign. He did not make it a major issue, and the industry believes Trump will focus on his bigger priorities – terrorism, immigration, the border wall.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the former Republican senator from Alabama who once said “good people don’t smoke marijuana,” is a bigger worry. As head of the U.S. Department of Justice, Jeff has control over how the government enforces federal law and could reverse the Obama administration’s willingness to look the other way as long as dispensaries followed state law.
The Attorney General said he would review the Cole Memo and commit to “enforcing federal law with respect to marijuana, although the exact balance of enforcement priorities is an ever-changing determination based on the circumstances and the resources available at the time.”
The post Off grid pot growers have problems stashing the cash appeared first on Living Off the Grid: Free Yourself.
PANAMA CITY, Fla. — An elementary school teacher was removed from her class this week for expressing her opinions on Facebook about President Trump’s immigration policies.
The teacher, Veronica Kochis Fleming at Parkside Elementary School in Naples Fla., was commenting about the Feb. 16 Day Without Immigrants protest, in which workers opposed to Trump’s policies stayed home from their jobs.
“The funny thing about immigrants staying home is the rest of us who pay for them are at work like we’ve always been,” Fleming wrote on her Facebook page. “Looks like less mouths to feed today. Have fun while you still can. So glad to hear about massive deportation. Let’s make America great again. Thanks Donald Trump!!”
“The whole school was hurt about the comment,” Gabriela Marquez, the mother of two children at the school, told the Naples Daily News. “Most of the students are Latinos. No one understands why she would comment something like that.”
“I would consider it really to be racist,” Marquez added. “I was mad. Really, really mad.”
Another parent, Juana Perez, said she, too, was offended.
“I don’t ask for any, I pay for my school, my daughter’s lunch, I pay for her insurance,” Perez said. “How could she give, like, education to these kids, knowing that she has so much hate, I thought she was a good teacher but I guess she’s not.”
Around 70 percent of the students at Parkside are Latino and 20 percent are Haitian, NBC 2 News reported.
Parents created an online petition asking for Fleming to be fired. Around 1,600 people had signed the petition by Feb. 16, and administrators transferred her to administrative duties at the headquarters of the Collier County Public Schools, NBC 2 reported.
Fleming was a computer lab instructor and instructional review teacher at Parkside. She removed the post from her Facebook page and refused to comment to news media after the controversy broke.
What is your reaction? Should she have been reassigned or fired? Share it in the section below:
While the world gives up on Trump and climate change, Australian politicians are dropping the ball on meeting the country’s energy needs.
Australia’s broken budget notwithstanding, the challenge facing the nation is affordability and reliability of its energy supply. Those on the Left disregard expense and reliability to focus on purely environmental concerns, while the Rights sprout facts and figures, thinking they know more about global warming than the CSIRO, and take the current energy crisis as proof that renewable energy isn’t sustainable.
The energy problem is especially urgent in South Australia, where a state-wide energy shortage in late 2016 interrupted supply to more than 60,000 homes on one of the hottest days of the year. To compound the problem, many of the state’s power stations are coming off line in the coming months, and, making matters worse, nearby in Victoria the Hazelwood power station – which supplies up the 25 percent of the state’s power supply and almost 5 percent of Australia’s entire energy supply – will shut down by the end of March 2017.
With so many stakeholders in the debate — state and federal governments, privately-owned power generation companies and infrastructure companies, and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) itself — when things go wrong, key players are able to pick and choose the facts that suit them to argue none of it is their fault.
The latest report released by AEMO regarding South Australia’s energy supply disaster points the finger at more than one guilty party. On the surface level, a software bungle by the state’s privately-owned power distribution firm caused thousands of homes to be kicked off the grid unnecessarily. But AEMO itself underestimated the level of demand on a 40 degree-Celsius day, and by the time it tried to respond, by looking at bringing gas online, it was too late. The wind stopped blowing, meaning the southern state, with the nation’s highest reliance on wind farms, was producing almost zero energy. The issue might be in technology – having batteries big enough to harness the wind on a windy day and store enough of it to keep the state running – or it might lie elsewhere.
AEMO should rethink its contingency plan – have a proper look at the manner in which energy is shuffled around between the states. But the larger issue remains the politicians, and the manner in which the discussion about renewables continues to be carried out in the public domain. There is a long-overdue need for an honest and non-ideological discussion about the capacity of renewables to meet the community’s energy needs. Whether they can in a sunny country like Australia remains under debate, but with the world watching Trump, the Oz establishment doesn’t seem to be listening.
As Mayor of our nation’s most corrupt city, Rahm Emanuel represents the ultimate politician. In a city that revels in political scandal, he’s the best of the worst. A partisan hack who toes the liberal line with the ruthlessness of a pit bull. His political “coaching tree” is a who’s who of ne’er-do-wells, miscreants and convicts. He rose to prominence by winning Rod Blagojevich’s House seat, served in the Obama White House, and replaced Richard Daley as Mayor of Chicago.
By Professor Liberty Mize, a contributing author of SHTFBlog
In a telling article in the Chicago Tribune, Emanuel speaks openly about his plan to return the Democrats to power. He does so by openly addressing the donkey in the room—that his only hope is the failure of Republicans. You get power when you earn it, or your opponents fail. He cares little about the former and is laser-focused on the latter.
“Wherever there’s a disagreement among Republicans, I’m for one of those disagreements,” he said. “I’m all for it. The president’s with Russia? I’m with John McCain and Lindsey Graham, I’m for NATO! Why? (It’s a) wedge. Wedges have to be schisms, schisms have to be divides.”
His goal isn’t to win, rather to destroy his enemies and collect the spoils. His tactics are so bad that even the left-loving publication Salon has termed him “a national disgrace”.
Why do we care? Because he’s the only Democrat who is honest about his approach. If we can learn from the Grand Poobah, we gain insight into the rest who think the same but keep their cards closer to the vest. The so-called “party of no” is back, they’ve just changed jerseys. Emanuel is the tip of the spear for a new breed of Democrat, one who only sees the outcome of the actions and is unconcerned with what it takes to get there.
So what can Republicans do to thwart Emanuel and his cronies?
Tip #1- Show Unity in Public & Refuse to Engage
Smart Republicans should simply refuse to take the bait. Stay united in public and fight your battles in private. We have a President who is addicted to knee-jerk reactions and sharing his every opinion via twitter. That will never change. But when you add a liberal media specialized in whipping up a frenzy 140 characters at a time, you have a powder keg.
What can change is the Republican reaction. If they simply refuse to engage, they can stay clean. A full 90% of Trump tweets are simply the president cocking off with little strategy or a formulated plan. He works things out by engaging, backing away and discussing. Weighing in on every tweet is a fool’s errand.
Policy debates are for debating policy. If an executive order or a budget is produced, let’s talk about that. Tweets are the opposite of serious talkers. They merely work as a stirring of the pot in the public realm. Conservatives can certainly hold Trump accountable, but should resist the urge to grandstand and challenge him when there is no policy proposal on the table. Not that he’s above reproach, quite the contrary–but style and optics matter.
Tip #2- Prove You Are Better
The election of 2016 proved two things definitively. First, that people in general prefer Republican ideals. Second, that people hate politicians and prefer a president with zero public service record to the status quo. Said another way, people are sick of the BS.
On Obama’s watch we witnessed…
- A supreme court that re-writes legislation on the fly, inventing new rights rather than simply weighing in on constitutional muster
- A justice department that uses verbal gymnastics to punish administration enemies in the name of the fabricated social cause du jour
- A weaponized IRS that targets citizens based on their religious beliefs or political leanings
- Executive orders that circumvent the legislative process in an attempt to redefine foundational things like citizenship
- The rise of Federal Judges as penultimate arbiters
The challenge for Republicans in two words—be better. Rather than emulate their enemies by fighting fire with fire, abusing executive orders and politicizing the justice department they should govern how the founder’s envisioned it. The best revenge is clean living. That is what people want, not simply the other side using the same tactics to different ends. If Republicans can do that they’ll brand themselves above the fray and EARN the right to govern.
Tip #3- Accept the Fiscal Mandate
Of the many reasons Trump won the election, perhaps the most universally popular one is an embrace of fiscal conservatism. By taking serious action on fiscal issues, President Trump can not only easily win reelection, he’ll set our financial table well into the future.
Read Also: Dire Straits
While regulatory reform is a part of this, the nation’s growing debt and astronomical projected entitlement spending must be addressed. Three things can help with this.
- An increase to the retirement age and means-tested Social Security
- A full repeal of Obamacare AS PROMISED to the American people
- A Scott Walker-style frontal assault on government pensions and the unions
The time to tackle this is early in a first term. While conservatives may scoff at my “means-tested” language, it is a regrettable but inevitable step on the road to solvency. The AARP and others will fight any reform, by giving in on means-testing we actually have a chance to make a change.
As far as Obamacare, repeal is a political winner of an issue, yet Republicans are already set to ignore it. This is poor public policy. No “replace”, no “reimagine”, full repeal and start from scratch. As for Scott Walker, his ability to go full frontal with labor unions in reforming collective bargaining and pensions was nothing short of miraculous. It also represents a federal roadmap to setting our fiscal house in order.
How can Republicans Make American Great Again? Not by emulating their enemies, but by proving that they are different, by staying united and shoring up our finances. Too many politicians campaign simply to win elections. To defeat the Rahm Emanuel’s of the world is not to become them. Conservatives must resist the urge and instead confront head-on the many challenges of this Constitutional Republic.
Visit Sponsors of SurvivalCache.com
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s administration is making a mistake in its interaction with Iran and potentially setting the stage for war, famed conservative pundit Patrick J. Buchanan is warning.
“[The] White House statement makes a collision with Iran almost unavoidable; and a war with Iran quite possible,” Buchanan wrote at WorldNetDaily, referencing a statement by National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn on Feb. 1.
Following Iran’s ballistic missile test launch, Flynn said during a White House press briefing he was “officially putting Iran on notice,” claiming Iran was violating a U.N. Security Council resolution.
Flynn did not elaborate.
“Iran is playing with fire” Trump tweeted on Feb. 3, and “they don’t appreciate how kind President Obama was to them. Not me!”
Wrote Buchanan, “A 2015 U.N. resolution ‘called upon’ Iran not to test nuclear-capable missiles. It did not forbid Iran from testing conventional missiles, which Tehran insists this was.”
Buchanan – a strong backer of Trump during the election – also was troubled by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s comments about China’s building of artificial islands in what an international court called international waters.
“We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that first, the island-building stops, and second, your access to those islands is also not going to be allowed,” Tillerson said during his U.S. Senate confirmation hearing.
Buchanan predicted that the words and actions by the White House could lead to conflict.
“High among the reasons that many supported Trump was his understanding that George W. Bush blundered horribly in launching an unprovoked and unnecessary war on Iraq,” Buchanan wrote at WorldNetDaily.
“Unlike the other candidates, Trump seemed to recognize this. It was thought he would disengage us from these wars, not rattle a saber at an Iran that is three times the size of Iraq and has as its primary weapons supplier and partner Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
“… Neither the Ayatollah Khamenei nor Trump appears to be in a mood to back away, especially now that the president has made the threat public.”
What do you think? Did the White House make a mistake? Share your thoughts in the section below:
A new article published in the Journal of Contemporary Security Policy endeavors to explore the impact of Trump’s Presidency on nuclear proliferation. Specifically, it brings to light the changing nature of US alliances with non-nuclear defense partners. Since the cold war, non-nuclear defense partners have been under a construct known as the nuclear umbrella. Under this arrangement, the United States gives defensive assurances to partner states. As a result, the United States is able to exert regional influence and discourage the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Trump has since challenged the existence of this paradigm by demanding NATO members pay more. Even more surprising is Trump’s suggestion that Japan and South Korea acquire their own nuclear weapons.
By D-Ray, a contributing author to SHTFBlog & Survival Cache
A superficial examination of nuclear umbrella deterrence and President Trump’s comments indicate we will see partner states developing their own nuclear programs in the next few years. Upon further examination, this conclusion is not entirely accurate. The paper notes that even if the Trump Administration wanted to, it could not unilaterally abrogate defensive partnerships with allied states. In this regard, the nuclear umbrella can only be weakened. It will always exist under Trump’s State Department.
Additionally, the partial withdrawal of United State defense assurances would not compel all states to pursue their own nuclear defense programs. Some states have no desire to build their own nuclear program for a variety of ethical reasons. Moreover, some states find that the security costs of pursuing an independent nuclear program are too high.
In any case, it would seem, at least according to this article, that international nuclear paradigms will change little under Trump’s Presidency. Nuclear deterrence arrangements constitute a very strong institution. Contrary to what some pundits claim, the world is not going to go “totally nuclear” under Trump’s Administration.
Do you agree with the conclusion of this article? How do you see nuclear paradigms changing in the next four years?
Visit Sponsors of SurvivalCache.com
WASHINGTON — President Trump moved quickly to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, and in nominating Neil Gorsuch – currently a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver – Trump instantly appeased his base.
But who is Gorsuch, and what can we expect from him?
1. Gorsuch is a life-long conservative. He co-founded a magazine and a newspaper while attending Columbia University in the mid-1980s. The publications were designed to promote conservativism and combat liberal views on campus. Gorsuch has contributed $3,050 to Republican candidates and causes in the past, according to a biography prepared by the Alliance for Justice. Gorsuch is so conservative that CNBC writer Jake Novak described him as a “Scalia clone.”
2. Gorsuch is highly qualified for the job. He studied law at Harvard and earned a doctorate at England’s Oxford University. At Oxford, Gorsuch studied under John Finnis, one the world’s top legal philosophers. He clerked for two different Supreme Court Justices: the late Byron White and current Justice Anthony Kennedy. Before being nominated to the federal bench in 2007, Gorsuch served as principal deputy to the associate attorney general during the George W. Bush administration.
3. He might be on the Supreme Court for a very long time. Gorsuch is just 49 years old and would have a lifetime appointment. The oldest active Supreme Court Justice is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is 83.
4. Gun-control advocates are afraid of Gorsuch. “Neil Gorsuch’s record on gun-related cases indicates some willingness to make it easier for felons to own guns – something that puts our families and communities at risk,” Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America told The Guardian.
5. The National Rifle Association (NRA) strongly supports Gorsuch.
“We will be activating our members and tens of millions of supporters throughout the country in support of Judge Gorsuch,” Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, said in a statement.
Do you support Gorsuch’s nomination? Share your thoughts in the section below:
When Donald Trump said he was anxious to get to work in his new job, few people took him seriously. Even amongst those who voted for him, there was doubt how quickly he’d actually get to work on the items in his first 100 days agenda.
After all, we’re talking Washington, DC; nothing happens quickly there. The town is filled with a huge spring, called bureaucracy, which reverberates to its own inefficient frequency.
But Washington apparently doesn’t know how to deal with a businessman, only bureaucrats and politicians. So they weren’t ready on the afternoon of January 20th, when Trump returned from the inauguration and hit the ground running.
Before the day was out, he had signed four executive orders, which had been prepared by his transition team.
Things have continued hard and fast since then, with Trump making a start on his “Contract with America.” A few of the more noteworthy moves have been:
- Pulling the United States out of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). If you remember, that’s the trade deal that Obama’s administration negotiated in secret and expected Congress to vote on, without giving the members copies to read. If they wanted to read it, they had to do so in a secure room and return the copy they were reading when they got done.
- Putting a stop to U.S. taxpayer funding of foreign abortions. This one has gone back and forth every time there’s a change of president. Democrats order funding of those abortions, and Republicans stop it every time they are in office. Well, Trump signed that one in quickly.
- Signing an executive order on Obamacare. While President Trump didn’t repeal Obamacare, he did sign an executive order, directing the various departments of the executive branch to use as lenient an interpretation of the law as possible, when dealing with the American public. Specifically, this deals with the financial burden of Obamacare, or the individual mandate. Quite literally, it tells bureaucrats to decide in favor of the citizens, rather than in favor of the government.
- Called for a renegotiation of North-american Free Trade Agrement (NAFTA). Like the TPP, NAFTA has cost American jobs. Since jobs are a major issue for the American people, Trump is responding. Unfortunately, for Mexico, that left their president looking bad and caused a dip in the value of the already struggling peso.
- Ordered the building of the wall. This was a big campaign promise of Trump’s, and he’s lost no time in ordering it started. Relying on a law passed by Democrats in 2006, Trump has ordered that the wall be started post-haste. He’s also ordered the hiring of 5,000 more Border Patrol Agents.
- Established a freeze on federal workforce hiring. This is part of Trump’s plan to reduce the federal workforce by 20% and discretionary spending by 10%.
- Authorized the building of the Keystone XL pipeline and the Dakota pipeline. Obama wavered on these all through his presidency, ultimately succumbing to the pressure of environmentalists. Trump, ever the businessman, authorized the continuation of these projects.
- Rescinded Obama’s “catch and release” instructions to the Border Patrol, where illegal aliens, even illegal alien criminals, were released into society, with nothing more than a court date (that most didn’t bother to attend) and a work permit.
- He’s also given the EPA a gag order, stopping posting of information and issuance of new regulations, until they can be reviewed. During Obama’s presidency, the EPA was used as a bludgeon against business, reaching the point where regulatory compliance with the EPA’s mandates, equals half of all regulatory compliance costs that businesses must bear.
- Signing an executive order temporarily suspending all travel from seven Muslim controlled countries, which are the most known for supporting and exporting terrorists.
Video first seen on: Fox News.
As anyone can see, looking at this list, Trump is holding to a hard conservative line in his early actions. He’s actually doing what he said he’d do.
According to information from the transition team, there are about 200 executive orders and actions ready for Trump to sign. While we don’t know how quickly those will be rolled out, it’s clear that the transition team put an effort in getting things ready for the new president.
Liberals have already been screaming about Trump’s actions, as they don’t follow the liberal ideology. But they’re also screaming for another reason; trying to throw the high number of executive orders in Republican’s faces, citing how those of us on the right complained about Obama’s executive orders.
A Difference We Should Be Aware Of
But most of these actions don’t really qualify as executive orders. In the first week, only four of them did. The rest are what are known as “Executive Memorandum.” The difference between those and executive orders may seem small, but it is significant. Calling them executive orders is misleading, even though Trump himself is making that mistake.
An executive order does something new, carrying with it the weight of law. As such, they are numbered and entered into the federal registry, just like any other law. But executive memorandum aren’t treated in the same way. While they may ultimately carry as much weight as a law does, they aren’t a law.
What they are is guidance to the various departments of the federal government, directing them in how to apply specific laws that are on the books.
In fact, President Obama actually issued fewer executive orders than many of his predecessors, preferring to use executive memorandum instead. But in his case, it was so that Congress would have a hard time finding his orders.
Since executive memorandum aren’t numbered, they are easily “lost” in the halls of power, so that when members of Congress ask for a copy, it’s hard to provide it to them.
While just about everything that Trump is doing has the liberals up in arms, the supposed “Muslim Ban” seems to top the list. According to the liberal narrative, Trump is discriminating against Muslims based upon their religion. But to take that stand, they have to purposely misunderstand the order that Trump signed.
Trump’s order isn’t based on the individual’s religion, but in fact bans travel to the United States by all people who are citizens of those seven countries. While the countries in question are Muslim controlled, with a majority Muslim population, they are not the only such countries around.
There are many other countries that he did not ban travel from, which are also Muslim controlled, with a majority Muslim population. But those countries are not known for exporting terrorism. The seven countries on the list were actually picked by Obama’s Administration, as they were the ones who created the list of the seven countries which exported the most terrorism. So, in a sense, all Trump was doing was something that Obama wouldn’t.
Nor is this the first time that such a ban has been put in place. Obama himself did a six month ban on travel from Syria during his first term in office. However, nobody was demonstrating against it or even talking about it, because Obama was the liberal media’s poster boy. They wouldn’t dream of saying anything so negative about him.
Changes in the White House
Trump hasn’t just been changing things in the law, through executive orders and executive memorandum, he’s also made some serious changes in the organization and operation of the White House.
Even before taking the oath of office, he changed the name of the Office of the First Lady to the “Office of the First Family,” demonstrating that his family, especially his daughter Ivanka, will have a part to play in his administration.
That’s not too surprising, considering that they have all worked as his executives in Trump Tower. But it’s disconcerting to those on the left nevertheless. They’re responding strongly to that, citing laws about nepotism and conflict of interest. But those laws don’t actually apply, as none of his family members are filling cabinet posts.
Then there’s the décor of the White House. Yes, Trump has had something to say about that as well, telling the staff to remove all Muslim signs and symbols, even from the chapel. This country was founded as a Christian country.
But the biggest change in the White House has been in the Press Briefing Room. We’ve all watched Trump’s ongoing war with the press with some humor. The mainstream media acted as shills for Hillary Clinton during the campaign, and Trump’s not likely to forget.
Worse than that, the mainstream media is still acting as Clinton’s shills, even though it’s clear that she lost and Trump is now the president. Like the rest of the liberals in the country, they can’t seem to accept the idea that their candidate could possibly have lost. So they’re doing everything in their power to make Trump look bad.
That’s not all that surprising, as the liberal press does that with every Republican president, while working to hide the mistakes of the Democrats. Nowhere was this clearer than during Obama’s presidency and Hillary’s candidacy. In both cases, they held back information that the American people had every right to know.
The war between Trump and the media is far from over. The day after the inauguration, he was taking shots at them for their misrepresentation of the crowd at his inauguration ceremony. While that might seem petty, it demonstrates how low the liberal press is willing to go. Trump won’t put up with it.
So, Trump’s staff started out with the idea of moving the press to the Old Executive Office Building, so that they could give them a bigger room. But that idea didn’t go over too well with the press. They saw it as Trump pushing them away, something that would be understandable, if not necessarily wise.
So the press are in the same little briefing room they’ve been in for years. The difference is, there’s a whole lot more of them who are receiving credentials from the White House. Now it isn’t just the mainstream media, but many conservative news sites who are receiving their credentials.
That’s making that little briefing room seem tiny; and it’s going to get worse. It’s also giving Trump’s Press Secretary, Sean Spicer, a chance to rub the mainstream media’s nose in the dirt. Rather than following longstanding tradition and allowing the AP wire service and the major networks to ask the questions, Spicer is calling on conservative news outlets.
The leftist media has managed to control the narrative in Washington, simply by the questions that they ask. Even if the briefing was about one subject, they’d turn the question period to what they wanted. But now, the people who are asking the questions aren’t asking what the liberals want to know, but what conservatives care about. That means that the narrative is being controlled by conservatives, rather than liberals.
Where Will Trump Go From Here?
There’s really no way of knowing for sure exactly what Donald Trump is going to do as president; but I think we can draw a few early conclusions. First of all, we have to take into account the fact that he put forth the most conservative platform that the Republican Party has floated in 20 years.
That’s a bit surprising, coming from a man who was a Democrat most of his adult life. But it’s not, if you consider how he ran his campaign. He wasn’t following any real political ideology, right or left, per se; but rather, asking what the American people, all those millions of people in flyover country, cared about. Those are the issues that he campaigned on and those are the issues that he has covered in his Contract with America.
It looks like Trump wants to be the president for the working man and woman. Those are the people who voted him into office, and those are the people he’s committed to serve. He’s willing to be the president for all Americans, but those who voted for him come first.
Some of those who voted for him are a bit surprising. Trump is the first Republican President in I don’t know how long who earned the support of labor unions. That’s a biggie, because the labor unions have traditionally backed and funded Democrats.
But when it all comes down to it, Trump is trying to create jobs, while the Democrats are trying to create a socialist utopia. For the unions, jobs are more important.
While it’s too soon to tell for sure, based on some of the things he’s said in the last week, it appears that Trump understands where the limits of his authority are and wants to work together with Congress on the rest.
That will be a nice change. Obama’s idea of working with Congress was to give them orders and expect them to carry them out. There were countless times when he said that Congress wasn’t doing their job, adding that if they didn’t, he would do it by executive order. But in each of those cases, it was clear that he thought that Congress doing anything but his will, wasn’t doing their jobs.
And Finally, the Democrats
The Democrat Party now finds itself with the shoe on the other foot. Their populist president has finished out his term, trying to rule by the force of his own personality and will, lying to the American people constantly and using a bludgeon on the collective heads of Congress.
Obama started out with control of both Houses of Congress and now Trump has that. But in the eight years of Obama’s presidency, the Democrats lost more and more power, until they lost control of both houses. They still acted like they had control, but they didn’t have the numbers. They had to rely on the president’s pen to thwart the Republicans’ will.
The question to be seen is how they Trump uses that same advantage and whether he’ll be able to keep it. A lot is hanging in the balance.
Sixty-eight Congressmen and Congresswomen boycotted Trump’s inauguration, with many stating that they didn’t consider his presidency legitimate. Of course, they wouldn’t think any Republican presidency legitimate, but in the process, they’ve shown their true colors, picking partisanship over patriotism.
That “boycott” sent a loud and clear message to Trump, the Republicans in Congress and the American people. It went something like this: “If we can’t have our way, then we’ll take out bat and ball and go home.” Sigh; it’s sad to see supposed adults acting so childish.
But this is the stance that the Democrats have decided to take for the next four to eight years. If they can’t have their way, they’ll just have a collective temper-tantrum. We can expect more of the same, expressed in a myriad of ways, as liberals and other Democrats continue to “demonstrate” against the duly elected president.
Apparently, those on the left feel that Trump is a threat to their freedom. Yet he hasn’t said one single word about taking away women’s rights, taking away LGBT rights or any of their other hot buttons.
The closest you can say that he came to that, was to say he was going to keep potential terrorists and criminals out of the country. I guess they think that’s stealing their rights.
Actually, the reason for the collective outrage of the left is quite simple; they’re listening to the lies of the mainstream media. The “fake news” machine is out in force, and it’s aimed its cannon on a target called Trump. They’re going to blast him with every malicious epitaph they can, and their blind sheeple and going to believe it.
We can expect more of the same, eight more years of the same. So stock up on pampers and pacifiers, we’ve got a lot of crybabies to take care of.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
3 total views, 3 views today
[Total: 1 Average: 2/5]
WASHINGTON — President Trump is making good on his promise to build a wall along the United States/Mexico border and to get tougher on illegal immigration.
Trump signed executive orders Wednesday ordering the building of a wall along the border and also calling for 5,000 additional border patrol agents and 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The latter is contingent upon congressional funding, but the wall may not require it. That’s because a 2006 law – signed by President George W. Bush — funded a wall that was never completed after Democrats took control of Congress.
“We are going to restore the rule of law in the United States,” Trump said in an address to the Department of Homeland Security. “Beginning today the United States gets control of its borders.”
The wall will cost a lot — $15 billion total, or $3 million to $10 million a mile, NPR reported. The Washington Post’s estimate was even higher: $20 billion.
“A nation without borders is not a nation,” he said.
Trump still plans on having the Mexican government pay for the wall by reimbursing the U.S.
“All it is, is we’ll be reimbursed at a later date from whatever transaction we make from Mexico,” Trump told ABC News. “I’m just telling you there will be a payment. It will be in a form, perhaps a complicated form. What I’m doing is good for the United States. It’s also going to be good for Mexico. We want to have a very stable, very solid Mexico.”
Story continues below video
Trump contends the wall will benefit Mexico by cutting down on the number of people from Central America crossing through that country. Some of the wall’s costs might be covered by redirecting foreign aid money that is going to Mexico, CNN reported.
Construction on the wall, Trump added, will likely begin within months.
“Certainly, planning is starting immediately,” he said.
Around one-third of the US-Mexico border is already blocked by a fence.
The wall was just one of several actions on immigration in two executive orders Trump signed. Other actions included:
- Withholding federal funds from “sanctuary cities” where local governments refuse to support enforcement of federal immigration laws.
- Stepping up prosecutions of people accused of committing crimes along the border.
- Increasing detention of illegal immigrants.
- Forcing other countries to take back criminal aliens by withholding U.S. Visas to their citizens.
- Giving ICE more power to arrest, detain and deport illegal immigrants.
“The recent surge of illegal immigration at the southern border with Mexico has placed a significant strain on Federal resources and overwhelmed agencies charged with border security and immigration enforcement, as well as the local communities into which many of the aliens are placed,” one of the executive orders reads. “Transnational criminal organizations operate sophisticated drug- and human-trafficking networks and smuggling operations on both sides of the southern border, contributing to a significant increase in violent crime and United States deaths from dangerous drugs. Among those who illegally enter are those who seek to harm Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct. Continued illegal immigration presents a clear and present danger to the interests of the United States.”
Do you agree with Trump’s actions? Share your thought in the section below:
WASHINGTON – President Trump signed three executive orders Monday to begin his first full week in the White House, fulling campaign promises and sending signals to his base that he isn’t backing down on major pledges.
The executive orders:
- Freeze most hiring within the federal government. Exceptions will be made for the military.
- Defund organizations like International Planned Parenthood that promote or perform abortion in other countries. By restoring the so-called Mexico City Policy, Trump is following in the footsteps of Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. Presidents Clinton and Obama rescinded the policy.
- Withdraw the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the free-trade deal that had drawn the ire of both liberals and conservatives. (Listen to Off The Grid Radio’s in-depth show about TPP here.)
“We’ve been talking about this for a long time,” he said of the TPP order. “[It’s a] great thing for the American worker.”
Conservatives applauded his signing of the Mexico City Policy order.
“American taxpayer dollars have many good uses, but paying for elective abortions overseas is not and never has been one of them,” said Steven H. Aden, senior counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom. “The president has done the right and logical thing in reinstating a policy that never should have been rescinded.”
Do you agree with Trump’s signing of the orders? Share your thoughts in the section below:
Friday night’s show is done…news of the day, homesteading tips, frugality, home security, and brain science…understanding how your brain responds to danger…and how to make it better. SurvivalRing Radio…we’re gonna make it out alive….catch the podcast here… http://www.freedomizerradio.com/blog/2017/01/survivalring-radio-01202016/ As always, you are invited to be part of the show every week, either calling in, emailing […]
The post SurvivalRing Radio Podcast – Show 103 – Jan. 20th, 2017 appeared first on SurvivalRing.
If you’ve stopped prepping, it could be the biggest mistake of your life
In a wildly viral article from TheEconomicCollapseBlog.com, Michael Snyder reveals that prepping has collapsed among Trump supporters since the day of the election. “[I]nterest in prepping is probably the lowest that it has ever been in the history of the modern prepper movement. A couple of weeks ago, I wrote an article about how it was like ‘a nuclear bomb went off in the prepping community’, and nothing has changed since that time,” Snyder wrote.
Liberals and leftists, meanwhile, are suddenly stocking up like mad on food, guns and ammo. In an article titled, “Now it’s the liberals who are arming up,” McClatchyDC.com reports, “Gun shop owner Michael Cargill told NBC News gun classes at his Austin, Texas store are selling out. He’s noticed an increase in LGBTQ, African-American, Hispanic and Muslim customers. Store owners told NBC they’ve seen up to four times as many minority customers than is typical.”
Liberals, it seems, are scared about the possible rise in “hate crimes” under a Trump presidency. What they don’t realize, of course, is that nearly all the hate crimes are hate hoaxes committed by leftists. But that doesn’t stop them from buying guns, which is probably a smart thing to do no matter what the fear behind it.
Preppers are being lulled into complacency by the final blow off of a wildly overvalued stock market
My warning for all preppers — no matter what your political affiliation — is that if you’ve been lulled into a sense of complacency by the rising stock market and the Trump election victory, you could be making the biggest mistake of your life. Here’s why:
The Federal Reserve has already set the debt collapse apocalypse into motion by raising interest rates. The dominoes that will fall have already begun to tumble. The Fed promises two more interest rate hikes (at least) next year, giving the absurd excuse that the “Obama economy is overheating” from all its economic abundance and must therefore be slowed down using interest rate hikes.
This is all being done to create a false narrative that Obama is handing Trump a “robust economy.” Next, rising interest rates are coupled with a halting of quantitative easing and the acceleration of debt instrument failures in Europe. The result is that at some moment in President Trump’s first term, the global debt collapse is unleashed, unraveling the decades of debt creation and mindless bank deregulation we all witnessed under Clinton, Bush and Obama.
When that nightmare lands in Trump’s lap, the most likely outcome in the streets of America will be mass riots and social chaos at a level America has never before witnessed. Remember: This is all being set into motion to blame Trump and discredit the Republican party. I’ve released a mini-documentary explaining all this. You can read the full transcript at this link. Watch the video here:
What the mass riots are going to really look like
It’s difficult to give you the full picture of what these riots will really look like, but I can start by explaining that the food stamps will almost certainly stop working for an extended period of time. You can probably imagine what that will mean in America’s inner cities. No free food from the government? Burn it down! (That’s what the food stamp recipients will be shouting as the also chant, “Kill the pigs!”)
But let me back up for a second and share something that will help you understand the “financial freeze” that will immediately follow the global debt collapse. There’s an outstanding book by Jim Rickards called The Road to Ruin: The Global Elites’ Secret Plan for the Next Financial Crisis. I strongly recommend you read or listen to this book (it’s available on Audible.com, too).
As Rickards explains, the government’s solution to the next big banking crisis will be to “freeze” institutions and transactions, much like the “Ice-Nine” molecule in Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle fiction novel. As described in the book, Ice-Nine was a special kind of water molecule that was frozen solid at room temperature (its melting point was higher than room temperature). More importantly, Ice-Nine would convert all other water molecules it touched into Ice-Nine molecules. Thus, it could spread like a molecular pandemic, freezing ponds, streams, rivers and eventually, entire oceans.
The coming debt collapse will function much like Ice-Nine, Rickards explains. Because of the global interconnectedness of central banks, investment funds and retail banks, once the next large collapse strikes a single institution, it will spread to all the other connected institutions, “freezing” their transactions and assets in the same way that Ice-Nine would freeze rivers and lakes.
The newly frozen institutions will, in turn, spread the “financial freeze” to all the other institutions to which it is connected. Because no bank operates in isolation these days — everything is connected — the Ice-Nine financial freeze will quickly spread through the entire financial system, locking up the western world’s financial infrastructure on which everything in our society depends (including food stamps).
When ATMs stop working and food stamps collapse, the ignorant, unprepared, left-wing masses go berserk
This means no one will be able to get cash out of their ATMs. Food stamps won’t work. Credit card transactions will be halted at retail. Businesses won’t be able to write checks, wire money or deposit funds. Essentially, just imagine the worst case scenario in the world of banking and finance… that’s what’s coming.
The effects on the streets shouldn’t be difficult to visualize. As the following chart from Visual Capitalist shows, nearly 52% of Millennials have less than $1,000 in savings. This number is even worse among females, where nearly 57% have less than $1,000 in savings.
Across the nation, the numbers are similarly alarming. A 2013 article from CNN.com reported that “Roughly three-quarters of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, with little to no emergency savings, according to a survey released by Bankrate.com Monday.”
The article explains that 22% of Americans don’t even have enough cash to cover a $100 emergency expense, and 46% can’t cover an $800 expense.
Consider how this plays out when the Ice-Nine freeze kicks in across America’s financial institutions. Bluntly stated, approximately half the population will face starvation in just one week due to an inability to purchase food.
That’s when nearly every major U.S. city begins to burn. President Trump will have no choice but to declare martial law and roll out troops on the streets. The starving masses — mostly leftists who failed to prepare — will loot, steal, rob and murder anyone in sight if it gives them something to eat.
It is during this time that you will thank yourself for having some storable food on hand (like my certified organic survival food buckets). You’ll be thrilled that you picked up that extra Glock or POF-USA rifle. You’ll wish you had spent twice as much money on ammo, gold and silver (instead of the Starbucks, porn and lotto tickets you blew it on).
Don’t forget about the mindless zombies who demand your stuff, citing “equality”
As you ponder all this, don’t forget about the mindless liberal “zombies” who will wander out of the cities in a desperate effort to loot the suburbs and countryside for food and medicine supplies. I know, it’s insulting to call them “zombies.” But it’s actually not a bad description for a humanoid organism of low intelligence that’s incapable of planning. Those are the ones will will be the greatest threat to you and your safety (their total lack of preparedness turns into YOUR emergency when they show up at your door demanding you “share” your stuff).
The communist-leaning philosophy of the political left is also extremely dangerous during times of social chaos. Because they’ve been taught that “inequality” is an evil thing, they truly believe that your stuff belongs in their hands so that everybody is “equal.” Of course, they didn’t spend equal time or money to prepare, did they? So what they’re really doing is justifying their theft by calling it “equality.” (And that’s communism in a nutshell, come to think of it.)
If you live in a rural area, you may want to double check the range, in yards, to your front gate, and match it to your DOPE charts. If you don’t know why that’s important, you might not be qualified to live in the country during a zombie apocalypse. Make sure you have a PVS-14 at the ready, since the zombies come out at night, as Michael Jackson showed us in Thriller.
I’m also a proponent of micro-caching, meaning hiding your stuff in small containers that are distributed in different places around your home or yard. Don’t have all your stash in one place. It’s not a bad idea to have a spare handgun, ammo and some gold or silver coins buried in an air-tight, water-tight container that you can recover when needed. The MTM SAC Survivor Ammo Can is a good choice. You can pick these up for around $20.
Saving our forefathers ways starts with people like you and me actually relearning these skills and putting them to use to live better lives through good times and bad. Our answers on these lost skills comes straight from the source, from old forgotten classic books written by past generations, and from first hand witness accounts from the past few hundred years. Aside from a precious few who have gone out of their way to learn basic survival skills, most of us today would be utterly hopeless if we were plopped in the middle of a forest or jungle and suddenly forced to fend for ourselves using only the resources around us. To our ancient ancestors, we’d appear as helpless as babies. In short, our forefathers lived more simply than most people today are willing to live and that is why they survived with no grocery store, no cheap oil, no cars, no electricity, and no running water. Just like our forefathers used to do, The Lost Ways Book teaches you how you can survive in the worst-case scenario with the minimum resources available. It comes as a step-by-step guide accompanied by pictures and teaches you how to use basic ingredients to make super-food for your loved ones. Watch the video HERE .
Source : naturalnews.com
About the author : Read full bio here
The post If you’ve stopped prepping, it could be the biggest mistake of your life appeared first on .
President-elect Trump will be inaugurated today around noon Eastern, but the festivities already have begun. Watch it all live here:
Unsurprisingly, the left’s attacks on President-elect Trump haven’t stopped or even slowed down. In their never-ending search for justice, they have taken upon themselves the burden of finding fault with everything he does and even things he doesn’t do. In that regard, they are glad to assume the worst of our incoming president and accuse him of things, before he has a chance of doing them.
While most of those attacks mean nothing, there is one attack that is of interest and perhaps even concern. That is, the potential of there being a conflict of interest between Trump’s presidency and his many business holdings.
If nothing else, that’s keeping liberals busy, especially liberals in the media. They’re spending so much time slamming Trump for made-up news, that they aren’t able to do anything effective against him.
Perhaps if they keep that up throughout his presidency, the Republican Party can actually get something done. That would be a real change for Washington.
Trump the Businessman vs. Trump the President
Trump’s presidency is unique in this, in that he’s spent his life as a businessman, rather than spending it living a life of high-class welfare, otherwise known as politics.
It seems to be fairly common knowledge that politicians pass out political favors to their donors, most of whom are businessmen of one sort or another. Yet, while that is disgusting to the average American, it’s not considered a conflict of interest.
Apparently it’s not even considered that when it is taken to the extreme that Bill and Hillary Clinton have, using their own non-profit corporation and its overseas subsidiaries as a means of funneling money into their pockets in exchange for political favors. Even so, the same people who willingly turn a blind eye to the immoral activities of the Clintons, are hot on the trail of anything they can find, which they can use to claim a conflict of interest in Trump’s case.
I’ve got to say, with a worldwide corporation, his connections to foreign governments, as well as his connections to various banks, it would seem that there is ample opportunity for there to be such a conflict. Most disturbingly, there could be a conflict of interest between Trump’s relationship with a foreign government and his responsibilities as President of the United States.
The simple solution, of course, is for Trump to either divest himself of his business interests or to keep his hands off of them, perhaps by putting them in some sort of blind trust. He’s working on that, even as we speak; or rather, his lawyers are; but with so much money at stake, that’s not something that can be done overnight.
His family is even taking that a step further, with his daughter and son-in-law quitting the Trump corporation, so that they can work with him in the White House. His son-in-law is going to be working as some sort of an unspecified senior advisor, and his daughter will be working in the office of the First Family, which is the newly renamed Office of the First Lady.
It has to be costing Trump and his family to be making the moves they are. Trump has already stated that he isn’t going to accept his salary as president. But now it’s costing him more than that, just to try and eliminate any potential conflict between his presidency and his business. Yet, he is paying that price as well, in addition to the millions of dollars of his own money which he spent during the campaign.
The Sticky Ball of Wax
In a way, it’s surprising that this is even an issue. The Founding Fathers never intended for the United States to have a permanent ruling class, as we have today. Their vision, which has been passed on to us rather clearly, was for citizen legislators, who would leave their farms and businesses for the business of government, and return to them when their work in Washington was over.
I have to wonder what George Washington or John Adams would think of the stink being made of Trump’s business holdings. I think that rather than being concerned about Trump taking advantage of his position to enrich himself, they’d be glad that a citizen of such outstanding stature would be willing to leave his business interests, in order to serve the country, just as they had done.
None of the founding fathers gave up their plantations or businesses in order to serve in Washington. Perhaps that wasn’t as much of an issue back then, when the federal government was small and didn’t have its tentacles in every pie that it could find. There was no conflict, because the government didn’t meddle with farming or with business. Instead, when they served in office, they limited themselves to the powers that the Constitution gave them.
Yet, even with all that Trump and his family is doing to ensure that they keep everything above board, Democrats are salivating at the opportunity to hit him with a conflict of interest charge. Specifically, they’re planning on saying that he has enriched himself off of foreign governments.
In a strict legal sense, that’s true. Let’s say, if one foreign government employee dines or stays in a Trump owned hotel, he’s technically been enriched by a foreign government. For that matter, a case could be made that he has been enriched by a foreign government if a trail can be shown where an employee of a foreign government did business with a business that rents space from Trump’s corporation. After all, that business would be paying him rent with the money they received from that foreign government.
This merely shows what a sticky ball of wax Trump has fallen into. Current laws weren’t written with the idea of citizen legislators, simply because the country has moved from that into a permanent political class. While that isn’t in line with the intent of the Founding Fathers, it is the situation that we, and most especially Donald Trump, find ourselves in.
But then, we can say “so what” to those accusations. If Trump makes a profit, it will be because the things he is doing are good for the country as a whole, not just for himself. I’m sure that if he tries to use his office to further his business dealings, the Democrats won’t have to impeach him… the Republicans will do it for them. So, there will be plenty of eyes on Trump, to make sure that he stays above board.
Besides, how do the Democrats think they’re going to succeed in impeaching Donald Trump? There have been cries of “impeachment” for Obama for the last six years. Yet he made it to the end of his second term, without being impeached. Why? Because the Republicans never held enough seats in the Senate to ensure success. They would have had to have the assistance of about a dozen Democrats, and the Democrats are too good at marching in lockstep to allow the impeachment of “their” president.
Likewise, the Democrats would have to have the help of a similar number of Republicans. I seriously doubt that’s going to happen, even though Trump has plenty of enemies in Congress. Allowing an impeachment of Trump to go forward would be akin to conceding the election to Hillary, even after she lost.
Cooperating with the Democrats on this would be to say that they were right all along. It would also be an admission that their party is out of control and needs to be reigned in, reigned in by the Democrats.
While there are plenty of RINOs in Congress, I think that this is a line that even they won’t cross. Doing so in the current political climate would be political suicide. They could start looking for a house somewhere outside of Washington, because the voters would remove them as quick as they could.
Ultimately, it’s the voters, We the People, who hold power in this country. We proved that in November, voting in a man to be president, who the entire Washington establishment, including the media, opposed. For the first time in living memory, we rose up and took our place as the true owners of this country. As such, we sent a clear message to Washington, that we are fed up with their shenanigans.
Granted, they haven’t all gotten that message yet, but it was sent. The more astute of them have gotten the message, loud and clear. As for the rest, I believe that given enough time, they’ll get it too. If not, we’ll just have to make the message a little more direct and a little more personal.
After all, we’ve learned our lesson too. We know how to send that message.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
3 total views, 3 views today
[Total: 0 Average: 0/5]
For weeks now, the mainstream media has been in an uproar over Russia’s role in the U.S. election, alleging that President-elect Trump is far too friendly with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
So, is Trump too cozy with Russia – to the danger of the United States?
That’s the subject of this week’s episode of Off The Grid Radio, as we talk to Peter Vincent Pry, who is chief of staff of the EMP Commission and formerly served in the House Armed Services Committee and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Pry, an expert on the power grid and threats to the U.S., tells us:
- Why Russia is still a major threat to the United States
- What he believes Trump is really doing in befriending Russia.
- How the mainstream media has been ignoring the real threat that Russia poses.
- Why he believes the Russians may have the power to take out the U.S. power grid.
No matter which political candidate you supported in November, this is one show you don’t want to miss!
NEW YORK — A CNN reported tried asking President-elect Trump a question during Wednesday’s news conference. It didn’t go well.
Watch the exchange below:
NEW YORK — President-elect Trump is holding his first press conference since the election this morning. Watch it live, below:
The ending of Obama’s presidency and the beginning of Trump’s will be a dividing line for many things in our country and her politics.
For the last eight years, Obama has been pushing the country more and more liberal, more and more socialist, and more and more into supporting minorities and even terrorists. In many ways, he has pushed the country away from its roots.
With Trump at the helm, we can expect to see many changes, some of which will steer our country back towards its foundation as a Constitutional Republic, I hope.
As per usual, the Democrats have been attacking that, based upon their belief that the Constitution is a living document that should be rewritten to satisfy the whims of every generation, more specifically, the whims of whichever special interest groups the liberals are supporting in that generation.
Another area where we can expect to see massive changes is in foreign relations. Everyone knows that Obama’s foreign policy was disastrous, causing the rise of ISIS as well as Russia’s current preeminence on the world stage.
The World Needs a Strong America
The world needs a strong America as the guardian of freedom and self-determination, and we haven’t had that for the last eight years.
Not only has Obama’s administration failed to provide strong leadership on the world’s stage, they have weakened our military, as most Democrat administrations do. Without the deterrent of American military power, we end up with adventurers who want to reshape the world to their own likeness.
Obama’s parting shot at Israel is perhaps the most telling of all. Ever since the recreation of the nation of Israel, in 1948, the United States of America has supported and defended the small nation. While we have not actually done so militarily, we have defended them in the United Nations, where they have come under constant attack.
Yet now, rather than block a UN Security Council Resolution against Israel, as we’ve done many times in the past, the United States abstained, allowing the resolution to go through. Not only did we abstain, but there are reports that the Obama administration actually helped create the resolution in the first place.
In other words, as a nation we have turned out back on Israel, a long-time ally, as well as the only democracy and the only non-Muslim country in the Middle East.
It’s necessary to note here that this was a unilateral move by Obama’s administration, without the backing of Congress. In fact, Congress has already drafted a bill to condemn the resolution and to cut funding from the United Nations if it is not withdrawn, an action which I’d say is long overdue.
Trump is already showing something that the world expects to see from an American president. He is making no bones about who the big kid on the block is and flexing some diplomatic muscle in reminding the world of that. Don’t misunderstand me here, he’s not war mongering, but making the U.S. position clear, reminding the world that we’re still the big kid on the block.
This goes for both enemies and friends. During the campaign, Trump reminded the European Union of their responsibility in NATO, stating unequivocally that the U.S. government expects them to hold up their part of the bargain. This is probably a first, as Europe has depended heavily on U.S. protection, ever since World War II.
Some world leaders have already reached out to Trump, indicating a willingness to work with him. Most notably, Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin have extended the hand of friendship. However, not all of the world’s leaders are happy with his ascension to the office of President, as North Korea’s Supreme Leader, Kim Jong-un has made clear.
Democrats have complained extensively about Trump’s lack of foreign policy experience, especially during the campaign, when they were trying to use that as a talking point in favor of Hillary.
But the truth of the matter is that nobody has experience in diplomacy at that level, until they are thrust into it. Barack Obama surely didn’t, nor did his predecessor. Foreign policy at the presidential level is something that has to be learned on the job.
I think Trump has a slight advantage there over most politicians, simply because he has had business dealings all around the world. So, while he may not be used to negotiating a peace treaty with a foreign power or in using the military to support America’s stand on a particular issue, he is used to international business negotiations. That plays in his favor, I’d say.
So Putin has extended a hand of friendship towards America and Trump has responded in kind. That seems to be quite different than Putin’s attitude towards Hillary Clinton, who he said would cause a nuclear war. Better peace than that, I am sure.
Yet for some reason, liberals, who are supposed to be the ones who avoid war and want peace, are upset that Trump is willing to talk to Russia and even work together with them towards solving the world’s problems. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that what we’re supposed to do? Aren’t we, as the free world’s leaders, supposed to foster relationships with other countries and work together for the betterment of all mankind?
How is it that people who applauded Obama’s initiative to reach out to Cuba are demonizing Trump for his initiative to reach out to Russia? Cuba is still a communist country, while Russia seem to embrace democracy. Doesn’t that alone mean that we should form an alliance with them? No, we don’t have to agree with everything they do; nor do we have to trust them fully; but we should be willing to work with them towards making the world a better place.
Trump has made it clear that he’s willing to do that; and I, for one, applaud him for that.
I firmly believe that, as a country, we should be willing to befriend any other country who is willing to befriend us. But at the same time, I believe that we should keep one hand on our wallet and the other on our holster, because we don’t know the motives of those other countries.
One way that a new relationship with Russia could be proven is in the case of Syria. Russia has backed President Assad, even though there have been reports of them pressuring him to resign and turn the county over to others. But Assad and the U.S. haven’t seen eye to eye. How Russia handles that, especially as part of the larger job of dealing with ISIS, could be a very good indication of how our two countries can work together.
And ISIS is truly the big issue. Just as NAZI Germany was the big threat to the world, almost a century ago, extremist Muslim aggression is today. While ISIS isn’t the only group of Muslim extremists out there, they have grown to be the biggest. As such, they are the number one threat that the United States and Russia need to deal with. How we deal with them is something that has yet to be determined.
While I am not looking forward to the idea of sending Americans to fight another war in the Middle East, I think it might be necessary.
Unless the world is willing to accept the killing of large numbers of Muslim non-combatants as a cost of doing war, someone is going to have to send in troops to defeat ISIS. It can’t be done from the air. While there are various groups in the Middle East who are fighting against them, they aren’t enough. A larger military presence is needed.
The real question is, what part will the U.S. play in that? Will we be forced to put boots on the ground once again, or can we win this war without taking that step? Regardless of what anyone says, wars are not won by navies and air forces, they are won by the infantry. Everyone else just supports the soldier on the ground, with a rifle in his hand.
Trump supports our military, so I hope he’ll be working to strengthen it and quit using it as a sociological experiment. Even so, it will take years to fix the damage that has been done to it. Sending out troops off to war right now, in the condition that they are in, would mean a higher casualty rate than we’ve seen for quite some time.
While I expect that Mr. Trump would send them off if necessary, I also believe that he won’t send them unless he has to. I want to believe that he respects them too much to throw away their lives for nothing.
All in all, I think we can expect America to regain our place in world leadership. I think we can also expect some people to resent that, complain about that, and even fight against it.
But when push comes to shove, the U.S. economy is the strongest in the world and the U.S. military is as well. That’s a pair that’s hard to beat.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
2 total views, 2 views today
[Total: 0 Average: 0/5]
The Left has been running scared ever since Donald Trump won the presidential election. Thanks to the media narrative throughout the campaign, they are convinced that Trump is the atheist version of the devil incarnate, out to destroy their god (big government) and everything the progressive left has done to warp the principles of this country.
Liberals, by the droves, are joining the prepping movement: buying guns, stockpiling food and other essential supplies for an expected, coming disaster. Of course, they can’t define the disaster, other than to say it’s the incoming president, but to them, that’s a disaster.
On the other hand, many conservative preppers have put their prepping on hold, as if Trump could single-handedly stop a natural disaster or a terrorist attack on the grid.
A change in the president doesn’t make the world much safer than it was before. Oh, he might be able to enact some laws and initiatives which will eventually make the world a safer place, but only in some ways. Nothing that any president can do will stop a hurricane from hitting our shores. Nor is there much likelihood that any president could truly put a stop to terrorism, no matter how hard he or she tried.
The world is still a dangerous place and is likely to stay that way for as long as we live. Here are seven reasons you should continue prepping:
1. Natural disasters didn’t go away
The most likely disaster that any of us prepare for is a natural disaster. Statistically, we are all likely to live through one or more of these in our lifetime. While not as “sexy” as a nation-crippling EMP, natural disasters are what started the prepping movement. They are the foundation of all that we do.
No president can stop a natural disaster, at least, not with our current level of technology. We will continue to see natural disasters strike various parts of the country and see people lose their lives and property to them. About the only thing the government can do is improve their ability to react to those disasters — something that I won’t hold my breath waiting for.
2. The power grid is still at risk
The most vulnerable part of our country’s infrastructure is the electrical grid. In pretty much any natural disaster or even a large storm, you can count on the power going out. And it doesn’t even require a storm. Remember the 2003 Northeast blackout that took out power for 55 million people in the Northeast? It all started with a software bug at one utility in Ohio. Then there’s the danger of cyber threats. Gary Davis of the California-based Intel Security said representatives from other nations at the United Nations have told him that their biggest concern is that a “teenager could take down” their country’s power grid. Speaking of cyber threats …
Worldwide, the problems of cybersecurity have steadily increased. In his New Year’s address, President-elect Trump said that there is no such thing as true security over any electronic means of communication. He recommended putting things on paper and using good old-fashioned snail-mail or couriers, if you want security.
Any country’s power grid is susceptible to hacking. Both China and Russia have invested in this area of warfare, with China being the clear world leader. All it would take is a decision in Beijing, and the lights would go out nationwide in the U.S.
Netflix, Twitter and Amazon all went down in 2016 due to hacker attacks. LogRhythm, which helps companies guard against cyber threats, is predicting the entire “internet will be shut down for up to 24 hours” in 2017 due to cyberattacks.
4. A Carrington Event
Our sun is extremely active, with massive solar storms and sunspots appearing and disappearing regularly. We nearly were hit in the 2014, when an extreme solar storm sent electromagnet waves, known as a coronal mass ejection, in our direction, narrowly missing the Earth. Had those waves gone out at a few degrees in different direction, they would have hit us squarely, shutting down not only our grid but every electrical grid in the hemisphere.
The largest solar storm in modern history, knows as the Carrington Event, took place 1859. Since there was no grid and virtually no electronic equipment to be damaged, the storm had little effect other than to damage some telegraph machines. But if it such a thing happens again today, it will be devastating.
5. EMP attack
Then there’s the risk of an enemy attacking us by EMP. As best I know, neither Iran nor North Korea are running scared of Trump. Both of those countries are hard at work on both their nuclear programs and their missile programs. The only question is whether Iran would attack Israel or the United States first.
Similar to a Carrington-type event, a properly run EMP attack would shut down the grid for the foreseeable future, with devastating results. According to a report to Congress by the EMP Commission, as much as 90 percent of the population would die in the first year following such an attack.
6. The threat of terrorism
While Trump says he takes the threat of extremist Muslim terrorism seriously, it will take time for any of his initiatives to make a dent in terrorism, let alone bring it to a stop. The cancer of terrorism is loose in the world — and it’s not going to go away quickly. As the United States and countries throughout Europe and the Middle East have discovered, it is difficult to prevent lone wolf terrorists.
7. A possible economic collapse
There have been rumors of a pending economic collapse for years, ever since the national debt spiraled out of control. Yet the collapse hasn’t yet happened. But the conditions which create the concern of a collapse have not gone away.
The globalists control much of the world’s monetary supply, giving them a huge amount of leverage to control world events. It is they, more than any other group, who create economic rises and falls and can even orchestrate a financial collapse. If they decide a financial collapse is in their best interest — not the best interest of the USA, mind you — they will make it happen.
Do you agree or disagree? Share your thoughts in the section below:
We’ve seen many troubling trends over the last eight years, as President Obama has worked to bring about his “fundamental change of America.” Most of those have had to do with remaking our country more liberal and more dependent on the central government, preparing for the eventual transition to complete socialism.
But that’s not the only area where he’s sought to change our country. Perhaps one of the most dangerous and most long-lasting areas of change that he’s fostered has been in creating division between different groups of people.
I hope that many of Obama’s initiatives will gradually disappear over the next year, washed away by Trump reversing Obama’s executive orders or Congress passing laws to undo the changes that Obama’s administration forced upon the American people.
So, sadly for Obama, much of his legacy is going to follow him right out the door.
Some Things Can’t Be Undone
There are things which won’t go away, no matter how much we wish they would. It will take a lot of work on Congress’ part to eliminate all the massive regulations that Obama has promulgated.
While some can just be eliminated by a short bill going through Congress, others will require more detailed work, as parts will need to either be left in place or replaced by something else.
As Albert Einstein said, “Problems cannot be solved with the same level of thinking that created them.” I think we can safely add that they can’t be solved with the same level of work either. Nor can they be solved in the same amount of time.
Changes to society, such as the growth of the entitlement mentality aren’t easily changed and when they are, it is through the work of years, not simply by passing a bill or signing an executive order. Granted, the entitlement mentality has been growing over years as well.
I remember running a food bank 30 years ago and seeing the attitudes of some of the people, even back then. But what has changed is the way that the entitlement mentality has permeated society, especially the younger generation. Getting rid of that will be no easy task.
But the biggest part of Obama’s legacy will end up being the division that he’s caused in our society. He has single-handedly erased over 60 years of progress in racial relations, taking us back to the 1950’s. The problem now isn’t so much the stain that he created, but the fact that he’s leaving it behind.
Unity is always much harder to create than divisiveness and we have much more divisiveness now than we need. But rather than talking about bringing unity to the country, Obama is spending his last days helping to form more divisiveness. Nor do his followers want to seek unity.
Black Lives Matter and the New Black Panthers have already said that there’s no way they’re going to meet with President Elect Trump. They’d rather spend their time looking for new places to protest and new things to destroy.
They’re blaming their refusal on Trump, of course, citing his “racism” without any other reason than the left stream news media calling him that. But then, he’s a conservative white man, so according to the left’s definition, that automatically makes him racist, no matter what he does.
Video first seen on Tipping Point With Liz Wheeler on OAN.
But that sort of attitude doesn’t solve anything. If it does anything, it helps ensure that racial division continues and problems aren’t solved.
Contrary to the popular opinion that Trump’s election to the presidency is some sort of a “whitelash,” most conservatives think little about race. They deal with people as individuals, not as members of a specific race. About the only time they even mention race is to describe someone, about like mentioning their hair color.
That’s not to say there is no racism in this country, because there is. There are people on all parts of the political spectrum who still haven’t gotten the word that we’re all part of the Human Race. They hate people with different colored skin, just for their skin color, just like some black people hate white people for theirs.
But, those people are in the minority. While they still exist, there are not enough of them to make a major impact on our society. The media has blow the few that do exist out of proportion, turning them into the “Boogeyman” for colored people and other minorities. They’ve labeled the incoming president with this label too, causing people to turn against him, without even giving him a chance.
So Where Is This Taking Us?
Can we get back to a more unified front or is the United States destined to remain divided? That answer really doesn’t lie with you and I; nor does it even lie with the incoming president.
You see, there are those who want division in our society. It’s really an old military strategy; divide and conquer. They are dividing us so that they can conquer each little portion of American society, one at a time.
That also explains why there is so much emphasis to vilify white conservative males. In doing so, they are attacking what has historically been the strongest part of our society; the one that brings prosperity and change to our culture.
Manhood is under attack from all sides, most especially from Hollywood. It is no longer “chic” to be a man or even be masculine. In fact, men are told by a million subtle messages that they are supposed to be useless wimps. Then, liberals are working overtime to show how those useless wimps are the root of every problem in society.
Make no mistake about it; this is an all-out attack from the left. They want to destroy white men, so that there is nobody left with the strength and authority to protect society. Then they can easily pick off the rest of the groups we have in our mixed society. Ultimately, they can destroy every group, turning them into nothing more than leeches, dependent upon the nanny state and the central government for everything they need.
But it’s all based upon keeping society in division. If they can’t do that, they can’t gain the control they want. It is quite literally the key to their remaking the world into their image. Obama wasn’t causing division just to create division, but rather was doing so as part of a larger plan.
As long as there are people who want to control the world, or change it over to their own image of the world, there will be reason for them to keep us, the people of the United States of America divided.
Not everyone sees this or even wants to see it. Many don’t have a large enough vision to even try to see it. They are wrapped up in their own lives and their own concerns, which is enough for them. But those concerns are often created by others, such as the lamestream media, and can work to help further the division. But it keeps them so occupied that they can’t be part of the solution.
The only way we’re going to take a step back from divisiveness and work our way back to unity is if we, the common people, stop listening to the voices calling for division. But that takes people on both sides of the issue to stop. It takes two sides to make peace, but only one side to make a war.
Donald Trump has said that he wants to be a president for all Americans. I believe him for now. He got to be president without taking money from big donors who would try to get something in return. What he didn’t finance himself in his campaign, came from common people, giving small gifts.
That’s a unique opportunity, as it is probably the only time in our lifetime that we’ll see a president in office, who isn’t beholden to big money. He’s shown that he’s willing to listen to any side of an issue and willing to work together with people who are not of his party. That’s something rare in today’s political climate.
So, as far as he’s concerned, there is hope. Now what we need is enough others to hop on board and come into agreement with working for the good of the country, rather than just the good of their own special interest group.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
2 total views, 2 views today
[Total: 0 Average: 0/5]
Today, I read a Fox News article entitled, “Iranian dissidents seeking meeting with Trump.” See: (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/23/iranian-dissidents-seeking-meeting-with-trump.html). According to the article, Iranian dissidents have penned a letter to Trump urging him
For the last 41 days, the nation has collectively held its breath, waiting for the vote of the Electoral College.
During that time, we’ve heard a constant string of excuses from the Democrat left, as to why Donald Trump should be denied the presidency, even though it was clear on November 8th that he had won the election.
Technically, the results of the Electoral College‘s vote won’t be announced until January 6th, when Congress meets in a joint session to count them.
But the results are already in and unofficially we now know that Donald Trump has officially won the election.
This presidential election has been the most controversial election ever, quite possibly in the entire history of the United States. From a field of 19 potential candidates, the Republican constituency picked a total outsider, one who had been a Democrat most of his life.
This outsider not only steamrolled his opponents in the Republican Party, but he did a fair job of steamrolling Hillary Clinton as well. Part of that can be blamed directly on the pundits, who universally held that Clinton was going to win.
In every poll and in every political report, she was far in the lead, guaranteed a chance to sit behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office.
Yet the mainstream media, like most other Americans, was living and working in an echo chamber. Much of their prognostication was based upon what they were hearing from other liberal reporters, pundits, poll takers and politicians. They were so convinced that they represented the majority opinion in the United States, that they failed to even look at what the people of the United States were saying; most especially, they failed to look at what conservative Americans were saying.
The silent majority has been heard from, and they picked the most unlikely of candidates, a billionaire business mogul from Manhattan.
I was never a Trump fan, but now he is my president. Therefore, I will stand and salute him, supporting him in the execution of his duties. My desire, as that of many other Americans, is that he do what is best for all Americans, unlike the president he is replacing.
If American is going to be great again, it’s time to do away with partisan politics, and go back to trying to find solutions that work for everyone. I believe that’s what Trump is trying to do.
But I can already hear the collective cry of “FOUL!” erupting across the nation. Perhaps it is so clear, simply because we’ve been hearing it for over a month now. Democrats have used every excuse in the book to explain away Trump’s win and seek out a way to overthrow the election.
Amongst the various tricks they’ve tried, has been an ongoing effort to pressure electors to become “faithless” and vote contrary to their state’s election results. While electors in many states can do this, and even have done so in the past, the people that the parties select as their electors are faithful to the party, so this effort was doomed from the beginning.
This campaign has been with constant phone calls, letters and Facebook posts to the electors. They all had the same goal, to keep Trump from getting the 270 votes he needed.
The truly crazy thing about all that effort was that even if they had succeeded in reducing Trump’s electoral vote to below the 270 vote threshold, their candidate still wouldn’t have won.
Apparently they thought that the electors would automatically vote for Clinton, raising her total vote count high enough to win. But these were Republican operatives they were calling; they weren’t likely to vote for a Democrat candidate, no matter who it was.
That’s not to say that there weren’t any faithless electors. There were. Two Republican electors in Texas chose to vote for other candidates. They didn’t vote for Clinton, but they didn’t vote for Trump either. In the end, they were insignificant. Donald Trump needed 270 electoral college votes to secure the presidency and he far outdistanced that with a total of 304 votes.
There were apparently some Democrat electors who were faithless to Hillary Clinton as well, voting for Bernie Sanders instead of her. As with the Republicans who voted against Trump, their vote was more in the nature of a protest than anything else. It didn’t change a thing, except for them personally.
The Electoral College has done what it was intended to do, once again. It has assured that the will of the people in the majority of the states was carried out. It stopped the tyranny of the majority and ensured that the citizens of all 50 states received equal representation in the presidential election.
Please note that this is clearly different than the will of the majority of the people. If all that mattered was the popular vote, then the most populous states in the Union would decide every election. We would have a one-party dictatorship, even if the actual figurehead of that dictatorship had to change every eight years.
As we saw in Hillary’s campaign, if she had won, it would have been a continuation of Obama’s policies, effectively a third term for Obama.
Yet Democrats everywhere have been crying about the popular vote, claiming that it is the only fair method of voting for a president, giving one vote per person. That complaint has been largely fueled by the fiction that Hillary won the popular election. I say it’s a fiction, because there have been three million votes discovered so far, which were cast by illegal aliens.
Of course, to the Democrats, those illegal aliens aren’t illegal and aren’t aliens. They have bought into the one world mentality, wanting to tear down our borders and allow anyone in. Part of that is allowing anyone to vote, since in their minds, there is no such thing as citizenship.
But traditionally citizenship has been defined as the right of voice and the right to vote in democratic countries. If you travel outside the United States, you have no legal standing in front of the government of whatever country you visit. You have no right to vote. You don’t even have the right to salute their flag. You are a visitor, denied the rights of citizens. That’s why citizenship is important.
Yet the Democrats would do away with that; partially to further the one-world government and partially to pad their own constituency. Democrats hope that immigrants of all types will vote Democrat, because it is the Democrat party who promises to give them freebies. It isn’t until those people become self-sufficient and are paying taxes that some of them shift over to the Republican Party.
So, if you take the votes by illegal aliens out of the popular vote count, Trump wins the popular election. Then if you take the votes cast by voter fraud out, he wins it by an even bigger margin. But that doesn’t matter. He ran his campaign to win the Electoral Vote and he did. It’s time for the complaining to end.
Sadly, that doesn’t mean that it will, but we can expect the complaints to continue. The media will be after him. Democrat politicians will be after him.
I suppose liberals on the street will be after him as well. We can expect demonstrations, riots and all the other dirty tricks that liberals use to display their displeasure.
In other words, the election of Donald Trump has not made the United States any safer than it was before. Groups like Black Lives Matter and the New Black Panthers have become used to flexing their muscles. They will continue, quite possibly joined by other liberal “organizations” who want to make their displeasure known as well.
It must be hard being part of the pampered elite. Yet those Hollywood actors, sports celebrities and college snowflakes are all going to have to learn something new. They’re going to have to learn that the world really doesn’t care about their precious opinion, once you get out of that liberal echo chamber.
Oh, they won’t quit. You can be sure of that. We will hear their complaints as we watch them work against the best interests of the country. They will continue to try to impose their will upon us. But at least for the moment, they’ve lost the clout to make that will stick.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
2 total views, 2 views today
[Total: 0 Average: 0/5]
A Christmas Read. This is a long one take your time, read it over the Christmas break, then please distribute the information. Its Good News and everyone deserves to hear it.
When our politicians can knowingly make a decision on a lie to push the ideological view of their financial masters banning the Adler then none of our property is safe. Our political leaders have shown that they can concoct fear, lies and misinformation and present it as an acceptable method of creating legislation. I suspect that most of them realise that the Adler out come – will be the catalyst that removes them from government, but they are so dependent on party donations from the international trust funds, that they will commit personal political suicide to save their status quo party.
We have had it burnt into our minds that if it’s lever-action shotgun today, it will be something else tomorrow, semi-automatic pistols, pump-action rifles, lever-action shotguns and lever-action rifles are all on their list and they won’t be happy until they take our pea shooters.
On the other side of this long war, we know well that we have never been better placed to fight this battle, if we are going to win this battle now is the time to do it. We all know that any recommendations that COAG make have to be forced through the State parliaments. Nothing that happens in COAG is final. Nothing is set in stone. It is only a committee with no legislative power. Soon, this will be a much broader struggle, but given the fracturing of state politics, we have a much better chance of preventing ratification. We have up and coming elections in Western Australia, NSW and Queensland, we have two members of the Katter party willing to cross the floor in Queensland and vote against its introduction. To bulldoze this legislation through the Queensland house Labour would have to go to a general election, and an election at this time would NOT give either Labour, or Lib/Nats a majority. At the next election, minor parties will have the balance of power in Queensland, so we must work and vote to ensure that pro firearm rights candidates are elected to parliament. If this legislation is blocked in one state, the federal governments uniformity is fractured and ultimately lost. Whatever happens, the media will hype this re-categorisation as a done deal and besmirch any candidate who speaks out against it. These people must have our support and our encouragement to cross the floor when the time comes. Start preparing a list of your state candidates in categories:
“Pro Gun” – will vote against re-categorisation
“Persuadable” – can be persuaded to cross the floor with the Pro members
“Lost Cause” – Greens and others who will never change their minds.
So we have an up and coming battle, this is the letter I sent (and I hope they received thousands more like it) last week to local MPs and Police Ministers.
I am one of the two million (Crimtrac Annual Report 2015/16) Licenced firearm owners, who have conscientiously jumped through all the hoops and impositions, paid application fees, Permit to Acquire fees, and 20 or so renewal fees(which are more like un just fines) all created to punish us, for enjoying our sport and hobby. All of us are worn ragged with corrupt politicians incessantly crucifying the innocent pillars of the community, to appease the internationally financed socialist Gun Control, lusus naturae’s who could have their annual meeting in a telephone box.
(The voters are waking up, the Orange NSW by Election can be repeated successfully in every State in Australia.)
These international financiers who donate so well to mainstream political parties, make huge donations to academics in Gun Control, they are also huge shareholders in mainstream media and give generously to organisations that prop up the billion dollar budget to the ABC, have replaced the constitutional representation with corrupted dollars. If this information is a conspiracy theory, and not just information re-published by Jennifer Oriel Australian, 22nd August 2016 newspaper from Wiki leaks,
Thirty five years ago, when I began to write about the international trust fund intervention in our firearm legislation I was castigated by mainstream media and even opposition Australian shooting magazines poo poohed the facts that I presented in Lock, Stock and Barrel. The opposition shooting magazines and the general firearm trade changed its tune, when John Howard adopted the 23 points of gun control issued by the United Nations Civilian Disarmament Conference in Cairo, Egypt and placed Daryl Smeaton, (who had attended that Conference) as Director, Office of Law Enforcement Coordination, Commonwealth Attorney -General’s Department to supervise the Un informed Gun Steal Back which took the people’s property and paid some of them back with their own money.
When the United Nations policies were forced on Australia, most people instrumental in resisting the activities of the Gun Control Australia and Daryl Smeaton looked at the common factor in this movement intent on destroying all individual liberties. That common factor was the international funding, that went to the three heads of the hydra, being
1. Gun Control Australia, Academics,
2. Main Political Party Campaign donations, and
3. Ownership of mainstream Media outlets. The connecting factor was mainly the journalist academics who were involved in all three heads, but finance ultimately came from one source in the body of the monster.
Gun Control Bought and Paid For.
If you have had to suffer under the continued, ever increasing, creeping impositions of firearm legislation a large part of that served up to you has been due to the orchestrations of Rebecca Peters who served as Director of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) from 2002 to 2010. She was still listed on the IANSA board of directors as of April 2012.
Prior to her work with IANSA, Rebecca Peters was also paid by the Open Society Institute, a private foundation funded by George Soros. As chair of the (Australian) National Coalition for Gun Control at the time of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, Rebecca Peters played a key role in the impositions and suppression of individual liberty in Australia.
The following was taken from ” Andy’s RANT published on 1 May, 2011. I can vouch for much of this information..
The National Coalition for Gun Control (NCGC) was based in Sydney, but had an important branch in Hobart, Tasmania, headed up there by lawyer Roland Browne, while in Melbourne a “sister” organisation, the Coalition for Gun Control (CGC) was run by John Bruce Crook. Prior to 1996, Crook was involved in a defamation action in Melbourne, and in that trial it was reported that none other than Daryl Smeaton presented the Court with a supportive character reference for Crook.
It was in Sydney where Rebecca Peters rose to prominence, arriving in 1981. While Peters says “she decided” to settle Down Under and become an “Australian citizen. We must remember those famous words, “In politics nothing happens by chance. If it happens, it was meant to happen that way”.
Rebecca Peters grew up as a teenager in Costa Rica, the second of six children in an American family. As her father worked for the American Government there, ‘half jokingly,’ she suggested in an interview in Australia he “probably worked for the CIA.” In Sydney, Peters enrolled in a university in the faculty of Engineering (possibly Macquarie), being just one of only two females in the course, but in 1983 she dropped out. For a time Rebecca took a job as a researcher and reporter with ABC Radio (known locally as the “Gay-BC”), and worked with Andrew Olle. In 1991 with a not-so-subtle agenda, Peters returned to university, enrolled as a law student gaining her law degree, at the end of which, she produced a thesis on ‘tighter gun control’. This was the “centrepiece” of an enormous folio of material she collected and wrote for her campaign to remove loop-holes in existing gun laws in Australia. She promoted herself as a ‘multilingual middle-class lawyer’ who was fanatical about “gun control”.
By ’91 Peters was running the NCGC, rising fast to the position of “chair”, almost as quickly as the death rate climbed with each incident of that new phenomenon to Australasia, the gun massacre. With the shooting massacres she produced a ‘win-win sound-bite’ for the minds and meek support of the gullible Mums and Dads of Australia. The Dunblane massacre occurred on 13 March ’96 and Port Arthur followed 46 days later. Then all the pieces fell into place for Federal Attorney General, Daryl Williams, to implement the gun-ban laws prepared and ready from Daryl Smeatons’ trip to Cairo.
However, in relation to both massacres it should be remembered it was Rebecca Peters’ colleague, Roland Browne, now chair of NCGC, who predicted a shooting massacre in Tasmania in November of 1995, and quite remarkably again made a repeated prediction on the “A Current Affair” TV show, straight after Scotland’s Dunblane Massacre. But then anti-gun proponents in Australia seem to have this remarkable psychic skill. For in Tasmania’s capitol city Hobart after a Special Premier’s Conference in relation to Gun Control held in December of 1987, NSW’s then Premier, Barry “No-gunsworth” Unsworth stated bluntly: “There will never be uniform gun laws in Australia until we see a massacre in Tasmania.”
What should be engraved in everyone’s minds is that while Rebecca Peters was “Down-Under”, 6 shooting massacres occurred in Australia and New Zealand resulting in 76 deaths and 53 wounded people. In “gun control” here, Peters was no doubt – numro uno supremo. Curiously though since Peters left, the shooting massacres, of the same style, lone gunman, have ceased! And private firearm ownership and number of firearms have doubled. Since Peters has returned to the USA, they have been subjected to the lone gunmen syndrome ever since.
It was announced in 1997 that Peters was awarded (if you believe their own news releases – or if logic is your guide, rewarded may be the more appropriate word) – with a Senior Fellowship in March 1997 by the Soros Foundation’s Open Institute funded Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Merryland. So the good citizens there should perhaps keep her Australasian achievements in mind.
In making application for her fellowship, Rebecca Peters had to ‘submit a budget’ for her envisioned work … forgive me from chuckling. Can you imagine her difficult task here? Think of a big digit add lots of zeros and voila … a budget!
You may wish to drop a line to the Doctor so here is her working address: The Center on Crime, Community and Culture, 400 West 59th Street, New York, NY10019. Or perhaps you may wish to forward a congratulatory e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org . Rebecca’s doctorate included a stipend incidentally of US$32,500 p.a., plus various expenses covered in her ‘budgeted’ expenses, the lot bankrolled by the tax-exempt Soros Foundation.
It should come as no surprise to learn that John Hopkins in 1986, received funding of a reported $317m American “defence dollars”! What level of “Arms and Military” funding does John Hopkins receive today that in any way assists the works of Dr Peters and her ‘arms-grabbing’ cadre?”
To put this together, who is George Soros, (just check him out on google)http://concit.org/soros-and-his-australian-minions/
Here is a short synopsis that shows the links between the body of the hydra beast and its three heads. George Soros was born in Hungary. His family were non practising Jews and changed their name to assimilate into the gentile population. When Hitler’s henchman, Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary to oversee the extermination of the Jews, George Soros ended up working with a man whose job it was to confiscate property from the Jewish population. Seventy percent of Hungary’s half a million Jews were killed that year.
“Sixty Minutes”, Steve Kroft interviewed Soros about that time, years later:
In 1956 Soros moved to New York City where he would work on Wall Street specialising in hedge funds and currency speculations.
In 1992 Soros made his first billion by breaking the Bank of England shorting the English Pound.
In 1994 Soros went onto to almost collapsed the Russian economy by similar means.
In 1997 Soros almost destroyed the economies of Thailand and Malaysia. Soros was part of the full court that dismantled Yugoslavia in a coup, caused trouble in Georgia, Ukraine and Burma (Myanmar). France also fined him $2.9 million for felony insider trading in France. Hungary fined him $2.2 million for illegal market manipulation after putting his own home country’s economy into a tail spin by driving down the share price of its largest bank.
These actions earned Soros the title of “Financial Terrorist” and was described by various commentators and leaders as a “planetary parasite”, “a kind of “Dracula that sucks the blood from nations of people”.
His eyes are now on America, with a wealth far more vast than the Rothschild’s empire. He told the Australian newspaper “America is the centre of the globalised financial markets was sucking up the world savings, this is now over…the time has come for a “very serious adjustment in America’s consumption habits, he implied he was the one with the power to bring this about.”
On the economic front he is shorting the dollar in global currency markets, trying to force a devaluation. At the same time Soros is orchestrating a nationwide movement to encourage mass migration into the United States and to mandate the provision of free social services to illegal immigrants in order to bankrupt the nation.
(On Aug 7, 2015 Obama, who is financially backed by Soros, reissued his pledge to the press that he wanted to legalise all illegals.)
When Soros arrived in the UK he attended the London School of Economics a Fabian establishment where he met his mentor, philosopher Karl Popper. (Fabians are socialists who support the notion of a One World Government and key supporters of the United Nations.)
The Open Society Foundations, created by George Soros, was inspired in name and purpose by Popper’s book—”Open Society and its Enemies”.
To this end Soros’ “Open Societies Foundation” pick and choose organisations to support and activists to get behind, according to local advisors that will further their cause. Universal acceptance of the United Nations has given Soros the right to meddle in any country if the meddling promotes human rights, democracy and fundamental freedoms. Soros is using the Human Rights Charter of the United Nations to direct support from his Open Societies Foundation.
Soros is shaping the governments and societies of the world to the tune of $18 billion dollars a year—influencing government policy, education, media, public health, and human and women’s rights, as well as social, legal and economic engineering according to his personal and Foundation’s agenda.
President Obama—a Liberal Democrat, recently promised $10 billion dollars to Brazil in order to give them a leg up in expanding their off-shore oil fields. This came after his political financial backer George Soros invested heavily in Brazilian Oil (Petrobras). The Petrobras loan was a windfall for Soros and Brazil which could produce $1.7 trillion in revenues.
Soros virtually owns the Liberal Democratic Party of America and is currently backed the billions for Hilary Clinton’s campaign.
In August of 2016 Wikileaks released a series of emails between Soros and Hillary Clinton on the Albania situation which clearly show Soro’s recommendation being adopted by Hillary Clinton even to the person recommended as mediator.
Soros intervenes in elections both in the US, and Australia. In the US he spent $42 million at the High Court of America to ensure that “non political” groups were able to give political donations and agitate for change but not have their donations scrutinised by the various electoral commissions.
In 2013 Soros bought into Australia’s Channel 9 network—Billionaire investor George Soros is understood to have bought $6 million to $8 million of shares in Nine Entertainment ahead of the company’s $1.9 billion IPO.
These groups have received enormous support from Soros because these are the change agents for elections, in both Australia and the US that can operate outside of Governmental control.
Australian GetUp was founded by David Madden and Jeremy Heimans, the same week Liberals under Howard won power in the Senate in 2005. These two founders both from America were also involved with another Soros-financed left-wing activist group, MoveOn.org.
Public records reveal that between January 2003 and December 2004, Soros contributed $2,500,000 to MoveOn.org.
GetUp! (who is a major agitator for their ABC). Sources have also suggested that Soros’ money is being funnelled into the coffers of militant groups such as Refugee Action Coalition (RAC), Socialist Alternative, ANTIFA and other radical Left-wing cadres. Following the lead of the Australian Greens, the left wing organisation, ‘GetUp!’ has launched a campaign to fund political action in electorates where recent criticism of the ABC is likely to have an impact.This action by GetUp!, complementing the Greens’ ‘Hands off our Aunty’ campaign, Landscape is more evidence that the ABC is not only biased, but as a media organisation, has become hopelessly, and perhaps irredeemably politicised. The ABC is supposed to be an independent and impartial media service for all Australians, but it is becoming clearer and clearer that this is not the case.
What is becoming crystal clear is that the ABC is only serving one constituency in Australia, and that is the ‘progressive’ Left. Not only is the ABC only serving the left, the desperate campaigns launched by the Greens and GetUp! reveal that the ABC acts as an important mouthpiece and advocate for their policy agenda. Without the ABC’s billion dollar plus budget provided by tax payers, and vast resources to disseminate the so called ‘progressive’ agenda, the left would have to rely on its own resources and funds to promote its political platform. Of course, this is why the Greens and GetUp! have been so quick to criticise calls for the ABC to be accountable to its charter, to all Australians and tax payers, and have launched their campaigns defending the ABC and its bias.
Madden and Heimans are also co-founders of the global activist group, Avaaz.org, an organization that the Canadian Minister John Baird in 2008 labelled as “shadowy foreign organization tied to billionaire activist George Soros.”
The largest donor to Get Up in Australia in 2010 with a donation of $1.1 million is the CFMEU, a coalition of 5 former communist unions.
Another AVAAZ linked cause to GetUp, namely “Climate Alarmism” in Australia, received an alleged $15 million donation from Soros.
Shorten on Soros Payroll?
On Get Up’s original board, members included Australian Workers Union secretary Bill Shorten, Australian Fabian Society Nation Secretary Evan Thornley, Green activist Cate Faehrmann, and left-wing trade union researcher and “community organiser” Amanda Tattersall.
(Little know fact…GetUp are the first two words from the first Communist Anthem “The Internationale” by Pier de Geyter Lille. “GetUp Not Arise”) (It depends on the translation)
In 2005 they campaigned AGAINST anti terrorism legislation and against Racism of the Cronulla riots.
In 2006 They campaigned AGAINST changes to the migration laws and Iraq war, supported terrorist David Hicks.
In 2007 They campaigned AGAINST Northern Territory National Emergency Response, but campaigned for repeal of laws that stopped electoral fraud (closing rolls the same day an election is announced—100,000 fake voters could then be counted in the election.)
In 2009 They campaigned AGAINST mandatory detention, but for same sex equality, renewable energy, paid parental leave.
In 2011 Against mining, coal seam gas…in order to fund a climate change Disaster fund in line with UN policies, and for marriage equality. (For homosexuals)
On the surface you could be forgiven for thinking it is simply a front for the Labor Party and the Greens. While it did criticise Labor’s Fuel Watch—it has NEVER criticised the Greens.
Get Up is an instrument of mass manipulation …not a mass movement. It was conceived in league with the unions. In 2007 and 2010 elections GET Up fielded 7,000 volunteer campaigners complete with T-shirts and how to vote cards. In 2010 they ran 700 television ads and fielded 3,000 booth workers. Every member on their board has been associated with either ALP, Fabians, trade unions or extreme environmentalism. They raise millions of dollars each year but have no actual accountability to their members.
Get Ups role in our elections is excessive yet, because its not a registered political party it does not come under the charge of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC). (Abetz, Minister for State, in 2005 asked to have Get Up investigated by the AEC and the ACCC but that request was turned down due to “insufficient grounds”.)
EMILY’s List is another Soros funded Fabian organisations. It functions with the Democratic Party in the US and the Labor Party in Australia.
EMILY stands for “Early Money Is Like Yeast”—because it rises like dough.
The stated aim of Emily’s List is to raise money to help progressive, (PRO ABORTION), women get elected. The reason we can say pro-abortion is a mandate because anyone standing against abortion, as one Emily List candidate found out, had their $100,000 support subsidy immediately withdrawn. That is why in Victoria because of Ms Gillard’s intervention we have late term abortion right through 9 months of pregnancy. Gillard herself a socialist, Fabian and EMILY List member.
This groups funds women into Parliament. They negotiate seats (with Labor in Australia) to ensure that a woman and not necessarily the best person, gets the seat in at least 40% of the time. EMILY’s List candidates also support “equality” — the promotion and preferential hiring of women and “diversity”— homosexual rights. They claim to have have helped 115 women into State and Federal politics in Australia.
EMILY’s List is now the second most powerful lobbying and fundraising task force in the United States. It was founded in 2007 by Ellen Malcolm (Fabian) after Soros won his court case to stop the limit that political candidates could receive from individuals to EXCLUDE donations from organisations…hence Getup, Move On AND EMILY’s List.
Fabians are the new communists—supporters of One World Government, Agenda 21 and the United Nations. They will feature in the next Soros post along with the Club of Rome and the influence they have had in destabilising Australia while creating the United Nations and One World Government.
Suffice to say that Soros after his introduction through the London School of Economics supports the UN and backs the establishment of a One World Government. Obama—Soros’ current Liberal Democratic puppet—last month also signalled that he wanted the top job in the UN at the end of his Presidency. Just keep watching that space.
As for Australia, Greens Leader Sarah Hanson Young last month flew to Switzerland to accept her World Economic Forum, Young Global Leader for 2016. The Chairman of the World Economic Forum is none other than George Soros. So we can safely assume the Greens now have the full support of Soro’s tentacles over here.
What Soros wants, simply put, is a New World Order outside of the grips of the US congress where he can exert his control and is prepared to dismantle America to do it. He also uses the values of the UN Human Rights Charter and and his enormous wealth to facilitate his Open Society utopia. The problem for us in the West that as a Fabian and a Socialist, Soros is a one world government man and therefore against any movement that preserves a Nation’s Sovereignty to go it alone or to leave the United Nations. Abbott and the Canadian PM—the only nay-sayers to the United Nations, were both ousted by Soros’s tentacles before the 2015 November UN Climate Summit. As a result the UN received 100% acceptance of a global taxation system and wealth redistribution system using the ruse of climate change. Any group that challenges the One World Government direction like the Reclaim Australia Rallies did in Australia in 2015, would also be shut down by what ever means. We all watched this happen in Australia with the heavily backed” No room for Racism” counter rallies through Soros’s mates—the Unions, Greens and the Left. The media then finished the job with unrelenting, biased reporting of all their rallies and a further towing the United Nations socialist “equality” and “diversity” line—without realising they were weakening the sovereignty of their own nation in the process. Soros is an atheist and has fallen into the same trap that so many non-religious, communists and Fabians have fallen into, believing that all religions are the same and that Islamic believers, like any other person, in the comfort of having their needs met, will let go of their religion. The fault in this logic is that Islam has been falsely identified as a “religion”. Instead, had it been classified as a totalitarian ideology with a religious component steeped in terrorism and death, then perhaps his planetary utopia could move a step closer as Islam would not have been granted the licence it currently has. Instead it would have been relegated with all those other totalitarian regimes like Nazism, Fascism and Communism that are the true enemies to open societies. But the way that the UN Charter reads concerning the practice of well meaning and quaint religions, is leading to social travesty of monumental proportions. Islam is not a religion first, but a totalitarian ideology first—complete with its system of racist laws, and prescriptive intolerant social behaviour and a religious component that glorifies those who die or used their possessions for those who die, killing for Islam. This is what makes the current Open Society support to this Charter a threat to humanity.
Soros is globally promoting a social system that fits neatly into Islamic expansionism with catastrophic results. He will never realise his New World Order because of the clash of values between the West and Islam that must inevitably result in civil war. Soros by his support of organisations that support left wing counter rallies like the “no room for Racism” he is forcing the tolerance of the West to tolerate the intolerant—Islam. His support of the UN Charter of Human Rights is giving Islam the ammunition to drive its totalitarian system into the world instead of allowing a true open and democratic society. There is nothing democratic in Islam. Further, by supporting these Communist, Green and left wing groups Soros is also removing “freedom” for the sake of “equality”, flying in the face of his Mentor, Popper’s warnings NOT to do so.
Political Correctness is being underpinned globally by Soros sponsored organisations like “Common Cause“. “Common Cause” is program designed for governments on “political correctness” for the sake of equality and diversity. The Rotherham Muslim rape gangs flourished in the UK for 10 years because of the Common Cause training the police departments were obliged to follow. As a result tens of thousands of innocents suffered. The Fabian, come Popper student, has now become the greatest agent of oppression of mankind in the 21st Century ensuring the rise of Islamic imperialism and the closing down of freedom and democracy in the West. He is more interested in how to break nations than strengthen them. He intends to force a sovereign UN based government on the world rather that a nation state model. Soros—the God Father of the Left—with his socialist New World Order goals has become the most dangerous man on planet Earth, because he has the means to do it.”…
Every person in Australia who has been charged for not closing the window of his house, or not locking their gun safe, or have lost their guns due to the domestic issue of not putting the milk on the wife’s cornflakes in the morning, or have been charged for having a broken un-fireable Daisy Red Ryder can put the blame fairly on these international monsters. Please research this subject yourselves we must use this information against our three headed enemy.
Students in Los Angeles are so afraid of Donald Trump that the school district has set up a hotline and support centers to deal with their anxieties.
“Although it has been nearly a month since the presidential election, many of our students still have questions and concerns about potential impact on them and their families,” Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Michelle King said in a recorded phone call to families. “As part of our commitment to providing a safe and positive learning environment, we are providing additional resources for our families.”
The resources include Extended Support Sites and a hotline designed to offer, among other things, “emotional support,” The Los Angeles Times reported. The centers and the hotline will provide access to “outside resources.”
Many Latino students are afraid that President-elect Trump will deport them. Around 74 percent of the students in the Los Angeles district are Latino.
“No other time in history have we had to have school counselors on duty more because of the person who is supposed to be president,” parent Jenny Jerome told The Times. “I’ve seen kids acting really scared and crying.
The district’s board has voted to make Los Angeles schools safe zones for students who are in the United States illegally, The Times reported. That vote affirmed an earlier resolution not to cooperate with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, the newspaper reported.
“I’m not here to deport anyone,” history teacher Noemi Morales told a class at Van Nuys Middle School. “I’m on your side. I’m your advocate. I’m fighting for you.”
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
WASHINGTON – A Republican elector from Texas said Monday he will not vote for Donald Trump Dec. 19, becoming the first member of the electoral college to abandon the president-elect.
The elector, Christopher Suprun, penned an op-ed in The New York Times explaining his decision. He is one of 306 electors won by Trump, with 270 needed to secure the nomination. All total, 37 would have to abandon Trump for him to fall short; if no candidate received 270 votes the election then would be tossed into the House of Representatives.
“I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office,” he wrote. “Fifteen years ago, as a firefighter, I was part of the response to the Sept. 11 attacks against our nation. That attack and this year’s election may seem unrelated, but for me the relationship becomes clearer every day. George W. Bush is an imperfect man, but he led us through the tragic days following the attacks. His leadership showed that America was a great nation. That was also the last time I remember the nation united.
“I watch Mr. Trump fail to unite America and drive a wedge between us. Mr. Trump goes out of his way to attack the cast of ‘Saturday Night Live’ for bias. He tweets day and night, but waited two days to offer sympathy to the Ohio State community after an attack there. He does not encourage civil discourse, but chooses to stoke fear and create outrage. This is unacceptable.”
Suprun further said that Trump “lacks the foreign policy experience and demeanor needed to be commander in chief” and that the world would be a more dangerous place with him in office. Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, Suprun said, encouraged the nation not to elect a “demagogue.”
Suprun added, “The election of the next president is not yet a done deal. Electors of conscience can still do the right thing for the good of the country. Presidential electors have the legal right and a constitutional duty to vote their conscience. I believe electors should unify behind a Republican alternative, an honorable and qualified man or woman such as Gov. John Kasich of Ohio.”
Suprun received support and pushback in he comments section, which by Tuesday morning had more than 1,100 entries.
“Whatever Mr. Trump’s shortcomings may be, he won the election,” one person named Fred wrote. “Any other candidate chosen by a rogue electoral college would have no legitimacy. The election of the next President (or any subsequent President) should not turn on the judgment of 538 people who are unknown to most of us.”
Another commenter, Rick Harris, wrote, “I do not believe that your vote is endowed with a superior value to that of the 60 million American’s who voted. It invites anarchy rather than enhances Democracy. If the American people, voting in their respective states, cannot act to maintain the individual freedoms granted in the Bill of Right, the 14th and 15th Amendments, as well as the need for honest in political discourse, it is sorrowful. But your electoral vote, however cast, will not change the fact that voters were prepared to reject the conventions that usually abide during American elections. Now we, as well as they, will have to live and react to that decision.”
What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:
President-elect Trump has pledged to repeal Obamacare, and his recent nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services – Obamacare critic Tom Price — shows he is serious about overturning the law.
But what should replace Obamacare? And why does American health care cost so much more than it does in other countries?
Health care is the topic of this week’s edition of Off The Grid Radio, as we learn how the problems with health care stretch back decades, to World War II.
Our guest is documentarian Colin Gunn, who interviewed experts throughout the health care field for his recent documentary Wait Til It’s Free.
Gunn learned a lot, and he tells us:
- What he thinks should replace Obamacare.
- Why the employee-based health care model has been disastrous.
- How competition across state lines might lower costs.
- Why even the CEO of Whole Foods believes health care needs an overhaul.
- How government regulation, implemented under both parties, has caused problems.
Finally, Gunn tells us why he labels President Obama a “crony capitalist” – and why that term is just as bad as being called a “socialist.” If you want to learn what the mainstream media isn’t telling you about health care, then don’t miss this week’s fascinating show!
The Seismic Shift to Freedom Through Out the Western World.
“The latest result of a populist wave that is set to upturn the political order”,
“2016 the Year that Changed Everything”, are not true, most of the changes, almost imperceptible changes, have occurred during the recent 25 year period. These changes are all part of the war, which is almost as old as human history, the war between ‘central control of the few’ versus ‘freedom for the people’.
and that Lamp is now shining brightly into every nook and cranny of the international suppressive conspiracy.
The mainstream media are horrified, they try to box it into words of containment, ‘revisionism’, or ‘populist’ desperately attempting to minimalize us all as a temporary phenomena.
Of course our opposition, those few who through there academic and media power state ‘they are fighting for freedom, by freeing their society from the threat of firearm owners’. We cannot question their right to have free speech, and their right to have a free opinion, but I can question their hypocrisy of using the banner of Freedom by denying freedom to the two million licensed firearm owners in Australia who own property.
I have no doubt that we will win our freedom again, I just hope I live long enough to see it happen.
WASHINGTON — It would be far easier to remove a President Trump from office than most Americans think – at least, that’s what his critics say.
All it would take is for the vice president and a majority of the members of the cabinet to declare the president mentally or physically unfit, according to liberal commentator Keith Olbermann, who made the case in a new video as part of his GQ “The Resistance” series.
“Section four of the 25th Amendment to our Constitution provides the means to vice president-elect Pence and Trump’s cabinet office to remove him from office as soon as the inauguration is over,” Olbermann said.
“No hearings, no doctors, no conferences, no impeachment. The vice president and merely most of the cabinet write to the Speaker Paul Ryan and the Senate President Pro Tempore Orrin Hatch and they say the president’s unable to do the job and the vice president becomes president,” Olbermann said.
Technically, Olbermann is right, although Republicans so far are extremely loyal to Trump. Olbermann’s theory also shows how desperate the Left is to deny Trump the presidency. First, a group of Democrat electors launched an effort to persuade Republican electors to abandon Trump in the electoral college. Then, Jill Stein of the Green Party sought a series of recounts.
The relevant portion of the 25th Amendment states:
“Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”
The amendment does not require a medical or psychological examination of the president. The amendment allows the president to resume office by sending his or her own letter to the speaker and the president pro tempore. If the cabinet and vice president refused to go along, then a vote by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress would be required to remove Trump.
The 25th Amendment was ratified in 1967.
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
I well remember the election of 2008. It came at the beginning of the crash of the housing bubble, which affected my family business in a big way. With a President Obama on the horizon and the economy going down the tubes, I felt very uncertain about the future. So, my wife and I became preppers, and it was a smart move.
Now I’m hearing of prepper-minded folks who think they can relax their prepping because Donald Trump has been elected President.
Like Obama when he was elected, Trump doesn’t have much of a record when it comes to actual governing but he speaks with confidence about making America great again. I guess that’s enough to convince a lot of people that the “good old days” are here again and they can put away their bug out bags and freeze dried food.
Me? I’m not so sure, and I’ll keep prepping, thank you very much. I’ve given this some thought and here are the reasons my family and I will continue on as preppers.
- S finds a way of hitting the fan in our personal lives, no matter who the President is. Whether it’s a job loss, devastating family illness or injury, or a house fire, it pays to plan ahead and prep for those kinds of events. Not ready for these types of events, this is the best overall family prepping book I’ve read.
- Natural disasters and extreme weather events will continue to happen. Right now, the story in the news is wildfires, something this blog has covered in dept in articles like this one.
- There are world events that no President can prevent. This what concerns me the most. There are too many wild cards out there. Belligerent countries, such as Iran, have become stronger and more confident in their boldness toward the U.S., and I’m not so sure they’ll back down easily just because another man sits in the Oval Office. I can’t remember a time when the Middle East was so unstable. Right now, it’s a powder keg that, I believe, has been lit. It’s a matter of time, maybe just months, before we see the explosion.
- A massive financial crisis looms and Trump has inherited it, and there’s no way of knowing how he will manage the coming crash. Mind-boggling debt cannot continue piling up forever. I worry for the future of my kids and the huge tax burden they’ll assume when they become adults. There’s no way to avoid it.
- The world balance of power has changed since 2008. China and Russia have been flexing their muscles, looking to expand their influence and borders. China has actually built artificial islands in order to establish military buildings and airstrips. Sounds like they may have long-term, aggressive plans for the region. The balance of power that existed for so many decades has changed and the world stage is very unstable.
- America has radically changed since 2008. The country is more divided than I have ever seen in my 4 decades here on earth. Black Lives Matter isn’t going away any time soon but will continue to cherry pick events they can exploit for the purpose of stirring up rage. The country is racially divided, perhaps beyond reconciliation. Hordes of immigrants have overcome our education system and stretched the limits of our country’s social services. Nothing good can come of a nation that is so fractured within.
- It seems that Trump’s political foes aren’t going to accept and move on. I fully expected the riots that followed the election and there’s more to come. At some point, growing civil unrest will affect many of us in ways we can’t yet imagine. Also, it seems there is a movement to upend our political process with pressure to remove the electoral college system and change long-standing process and rules. Wherever there is instability, chaos is the result.
I’m very interested to watch the Trump Presidency unfold. In a way, it’s exciting to see someone in office who has never been a politician, a group of people I hold in complete contempt, as they do me, coincidentally.
There you have it. My 7 reasons for prepping in spite of Trump being elected. I’m not going to sit back and assume that with this new President all my worries for the future were for naught. If anything, the future is more precarious and dangerous than ever.
The post 7 Reasons to Keep Prepping Because Donald Trump is President appeared first on Preparedness Advice.
WASHINGTON — Gun control expanded dramatically in three states this month while the nation’s attention was diverted by the presidential election.
California now requires background checks for ammunition purchases and bans magazines larger than 10 rounds. In Washington state, judges can now strip citizens of their Second Amendment rights with a court order. And Nevada now requires background checks on all gun sales, including those made by private citizens, though online transactions, and at gun shows.
“It was a repudiation of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the gun lobby,” Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, the sponsor of California’s Proposition 63, told The Los Angeles Times.
Proposition 63 also requires ammunition sales be made through licensed vendors and makes it a crime if a lost or stolen gun is not reported to police. The California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) opposed Prop 63, partially because of the reporting requirement.
“Penalizing the failure to report lost and stolen firearms actually can deter individuals to report for fear of penalty, which has already been proven to be the case in many areas where local governments have enacted similar ordinances,” Ken Corney, the president of CPCA, wrote in a letter to the citizens of California.
Said Craig DeLuz of the Stop Prop 63 Committee, “Prop. 63 is another attempt by Newsom and his one percent, elitist friends to attack law-abiding Californians. They want to replace the ‘War on Drugs’ with ‘The War on law-abiding gun owners’ so they can continue locking up young black and Latino men.”
Newsom and his allies raised more than $4.5 million to support Proposition 63, while opponents only collected $868,000.
Around 71 percent of Washington state’s population voted for Initiative 1591, The Seattle Times reported.
The measure allows law enforcement officers, family members and others to ask a judge to issue an “extreme risk protection order” if they believe someone is a danger to themselves or others. The gun/guns would be confiscated without warning and without the person having a chance to make his or her case.
Around 50.45 percent of Nevada voters supported Question 1, which expands background checks to gun shows, online purchases and private sales.
There was one major defeat for gun controllers: 52 percent of Maine’s residents voted no on an expansion of background checks.
What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:
WASHINGTON — The presidential transition is getting uglier – and dangerous.
A Republican member of the electoral college from Michigan says he is receiving death threats from Clinton supporters for his pledged support to President-elect Donald Trump.
“You have people saying ‘You’re a hateful bigot, I hope you die,’” the elector, Michael Banerian, told The Detroit News. “I’ve had people talk about shoving a gun in my mouth and blowing my brains out. And I’ve received dozens and dozens of those emails. Even the non-threatening-my-life emails are very aggressive.”
The Detroit News has confirmed one of the death threats against Banerian, who is 22 and is the youth vice chair of the Michigan Republican Party. He will vote in the electoral college Dec. 19.
“They disturb me,” Banerian said of the threats. “But I wouldn’t say I’m afraid.”
The threats won’t change how he votes, he told the newspaper.
“Even if I could, I wouldn’t be remotely interested in changing my vote,” he told the newspaper. “The people of Michigan spoke, and it’s our job to deliver that message.”
Michigan electors are not allowed to change their votes; if they do vote for a different candidate, a different elector will step in and cast a vote for the pledged candidate.
Banerian even penned a column under the headline, “In face of death threats, I’m still voting for Trump.”
“There seems to be some confusion among many as to how our election system actually works,” he wrote. “Let’s start here: there is no such thing as a national popular vote. Elections are held at the state level, not the federal level, with each state choosing a statewide popular vote to determine the winner of its electoral votes. To say that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote is a null argument; taking the results of each individual state (which all have different election laws) and combining them into a singular ‘national popular vote’ means nothing.”
Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein has raised $4 million to fund a recount in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Additionally, around 4.3 million people have signed a Change.org petition urging Trump electors to vote for Clinton.
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
Millions of Americans fear a Donald Trump presidency so much that they’ve signed a petition asking the electoral college electors to choose Hillary Clinton, despite the fact that Trump won more electoral college votes on Election Day.
As of Tuesday, more than 4 million Americans – including Lady Gaga – had signed the petition at Change.org.
The electors are scheduled to cast their votes on Dec. 19.
“We are calling on the Electors to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton,” the petition states. “Why? Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.”
Trump won at least 290 electoral votes to Clinton’s 232. Michigan has yet to be called, but Trump is leading there, too. The state has 16 electoral votes. Assuming Trump wins Michigan and gets to 306 electoral votes, then at least 38 electors committed to Trump would have to change their minds and flip to Clinton to place her at the 270 majority threshold – a highly unlikely scenario.
The petition notes that “if they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win.”
“However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine – which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!”
The chance of electors going against voters’ wishes is so remote that Vox writer Andrew Prokrop dismissed the notion as a “silly fantasy.” The petition was started by Elijah Berg of North Carolina.
“Hillary won the popular vote,” the petition reads. “The only reason Trump ‘won’ is because of the Electoral College,” the petition says “But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?”
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
Luckily American presidential elections always fall in the middle of hunting season so for many Americans few things make a better election detox than long walk in the woods with a gun. As I was doing just that, I considered if Donald Trump would need to wear any hunter’s orange. Bad joke I know, but it did pop into my mind. And there’s more. Some of the greatest opportunities of discovery begin with the unexpected. And many things “unexpectedly” unfolded between the evening of the 8th and morning 9th of November.
So as one with survival/prepping bends, I embraced the unexpected as a chance to learn. A social experiment, if you will. Rather than placing value judgements on people or results, I studied the behaviors, reactions, and counter-reactions. Like when there’s a natural disaster, instead of critiquing the evacuation, I study the events as they unfold and use them to refine my personal survival models. They are a picture of reality whether you like it or not.
According to the polls, its a proven fact that the readership of this blog and SurvivalCache are 50% Democrats, 50% Repbulicans, 30% Libertarian, 25% Green Party, and 71% Independent. At least 75% of the readers are male and 46% are female. Overall they voted 3% for Trump, 3% for Hillary, with the remaining 99% voting for someone or something else that may or may not have included anyone officially on the ballot.
As with Trump’s season of unscripted reality TV shows, it became clear that it had all the makings of a blockbuster thriller with none of the budget or stunt doubles. When each weekly episode ended we were left with a humdinger, a cliffhanger, or a key player was “killed off” the show. Sometimes there was a mind boggling plot twist that left America’s collective mouth agape and drooling. Red, blue, or purple, it made no difference. Everyone watched, listened, joked and talked about the show. But the biggest reveal, the one shocking the fans to their core and immediately becoming the most the defining moment of the entire first season, was when the audience was allowed to vote for the celebrity of choice. While it had long since been discovered that neither candidate could sing or dance, the followers of the show turned out in record droves. And then America became the star of the show. Yea, there was that tall guy and that shorter gal who were in the news, but for a brief moment, it was us, the citizens. It was our turn to take the spotlight. And trust me, we provided our own shock and awe.
Beware the Unknown unknowns
We have models for civil unrest, martial law, prepper percentages, mob behaviors, marauding, and natural disasters of all kinds. We make educated guesses on duration, when to call it a bug out, and any number of variables based on personal experience that we each individually believe will give us an advantage. The problem here: demographics data was wrong and Trump proved it.
Related: Trump Respect, not Understanding
Now I’m not one to give Trump any unearned sophistication, but he sure seemed to squeeze votes out of people and places that politicians had not drilled into in decades. The massive immigration of Americans flooding into the electoral system overwhelmed the poll vetting process to the point where it was clear we had no idea who would vote, and for whom they would vote.
In many ways, the election unfolded like a game of poker. Who’s hand was the best, who was bluffing, and most of all who was watching the game. So on Tuesday night, Hillary laid down the most important poker hand in her life, a straight flush (royals are unAmerican), all hearts, followed by smile and a Shoulder Shimmy™.
On the other side of the table, Trump hesitantly dropped his cards down on the green felt one at a time and looked just as surprised as the rest of America when his hand won. Who knew you could beat a straight flush with five-of-a-kind, all deuces. So how did Trump’s hand bite Hillary in the pantsuit? Because the media didn’t know there were more than four of each suite in a deck of cards since they never played polling poker with the entire deck.
Trump Voached, or poached votes, plain and simple. Nothing in the illegal sense, but definitely with the same tactics as professional poachers. Trump’s Voaching included attracting voters with bait. Trump Voached votes out of season by addressing topics formerly thought off limits to candidates. Trump Voached well over his limit of certain demographic groups leaving less game for the rest of the candidates to hunt. Trump viciously Voached votes by attacking fellow hunters in the primary and again during the general election. A Voaching Trump did not throw back the bottom feeders, trash fish, and other nuisance pests who still counted towards his limit because they are Americans. In many cases he even proudly hugged them for a selfie while simultaneously looking confused as to who they were.
Cape of Fear
A bright spot in all this disagreement that grows in intensity every day since 11/9 (although some compare it to 9/11) can be seen in a convergence of gun rights. Many traditional Republicans have wrapped themselves in the a 2nd Amendment cape strutting around like superheroes. Until recently, that cape was to give the common folk a fighting chance for when the government goes all tyrannical. Until recently, the fear of such tyranny was based upon ancient history and paranoia, at least according to the stereotypical Democrat. But on the 9th of November, 2016, a sizable swath of the those in the popular vote got a taste of that paranoia. And it was quite bitter. Now that the blood is drying and dust is settling, and the grieving process has moved away from rants and alcohol, a healthy respect for the power of the people has emerged. An unlikely consequence of this election: liberals may have a new perspective on the second amendment. Maybe there’s something to this well regulated militia stuff after all,” they’re thinking.
Read Also: The Free Marketplace of Ideas is Dead
In other words, the Right to Bear Arms looks a little different today to the “only-for-hunting” crowd. Not that Trump is the real enemy, but instead the very real chance that the undeniable rights of Americans might be infringed upon is the foe at the door. Exactly what those rights are has yet to be determined, but the Second Amendment is the Sheepdog, and there are a lot more blue sheepdogs today than this time last year.
But do you Operate?
There are at least two big survival takeaways as 2016 winds down. The first is that the Unknown Unknowns are alive and well. This means that there are significant concerns based in reality so there’s no need to waste good space adding bigfoot, Area 51, and chemtrails to your conspiracy of threats. There are very real threats which provide ample exercise for prepping and survival. Unfortunately the data we use to forecast imminent threats are incomplete at best. So, the downstream results of the threat gain an even greater margin of error.
To any serious survivalist, the so-called Mall Ninja has been the public face of the anti-operator or unprepper. If society collapsed, the purebred Mall Ninja would be little more than an irritating fly in need of swatting. Mall Ninjas are more of a threat to themselves than to others. With this being said, their abundance of gear and lack of skill means they shouldn’t be ignored, but rather treated like a drunk driver on the highway.
If Mall Ninjas are the public face of the prepared to the unprepared, and that face is used to generalize across society as a whole (or at least the portion of society that will attempt to survive), then our war planning is about to get a reality enema. If an unpolled, non-vocal segment of American society can Swiftboat a presidential election, just imagine what is waiting for you when the lights go out.
The second takeaway is the need to model our survival scenarios on more than popular demographics. The personal quantity of perceived threats in any competitive survival situation is probably based four factors: Hollywood, expendable income, ego, and the desire to remain sane. Hollywood is the generic term for fictional accounts of a disaster played out for entertainment. For many, the fiction is limited to the catastrophic event, but the reaction of the populace or the hero is often filed away by the consumer as a reasonable strategy should such an event ever unfold.
The expendable income aspect is that one cannot have it all so one must temper the universe to fit within whatever the pocketbook can afford. While there is positive correlation between gear and survival, it seems there is no lower threshold as to what constitutes “gear.”
Further Reading: Survival Psychology
Ego is a survival strategy. Not just that you can survive something, but that you deserve to survive. However, ego has been known to get some folks killed as well. Ego can lead you to do things like not asking for help, getting in over your head to avoid admitting you don’t know what you’re doing, or even thinking you have absolute Constitutional rights in the face of professional authorities.
And finally, one must navigate the turbid waters between imminent global catastrophe and a relaxing afternoon. Too much of either is unhealthy from a survival perspective, but one without the other rots your perspective. Applying the four aspects to the 2016 election should shift the mainstream American out of park, and the survival/prepper into high gear. Unfortunately, some people, including politicians, now plan on shifting into reverse. I can see their slogan now… “Make America Great Again Before It Was Great Again!”
The election results provide unvarnished insights into a portion of the fabric of society that rarely becomes measurable, but will certainly be fighting with you or next to you for scant resources when the overextended aspects of society collapse under their own weight. This is nothing short of Preparedness 2.0: an edgy remix with more cowbell. Just remember, a mind is like a parachute. It only works when it’s open but when it’s open you are a slower moving target that is easily visible from the ground.
Photos Courtesy of:
SHTFBlog.com T-Shirts Now Available
Visit Sponsors of SHTFBlog.com
I don’t know about you, but I feel like I’ve just stepped out of H. G. Wells’ famous time machine and I’m standing on the other side of a great gulf in time.
After over a year of grueling, divisive political campaigning, Donald Trump has finally won the election to become the 45th president of these United States.
If anything, this election has divided this country even more than the last eight years of Obama’s presidency.
Democrats and Republicans have always been opposites, but since the makeup of these two parties has split along liberal/conservative lines, their opposition to one another has become even more obvious. No longer is it just that they support opposite sides of the same issue, now they don’t even see it as the same issue.
What I mean by this is well illustrated by the recent controversy over transgender bathroom rights.
To liberals, the issue is fair treatment for what is clearly a minority group. They apparently can’t even see that giving that fair treatment puts women and girls at risk. But to the conservatives, the issue is all about protecting those girls and women. If the transgenders feel slighted by that, sorry, but safety has to come before their feelings.
So now we have a new president elect, who somehow has to unite this divided nation and govern for all. That will be a monumental task, even without Obama having spent the last eight years trying to create division along whatever lines he could.
The question is, is Trump up to the challenge? For that matter, is anyone capable of uniting us once again?
The White House?
Of course, I have to say that winning the election doesn’t guarantee much of anything, right now. While Trump is the president elect, Obama is still in office. With all the election fraud that’s been going on this election, I have to wonder if the Democrats have some plan to keep him out of office, even if they have to break the law to do so.
George Soros, the Democrat sugar daddy and puppet master all but said that they do. In a televised interview, he said that Trump would win the popular election, but that Hillary would ultimately occupy the White House. How can that be? What did he mean by that remark?
Until inauguration day in January, things are still at risk. The Democrats could try to raise legal issues, saying that the count was inaccurate, as they did in the 2000 presidential elections. This seems to have become standard policy for the Dems, who seem to think that there’s no way that they could lose an election. After all, they’re the “elect.”
There’s also the possibility of something happening with the Electoral College vote on December 19th, or for that matter, when they deliver their votes to the Senate President, Joe Biden on December 28th.
There could even be problems when Congress meets to do their official count of the votes on January 6th. With all the election fraud that’s come to light in the primaries and general election, the possibility of fraud in the Electoral College can’t be ignored.
Then there’s Obama himself. Someone wrote an article about how Obama will stay in office, “impeaching” the citizens of the United States for not voting in Hillary Clinton. While I’m fairly sure that the article in question was a gag piece, it has made its way around social media a couple of times.
But there is something that Obama could do, and I’ve written about it before. That is, he could declare martial law, suspending the Constitution. All he would need is a good enough excuse to pass scrutiny.
That excuse could come from widespread violence or social unrest; and he’s got the means to make that happen. The police in Los Angeles and other major cities are preparing for mass riots (which liberals call “demonstrations”) in the wake of the election.
ISIS has also called for violence, specifically on election day. While I haven’t heard any reports of terrorist incidents happening, that’s not to say that they still can’t. They have already shown their ability to infiltrate the United States and their capability to operate here. The big question is how many people there are here who claim an affiliation with ISIS and how well they can organize themselves to sweep the country with violence.
Should either of these groups rise up and fulfill their promises, we could see a bloodbath in the streets. That would be all the excuse that Obama would need, in order to declare martial law and keep Trump out of office.
Whether he could get away with that, or whether he would be forcibly removed from the White House in such an event is yet to be seen. At that point, it would be up to the military and the Secret Service to remember their vows and decide to take action.
The President Elect
But let’s assume for a moment that none of this happens and the transition of governmental power goes through smoothly, as it has so many times before. What then can we expect?
The first big question that’s in everyone’s mind is whether Trump will live up to his campaign promises or not. The mainstream media has been calling him a liar for months now, even if that required them lying to do so. They’ve painted him with the same brush used on any politician, that of bending the truth to meet their needs and telling the people what they want to hear, just so that they can garner votes.
The real question is whether Trump is just another politician or if he’s who he claims to be; and the kicker is that nobody truly knows. Since the mainstream media has done everything they can to paint him in a negative light, the picture of Trump that we’ve seen is a clouded one, at best.
But Trump has been a public figure for more than just his campaign. For years, he’s been one of America’s most-recognized citizens. While that has not always been good, it has given us some insight into who the man is, what he believes and how he operates.
Throughout the campaign, there have been people coming forth who have known Trump through the years. Some were employees who praised him as a boss. Others were ordinary citizens who talked about kind deeds that he did for them. But other than the attempts to paint him as a sexual abuser right before the elections, few have come forth to say anything negative about their dealings with the Trump.
Considering how much of a public figure he has been, I would think that if he was anything like what the mainstream media has tried to paint him to be, we would have all seen it by now.
The one truly worrying thing about Trump is that for most of his life he’s been a Democrat. He’s supported the Democrat Party and Democrat candidates; he’s even reportedly friends with the Clintons. So it’s a bit hard to accept that he is now a staunch conservative, committed to conservative ideals.
Yet, he’s making all the right noises and all the right moves to show himself as a conservative. The list of Supreme Court Justice candidates that he’s put together is impressively conservative. He also came forth with the most conservative platform that the Republican Party has seen in 20 years.
Then there’s his “contract” with the American People. The actions he’s promised to undertake in his first 100 days in office are clearly conservative, hitting on all the high points of his campaign and many of the silent majority’s biggest concerns.
Over the next several weeks, we will be able to see Trump in action as a leader. His first big job is to select his cabinet, something that is traditionally announced by Thanksgiving. This should be interesting. One of the ways that Trump has been successful in business is in his selection of managers. He has always sought out the most qualified and competent, giving them the authority and responsibility to do whatever was necessary.
This even came through in his hit television show, “The Apprentice.” At its core, that show was about picking the best possible person to run a business. The various tests and challenges the candidates faced were all about testing their ability to effectively run a business. Who cares about theory; Trump wanted people who could think outside the box and get things done.
So we can expect the same out of his cabinet selections. No, I’m not saying that he’s going to run it like a game show. What I’m saying is that he’s going to look for competence. For people who can think outside the box, and for people who can get things done.
The country is in need of such people. We are a country in crisis, and it’s going to take some new ideas and some out of box thinking to straighten it out. We can’t expect Trump to do it all himself, he’s going to have to select the right people and let them do their jobs. So the people he selects in the next few weeks are critical to the effectiveness of his presidency.
From the few positions that have been announced so far, it looks like Trump is going to be putting together a dream team. Trey Goudy has been mentioned for Attorney General, Ben Carson as the Surgeon General and Newt Gingrich as a possibility for the Secretary of State.
While none of these is definite yet, they show the caliber of people who Trump is looking at. He wants the best, not just some political figure who’s looking to get their ticket punched.
While I’m sure that some top spots will go to political figures, especially those who have hopped aboard Trump’s bandwagon, he’s looking more to the business sector, than he is to the normal pool of politicians only. This fits with the whole tone of his campaign, which has been about the American people taking our government back from the political class.
If anything, this election has shown how sick and tired the average American is with what has become the political ruling class. The Founding Fathers never envisioned such a group for our country and did everything in their power to prevent it. Yet, even with the constraints of the Constitution to guide us, we have drifted that way more and more for over a century.
The American people are a fiercely independent people, and this election has shown that we haven’t lost that independence. This isn’t a partisan move, but one that has been clearly shown in both major political parties.
Millions of Democrats abandoned the party’s chosen candidate and followed Bernie Sanders, who came close to winning, even with all the voter fraud that was used to defeat him. On the Republican side, the electorate has abandoned a wide-ranging field of establishment candidates, in favor of Trump, a political outsider.
But the truly amazing thing was that both Democrats and Republicans voted for Trump, many abandoning their lifelong party affiliation to do so.
This is a clear mandate to Washington that We the People are tired of business as normal. We are tired of a political ruling class. We are tired of our elected leaders treating us like nothing more than peasants. We are tired of being lied to, and we are tired of being mistreated by those who are supposed to serve us.
This election has been a breakwater; leaving behind the old system and its corruption, in favor of a new order.
One that returns back to the values this country was founded upon and back to running the country according to the Constitution. Not an adulterated version of the Constitution; not a modified version; not even a version that’s been twisted and tortured by the various laws passed through the years; but the Constitution itself.
It’s up to Trump to ensure that he follows through on his promises and doesn’t let things go back to the old way. But it’s up to you and I as well. We have our part in this presidency; that of keeping an eye on our President Elect and making sure that he does what he said he’d do. If not, we need to get rid of him.
Hopefully, Washington will get the message, and the political class will stop acting like our masters and start acting like public servants once again. If that doesn’t happen, then the breakwater has been nothing more than a symbol; and a worthless symbol at that.
If change is going to happen in Washington, it can’t just happen in the White House, it has to happen in both houses of Congress as well. But it needs to go farther than that; it needs to permeate every department of the federal government as well.
We the People have spoken. We’ve used our voice in the voting booth, selecting an outsider to take control of our government and give it back to the people. But we can’t stop now.
That message needs to keep going forth, to make sure that the politicians and bureaucrats hear it, and that they fear us and the power we wield over them. Until they do, it is we who fear them.
This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.
7 total views, 7 views today
[Total: 0 Average: 0/5]
WASHINGTON – Republican Donald Trump shocked the political world Tuesday to be elected the nation’s 45th president, and in doing so delivered the type of upset that hasn’t been seen in America since perhaps 1948, when Harry Truman defied the polls to defeat Thomas E. Dewey.
But, how? After all, even Ronald Reagan led Jimmy Carter in the final poll just prior to the 1980 election – an election that has drawn comparisons to 2016.
Here are five takeaways:
1. People wanted change. According to exit polls – which surveyed 24,537 people – a plurality of 39 percent said someone who “can bring change” was the most important quality in a candidate. Among that group, 83 percent supported Trump. The 39 percent is even larger than the 2008 Obama landslide, when 34 percent cited “change” as the most important quality.
2. There was a “Bradley effect” in polling. A significant number of people apparently lied to pollsters – or refused to say who they supported, perhaps due to the mainstream media making it taboo to back Trump. Democrat Hillary Clinton led in the final RealClearPolitics.com polling average by just over 3 points, but – when the votes were tabulated – was virtually tied with Trump. (Clinton led in the popular vote Tuesday.) There is precedence for voters not telling pollsters the truth, particularly when the media makes a certain position socially undesirable. This was the case during the same-sex marriage initiative battles a decade ago, when initiatives that would protect the traditional definition of marriage nearly always did better at the voting booth than at polls. The final three surveys in California in 2008 showed Prop 8 trailing by anywhere from 3 to 8 points, but it won by 4 points. The “Bradley effect” gets its names from a 1982 black candidate for California governor who led in the polls but lost on election day.
3. Trump blew up the map. Trump’s position on trade and economics helped him win two electoral vote-rich Midwest state – Pennsylvanian and Wisconsin – that hadn’t gone Republican in decades. Pennsylvania last backed a GOP candidate in 1988, and Wisconsin in 1984. (Trump may have won Michigan, too, but it was too close to call Tuesday.) Nationwide, Trump won 43 percent of union households, according to exit polls – better than Republican Mitt Romney in 2012 (40 percent). Trump won 52 percent among those who did not graduate from college, a category that Obama won in 2012. Trump also did better than Romney among those who make less than $50,000, with 41 percent to Romney’s 38 percent.
Story continues below video
4. He defied expectations among minorities. The conventional wisdom was that the non-white vote would carry Clinton, but she vastly underperformed Obama, and Trump overperformed. Trump won 8 percent of the African-American vote, better than Romney’s 6 percent. Trump also got 29 percent of the Latino vote; Romney received 27 percent.
5. Christians backed Trump in droves. Voters who identified themselves as born-again or evangelical and who were white comprised 26 percent of the electorate – and 81 percent of them supported Trump. That same group also made up 26 percent of the electorate in 2012, but during that year a smaller percentage, 78 percent, backed Romney. John McCain, the 2008 nominee, won 74 percent of the group.
What is your reaction to Trump’s victory? Did your candidate win? Share your thoughts in the section below:
A coalition of mutinous Republicans have emerged from their elitist holes to join Democrats in a whining chorus of: “Never Trump!”. Quite frankly, I’d like to know where these Republicans have been during eight years of a disastrous Obama Administration. Where was the contrived moral outrage during Attorney General Eric Holder’s botched mishandling of the Fast and Furious scandal? When Obama insisted on a wasteful, poorly managed stimulus package, where was Senator Lindsey Graham? I’ll tell you where they were: quietly sniveling in the shadows of Capitol Hill. Suddenly, when GOP Leaders face a historically flawed opposition, Republican leaders speak up in order to sabotage their own candidate. John McCain, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, and Lindsey Graham have all co-opted a mendacious, liberal narrative because their god is cowardice.
By D-Ray a contributing author to SHTFBlog & Survival Cache
CNN Would Hate Reagan
These false conservatives insist on referencing Ronald Reagan. “How did Reagan’s party end up in the hands of Trump,” they wail. Here’s a newsflash: if Reagan ran in 2016, CNN would characterize him as an unhinged racist and misogynist. The only reason the media is having this infantile fit over Trump is because they are scared. For the first time since Reagan, a conservative with a spine has made a bid for the Presidency. Trump possesses the audacity to do what McCain and Romney never could: challenge the left’s cancerous, politically correct culture. Trump and a resurgent GOP threaten the fragile existence of a deeply flawed, social marxist narrative.
As a millennial, let me tell you what my generation thinks of Republicans. We think they’re losers. For my entire life, Republican incumbents have acquiesced to the hyper-left agenda of the Democratic Party. They have allowed Democrats to push this country towards the precipice of socialism. American constituents, not just conservative millennials, are sick and tired of leaders paralyzed by fear. Our leaders would rather avoid controversy than stand up for the interests of their constituents. This is disgusting and wrong.
See Also: A Toxic Brand & Trump’s Most Heinous Sin
If Donald Trump doesn’t win in 2016, it is proof that the GOP’s soul has been sold to the timid and stupid. Reagan would have difficulty weathering the libelous reporting Trump has endured. For those who believe Trump is a racist, where is the evidence? The media’s arguments against Trump are more dishonest than Bill Clinton perjuring himself under oath. Americans are erroneously conflating conservative confidence with immorality because we’re not used to this. We’re not used to rallying behind a winner. When we’ve got Paul Ryan as the Speaker of the House, how could we be familiar with a winner? We haven’t had a winner since Reagan left office in 1989.
Vote To Win
If you don’t vote for Trump this election, you are giving this country over to Crooked Hillary and a league of spineless, Republican worms. The Supreme Court will assume a leftist majority, unvetted refugees will come to this country by the millions, our foreign policy will be compromised, second amendment rights will be curtailed, and the middle-class will grow weaker. But hey, if Trump loses, at least Paul Ryan will be able to smirk on MSNBC and pat himself on the back for his self-destructive, puritanical stand. More importantly, Ryan’s donors, the same lecherous lot that fund Hillary Clinton, will be ecstatic. Ecstatic because they convinced Republican voters to turn their backs on a great candidate and surrender this country to the loathsome hands of globalism and political correctness.
Related: Election Thoughts From a Survivalist
Trump’s message resonates with so many because he’s right. We don’t have victories anymore. I do not and will not accept this status quo of decline. The United States has never shied away from adversity. Paul Ryan, Hillary Clinton, and their contemptible ilk are gross deviations from a rich history of perseverance, bravery, and success. Let me be totally clear, they are failures. With Trump in the White House, the United States will win again. Paul Ryan can make flawed decisions premised on a perverted conscience; I will vote to win.
D-Ray is a recent graduate of CU Boulder and currently enrolled in a law school on the East Coast. By day, he is a mild mannered content writer; by night, he banishes unruly drunks into the black purgatory of night as a bouncer. He is passionate about the Constitution and First Amendment Rights.
Disclaimer: These opinions are not necessarily representative of SHTFBlog or its affiliates.
Photos Courtesy of:
Donald J. Trump For President
SHTFBlog.com T-Shirts Now Available
Visit Sponsors of SHTFBlog.com
Hillary Clinton is well on her way to 300 electoral votes in November and delivering a near Reagan-esque level ass-kicking for Democrats. As unlikely as it seemed only a year ago, a career politician as corrupt as the day is long will win the election, even with net favorable ratings in the negative double-digits. She’ll dissolve our borders, stock the Supreme Court with vegan, transgender tree-huggers and use the power of the federal government to build a nanny state to manage every aspect of our lives.
All while the red ink flows and individual Liberty wanes. And yet, while her election is one man’s fault, it still isn’t the worst thing he’s done.
Sending The Party Off A Cliff
While Donald J Trump may have handed the keys of this republic to a profiteering, untrustworthy mental midget, his most heinous crime against Liberty has gone largely un-noticed. Donald not only engineered Hillary’s win and put the Republican party on life support, his true sin against humanity is the damage he’s done to the conservative brand. Despite never earning conservative support, he’s now intent on driving conservatism off of a cliff. The result will foment decades of distrust and be much more damaging than a single Hillary Clinton term.
Also Read: Election Thoughts From a Survivalist
Sound dramatic? I assure you it is not. Your average voter, particularly the young, now associates conservatism with Trump. They think that all conservatives agree with him, act this way behind closed doors and endorse his behavior. Donald Trump is playing a cartoon character of every conservative stereotype and making it simple to paint us all with a broad brush and a palette filled with – racism, misogyny, dishonesty, and hypocrisy. This will undoubtedly have repercussions for years to come as voters come of age and buy into the false narrative.
How can conservatism attract young people when the version they’ve seen as synonymous with the movement is so unscrupulous and vile? Whether you believe the mainstream media is honest, whether you think we need new policies and plan to hold your nose to get them, one thing is without question. Donald Trump is a truly wretched human being. While I can’t speak to his faith, his actions in no way indicate a belief in any God other than himself. Consider the following. Donald Trump has…
- A documented history of infidelity and dishonesty
- Been a crass, belligerent, self-aggrandizing ass
- Lied about self-funding the campaign while using donations to line his company’s pocket
- Repeatedly sexualized his own daughter
- Disrespected women
- Shown he has incredibly thin skin and a hair trigger
- Been proven to be disloyal and wholly unlikeable
None of these are qualities that reflect conservative ideals. None could be used to characterize conservative leaders in the past. They don’t describe Reagan or Goldwater… heck they don’t even describe Rubio or Cruz.
A Moral Imperative
True conservatives accept that that our rights come from God and a politician’s job is to protect those rights and individual liberty. They believe in morality, fiscal restraint and Reagan’s three-legged stool. They believe the US is a shining light on a hill responsible for spreading democracy and that living our ideals matter. Trump believes none of this. He only believes in Trump. He is a New York City liberal who funded Hillary Clinton with multiple donations, and has the same progressive worldview.
Related: Dire Straits
So as we line up at the polls in November and take public stands on social media for and against candidates, I urge you to choose carefully. Many are watching and noting what conservatives will do. Trump won’t and can’t win the election no matter what you do, but preserving your personal political capital and being true to conservative principles matters. Don’t fall for this charlatan’s bait and switch, he’s not one of us and he never was.
Disclaimer: These opinions are not necessarily representative of SHTFBlog or its affiliates.
SHTFBlog.com T-Shirts Now Available
Visit Sponsors of SHTFBlog.com
An influential and bombastic Russian lawmaker, widely viewed as an ally of President Vladimir Putin, says Americans should vote for Donald Trump to avoid nuclear war.
“Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump,” Vladimir Zhirinovsky told Reuters. “But if they vote for Hillary, it’s war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere.”
Zhirinovsky is the head of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, the third largest group in the country’s parliament, or duma. He is a close ally of Putin and viewed as something of a spokesman for the Kremlin.
“Victory for Trump would be a gift to humanity,” Zhirinovsky said. “But if Hillary Clinton wins it will be the last U.S. president ever.”
The ‘Donald Trump of Russia’
Putin has used Zhirinovsky to make statements that are too radical or controversial for a sitting leader in the past, Reuters reported. Zhirinovsky is a nationalist who has been labeled the “Donald Trump of Russia” by some reporters because he likes to compare himself to Trump.
Zhirinovsky fears that Hillary Clinton will start a nuclear war if she is elected.
“She craves power,” Zhirinovsky said. “Her view is that Hillary is the most important person on the planet, that America is an exceptional country. That’s dangerous. She could start a nuclear war.”
Zhirinovsky also thinks that Trump would be a peacemaker as president.
“Trump will have a brilliant chance to make relations more peaceful,” he said, adding that Trump even could win a Nobel peace prize. “He’s the only one who can do this.”
Relations between the U.S. and Russia are already poor, Zhirinovsky said.
“He (Trump) won’t care about Syria, Libya and Iraq and why on earth should America interfere in these countries?” Zhirinovsky added. “And Ukraine. Who needs Ukraine?”
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
LAS VEGAS — The increasing likelihood of a Hillary Clinton victory might cause gun sales to boom and prices to skyrocket. That’s what one gun store owner is warning in “a pre-Hillary sale.”
“Don’t wait,” an advertisement for the Westside Armory published in The Las Vegas Review-Journal warns customers. “Prices will skyrocket after Crooked Hillary gets in.”
The ad features a picture of a Smith & Wesson M&P Sport II semiautomatic rifle. Clinton has been an outspoken proponent of bans and restrictions on such weapons.
History seems to be on Westside Armory’s side, as news articles indicate that gun sales boomed after Barack Obama was elected president in 2008 and 2012. Firearms sales, in fact, hit a record high after Obama’s reelection in 2012.
Odds on Clinton’s side
Most pundits and pollsters now think a Clinton victory is very likely, making higher prices in the next few months also likely.
The Reuters/Ipsos State of the Nation poll from October 15 gave Clinton a 95 percent chance of getting enough electoral college votes to reach the White House. A presidential candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win; Reuters/Ipsos predicts she will receive 388 electoral college votes.
The popular FiveThirtyEight.com website gave Clinton an 88 percent chance to win as of Tuesday morning.
In a four-way race, she leads by an average of 6.9 percentage points at RealClearPolitics.com. By comparison, in 2012 at this moment in the race Obama and Mitt Romney were tied in the RealClearPolitics.com average. On Election Day, Obama led by an average of .7 points in the polling average and he won the popular vote by 3.9 points. Two polls had Romney leading in the final surveys: Rasmussen (Romney +1) and Gallup (Romney +1). The other seven polls had Obama leading or had it tied.
It might be a good idea to go gun shopping now.
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has ignited a controversy that is testing the limits of patriotism and free speech, and several well-known Americans – including Donald Trump – are speaking out.
Kaepernick refused to stand for the national anthem over the weekend prior to a preseason game.
“I’m going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me this is something that has to change. When there’s significant change and I feel like that flag represents what it’s supposed to represent, this country is representing people the way that it’s supposed to, I’ll stand,” he said in a Niners Wire story.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump was asked about the controversy during an interview Monday.
“I think it’s personally not a good thing,” Trump said on The Dori Monson Show. “I think it’s a terrible thing, and you know, maybe he should find a country that works better for him. Let him try, it won’t happen.”
Kaepernick, who criticized both Trump and Hillary Clinton, claims his actions are a protest against racism and what he sees as oppression.
“I have great respect for the men and women that have fought for this country,” Kaepernick said. “I have family, I have friends that have gone and fought for this country. And they fight for freedom, they fight for the people, they fight for liberty and justice, for everyone. That’s not happening. People are dying in vain because this country isn’t holding their end of the bargain up, as far as giving freedom and justice, liberty to everybody. That’s something that’s not happening.’
Kaepernick said his protest will continue.
“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick said. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”
What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:
AUSTIN, Texas – If Hillary Clinton wins in November, a lot of residents in one American state say they will want their state to secede.
Currently, 26 percent of Texas voters say they support “Texas seceding from the United States,” while 59 percent oppose it and 15 percent aren’t sure, according to a Public Policy Polling survey.
But when asked if they’d support secession if Clinton defeats Donald Trump, support for it shoots up to 40 percent, with 48 percent opposed and 12 percent not sure. Among Trump supporters, 61 percent would want the state to secede if Clinton wins.
The PPP survey also found that Trump leads Clinton in Texas, 44-38 percent.
The poll surveyed 944 likely voters, Aug. 12-14.
Would you favor secession if Clinton wins? Share your thoughts in the section below:
DALLAS — Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton cancelled their Friday campaign events following a racially motivated Dallas shooting that left five officers dead and another seven injured.
The coordinated shooting Thursday night shocked the nation, and it occurred less than 48 hours after a pair of videos surfaced showing officers in Louisiana and then Minnesota shooting black men.
Three suspects in Dallas are in custody and a fourth one died in a standoff early Friday morning. Before he died, that suspect told police that he wanted to kill white people and white officers. He also said he was upset with the Black Lives Matter movement. The four suspects shot the officers sniper-style, aiming their rifles from elevated positions.
Trump called the killings “an attack on our country.”
“It is a coordinated, premeditated assault on the men and women who keep us safe,” he said. “We must restore law and order. We must restore the confidence of our people to be safe and secure in their homes and on the street.
“The senseless, tragic deaths of two motorists in Louisiana and Minnesota reminds us how much more needs to be done. This morning I offer my thoughts and prayers for all of the victims’ families, and we pray for our brave police officers and first responders who risk their lives to protect us every single day.”
Trump added that “our nation has become too divided.”
“Too many Americans feel like they’ve lost hope. Crime is harming too many citizens. Racial tensions have gotten worse, not better. This isn’t the American Dream we all want for our children. This is a time, perhaps more than ever, for strong leadership, love and compassion. We will pull through these tragedies.”
Clinton said on Twitter “I mourn for the officers shot while doing their sacred duty to protect peaceful protesters, for their families & all who serve with them.” (A full statement by Clinton was not available.)
Said Dallas Police Chief David Brown, “All I know is that this must stop — this divisiveness between our police and our citizens. We don’t feel much support most days. Let’s not make today most days. Please, we need your support to be able to protect you from men like these, who carried out this tragic, tragic event.”
The Republican National Convention could collapse into chaos this year, as prominent party leaders and delegates are organizing a revolt against presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump in the wake of poor polling numbers and a number of statements that have put him out of line with party ideology.
“This isn’t going to go away,” Cecil Stinemetz, an anti-Trump delegate from Iowa, told The Washington Post for a story Friday. “Trump or others might say that these are just little groups who won’t do anything and it’ll fizz out — that’s not going to happen. Trump just continues to embarrass himself and his party and this is not going to let up.”
A super PAC (political action committee) called Courageous Conservatives is organizing the revolt, and a conference call was held Thursday night, The Post reported, calling it the “most organized effort so far” to stop Trump. Dozens of delegates are supporting the plan.
The Plan to Block Trump’s Nomination
Blocking Trump’s nomination would be difficult because most delegates are “bound” to support him. To stop Trump, the movement is pushing the convention’s rules committee to pass a “conscience clause” unbinding delegates who say they cannot in good conscience support him. The resolution would then have to be passed by the entire convention before a new nominee is chosen. The committee is scheduled to meet on July 14-15, prior to the July 18-21 convention in Cleveland.
Significantly, the delegates say the movement is not intended to back Sen. Ted Cruz or anyone else – simply to block Trump.
The delegates are upset over Trump’s comments about federal judge Gonzalo Curiel’s heritage, over his support for taking away gun rights from those on the no-fly list and terror watch list, and over his poll numbers, The Post reported.
Presumptive Democratic Nominee Hillary Clinton leads Trump by an average of 5.8 points in the RealClearPolitics.com average of polls
The movement may have received momentum Friday when House Speaker Paul Ryan said in an interview that “the last thing I would do is tell anybody to do something that’s contrary to their conscience.”
The hope is to have a contested convention in which the delegates would pick the nominee.
“This literally is an ‘Anybody but Trump’ movement,” delegate Kendal Unruh of Colorado told The Post. “Nobody has any idea who is going to step in and be the nominee, but we’re not worried about that. We’re just doing that job to make sure that he’s not the face of our party.”
About 30 delegates from 15 states took part in the Thursday conference call, The Post reported. There are 2,472 delegates, and 1,237 are needed to win the nomination. Trump currently has 1,542 delegates, according to RealClearPolitics.com.
Unruh and his followers are organizing the effort via email, Facebook and Twitter. A group called the Citizens in Charge Foundation is planning to spend $2.5 million on advertising designed to sway delegates to the anti-Trump side.
“It’s not an effort for a candidate or against a candidate, but it’s an effort to educate people on what their real authority is and have them get the comfort that they’re not alone,” Eric O’Keefe, a supporter of the campaign, told the newspaper. “There’s a whole network of like-minded people.
“This is not a play for Cruz or Kasich or Ryan,” O’Keefe said. “I trust the delegates that if they understand their authority, they’ll nominate a good ticket.”
Several Republican leaders, including US Rep. Fred Upton (R-Michigan) the chair of the House Energy and Commerce committee, Ohio Governor John Kasich, and Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, have said they will not endorse Trump or are not ready to do so.
Trump told The Post: “I won almost 14 million votes, which is by far more votes than any candidate in the history of the Republican primaries. I have tremendous support and get the biggest crowds by far and any such move would not only be totally illegal but also a rebuke of the millions of people who feel so strongly about what I am saying.
“People that I defeated soundly in the primaries will do anything to get a second shot — but there is no mechanism for it to happen.”
Who do you support – Trump or the delegates trying to oust him? Share your thoughts in the section below:
The political unrest surrounding Donald Trump’s presidential campaign is triggering riots and violence that could last until the November election.
Several police officers were injured when protestors tried to storm a Trump rally this week, throwing rocks and breaking windows. Police in riot gear tossed smoke bombs into the mob outside the Albuquerque convention center, where Trump was delivering a speech.
“This was not a protest, this was a riot,” attorney Doug Antoon, who was inside the center, told the Associated Press. “These are hate groups.”
The protestors were carrying banners that read: “Trump is a fascist” and “we’ve had enough.” Some Trump supporters say the protesters are paid to do what they’re doing.
Protestors also threw objects at Trump supporters, burned Trump T-shirts and charged police officers on horseback, The Albuquerque Journal reported. Rioters did not get inside the arena, but rocks flew through the building’s windows.
“Appears that most of the @realDonaldTrump protestors have left & remaining contingent is only looking to cause trouble & be destructive,” the Albuquerque police tweeted.
Trump tweeted Wednesday, “The protesters in New Mexico were thugs who were flying the Mexican flag. The rally inside was big and beautiful, but outside, criminals!”
Chaos Elsewhere, Too
The chaos in Albuquerque was not the first, nor the worst violent outbreak at a Trump event.
Story continues below video
On April 29, a mob smashed the windows on one police car and tried to turn another police vehicle over in Anaheim, California, The Los Angeles Times reported. The rioters were protesting a Trump appearance in Orange County. At least five police cars were damaged and one officer was hit by a rock.
Some protesters also threw rocks and debris at motorists and tried to block an entrance to State Route 55 near the convention center.
“I knew this was going to happen,” protestor Daniel Lujan said. “It was going to be a riot. He deserves what he gets.”
“This is the anger people have against Trump,” said Jose Cruz, 21. “It’s not because he’s white — it’s because of what he’s said.”
But despite the protests – or perhaps partially because of them – Trump’s poll numbers are improving. He trailed presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton by 11 points on March 23 in the RealClearPolitics.com average of polls, but now is tied with her in the average, and has led in three of the most recent five surveys.
Protesters Will Continue To ‘Escalate Their Response’
Black Lives Matter activist Cat Brooks told The Guardian that “A lot of people want to dismiss us as troublemakers and rabble-rousers, but what you’re dealing with are highly sophisticated, very grounded, very committed organizers with a strong vision of what they want the future of this country to look like.”
Protestors plan to block roads, freeway exits and parking lots, Brooks said. She predicted that protestors will continue to try and disrupt Trump with bullhorns and publicity stunts.
“We have friends and allies all over the country,” San Francisco activist Linda Capato told The Guardian. “The more Trump engages in this hateful rhetoric, the more people will feel compelled to escalate their response.”
Of course, rioting and violence is not confined to Republican events. The Nevada state Democratic convention on May 15 degenerated into a brawl between supporters of US Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont) and Hillary Clinton backers. The Washington Post reported that at least one person was injured when Sanders supporters, who were angry at a vote count, tried to storm a stage.
Some Democrats are now afraid that violence could be repeated at the Democratic National Convention July 25-28 in Philadelphia, MSNBC reported.
Authorities in Cleveland are preparing for riots when that city hosts the Republican National Convention July 18-21.
What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:
The controversy surrounding Trumps comments about disallowing Muslims into the country continues to spread through the news media, social media, and the office water cooler. Trump is being compared to Hitler – a man who is responsible for the senseless murder of millions of Jews. I think the comparison is more than ridiculous.
When I first heard his comments I was taken aback. I guess I have been socially brainwashed like most people. Then I took some time to consider just what he is suggesting. I also remembered he is not politician and does not speak in the polished manner as all the other candidates. Just what is he suggesting anyways?
From DonaldTrump.com: Trump’s plan would block Muslims from entering the United States, with an exception for U.S. citizens who are Muslim, who would come and go as they wish. He has said he hopes the ban “will go quickly,” as soon as “our leaders figure out what the hell is going on.”
“If a person is a Muslim, goes overseas and comes back, they can come back. They’re a citizen. That’s different,” Trump told “Good Morning America” Tuesday. “But we have to figure things out.”
I don’t see the problem. This is the opposite approach of Germany who plans to take in millions. It is proven that our current vetting process of Muslim’s immigrating to this country is far from effective(Boston bombing/San Bernardino). These are non-American citizens.
Maybe a complete ban is unwarranted. Maybe there are countries where their governments provide sufficient information on its citizens that the vetting process would be satisfactory. The reality of the world we live in is we are in a war against radical Islam. They have openly admitted they will use immigration as a means to enter the United States to carry out jihad. Seems like a very just and logical thing to do. What is the alternative? Allow in potential threats that will shoot up schools, malls – and kill innocent people?
The point is if we are not sure if someone is safe to let in this country they should not come in. It doesn’t matter what their religion is. We do not have to be killed to show how tolerant a country we are.
Interesting – President Carter banned Iranians from entering the United States during the Iranian hostage crisis. He also ordered over 7,000 Iranian students deported as their visas were not up to date.
But hey…..what do I know?