Sperry: Possible That Ilhan Omar Committed Immigration Fraud, Passport Fraud, Tax Fraud … Petition Demands Congressional Investigation

A naturalized citizen has all the rights of any other citizen, but if that citizen committed immigration fraud the citizenship can be revoked and the now illegal alien deported.

Ilhan Omar was back in the news this week on her tax fraud violations and alleged marriage to her Somali brother.

After several years of avoiding the subject — on Tuesday the Minneapolis Star-Tribunepublished a report on Ilhan Omar, her tax fraud crimes, her illegal use of campaign funds to cover travel costs and touched on her alleged marriage to her younger brother.

Investigative Journalist David Steinberg who has been covering the incredible story for years commented on the report today.

Investigative reporter Paul Sperry today tweeted out that if Ilhan committed immigration fraud, she also committed passport fraud. And tax fraud. And campaign fraud.


Trump Troll Level: Grand Master
Trump’s “racist” tweets cement the Democrats’ congressional leadership to its least-viable radical fringe.

I’ll admit something I shouldn’t have to, as regular readers of this space already know it, but I’m sometimes a little slow to catch on to the ways of America’s 45th president.

…along came Donald Trump, who chewed the cover off the political rulebook and proceeded to rip out its pages with which to wipe his rear end. It turned out that Trump’s methods, Kurtzian though they might be, ended up being more effective than anything on the political market.

Surely, there are still those who, like Capt. Benjamin L. Willard, see no evidence of method at all. I can sympathize, to a point.

For example, I didn’t initially buy into this business about how Trump’s often-unorthodox tweets and actions are part of a political 3D chess game he’s playing while the rest of the country is playing checkers.

But I do now.

I could go through a lengthy punchlist of examples of Trump statements and moves that prove the 3D chess theory, but that would dramatically overtake the space this column has to offer. Instead, let’s just talk about this weekend’s flare-up over the president’s Twitter outburst aimed at The Squad — the four idiot freshman Democrat congresswomen, led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, who have spent their time as elected officials offering one inappropriate and stupid anti-American outburst after another.

Trump didn’t initially name any of the four. He didn’t talk about Omar or Ocasio-Cortez, and he didn’t talk about Ayana Pressley or Rashida Tlaib.

Instead he referred to “Progressive” Democratic congresswomen, and then noted that they “originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!”

This was decried by all the Usual Suspects as an abjectly racist statement, a response that Trump certainly anticipated and couldn’t care less about. ….

Absolutely everything Trump said in his tweets applies perfectly and without stipulation to Ilhan Omar.

The fact that he didn’t use her name meant that our political betters immediately assumed he was also talking about Pressley, Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez.

Which bothered Trump not one bit.

And here is why. All last week House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was engaged in an aggressive campaign to shut The Squad up before they tore the Democrat caucus apart with their never-ending idiotic and vitriolic remarks. And why would Pelosi want to do that?

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line pointed out why. AOC and Omar, particularly, are becoming two of the best-known members of Pelosi’s caucus, and they are both becoming absolutely radioactive. To wit …

A May poll reportedly found that Ocasio-Cortez is profoundly unpopular in congressional districts throughout America. More than 74 percent of those surveyed recognized her name. Only 22 percent had a favorable view of her.

Ilhan Omar fared even worse. She was recognized by 53 percent, with only 9 percent holding a favorable view. Socialism was viewed favorably by 18 percent and unfavorably by 69 percent.

Chris White of the Daily Caller says Democratic leaders are concerned that with all the publicity Ocasio-Cortez and Omar generate, the party might lose the House. Ocasio-Cortez “is getting all the news and defining everyone else’s races,” one operative fretted.

Mirengoff wasn’t convinced that AOC and Omar would have that kind of effect on House races in swing districts. The guess here is that Trump and his brain trust shared that view. But on Sunday, an internal Democrat poll of swing districts leaked that shows Mirengoff, and perhaps Trump, might be wrong …

The poll showed that socialist Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) are extremely unpopular and that they may cost the Democratic Party the presidency and the House in 2020.

“Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view,” Axios reported. “Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota — another member of The Squad — was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view. …

“Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%,” Axios added, whereas “capitalism was 56% favorable; 32% unfavorable.”

The firm that conducted the poll gave the results to Axios on the condition that it not be named because it works “with all parts of the party.”

A top Democrat involved in the 2020 congressional races told Axios, “If all voters hear about is AOC, it could put the [House] majority at risk. [S]he’s getting all the news and defining everyone else’s races. Socialism is toxic to these voters.”

So what do you do if you want to ensure Omar and AOC poison those so-called moderate Democrats who won those swing House districts last year?

You force Pelosi into bed with them.

Which is precisely what Trump has done.

Another Win for Judicial Watch: Kentucky to Remove Up to 250,000 Inactive Voters From Voter Registration Rolls

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch announced Monday that thanks to a consent judgment, Kentucky is set to remove 250,000 inactive voters from registration voter rolls.

This is in addition to the 1.6 million inactive voters names that are set to be removed from California’s voter rolls.

Judicial Watch is diligently working to clean up dirty voters rolls to reduce voter fraud leading up to the 2020 election.

We all know how much the Democrats love their dead voters!

Nearly 1 Million Californians Registered to Vote Are Ineligible, Says Non-Partisan Group

A non-partisan group has reported that there are still several counties in California where the number of registered voters is greater than the number of eligible citizens, with the total nearing one million people.

The Election Integrity Project California (EIPCa) stated in a release on July 8 (pdf) that if voter problems are not promptly addressed by state officials, fraudulent election activities may continue to haunt the state.

Using the state’s own data on active and inactive status registrants, the organization found that eight counties have not cleaned up their inactive registrant lists, despite a 2018 legal settlement that requires California counties to properly maintain their voter rolls and remove inactive voters according to federal law.

Climate Change Crusader Tom Steyer Enters 2020 Presidential Race

Billionaire Democrat donor Tom Steyer entered the 2020 presidential race on Tuesday.

Steyer, 62, is one of the most visible and deep-pocketed liberals advocating for President Donald Trump’s impeachment. He surprised many Democrats in January when he traveled to Iowa, home to the nation’s first presidential caucus, to declare that he would focus entirely on the impeachment effort instead of seeking the White House.

Despite becoming a national voice on the impeachment issue, Steyer made no mention of it in his campaign announcement. Instead, he said his campaign will focus on reducing the influence of corporations in politics. He also plans to target climate change, which is the focus of the Steyer-backed advocacy group NextGen America.

Iowa native Eric Swalwell ends 2020 presidential campaign

So this crap-for-brains idea didn’t help him one bit.
Eric Swalwell Says Background Checks Would Make Us ‘All Safe in America’

U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, is dropping out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination exactly three months after he entered the contest.

The Iowa-born Swalwell, 38, announced his decision Monday afternoon at his campaign headquarters in Dublin, California. He said he now plans to concentrate on his role in the U.S. House, where he is currently serving in his fourth term.

“I have no regrets. I’m excited about what we’ve done,” he said. (my bet is he’s excited because he got more campaign contributions that he had ever got when just running for his congressional seat)

Trump Compares Ocasio-Cortez To Nazi Sympathizer, AOC Takes It As A Compliment

President Donald Trump compared socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to former Argentine first lady Eva Perón — often called “Evita” — in a new book that is set to go on sale in mid-July. Ocasio-Cortez took the comparison as a compliment, despite the fact that Evita was a Nazi sympathizer who helped her husband, Argentine President Juan Perón, destroy Argentina’s economy by implementing socialism and eroded civil liberties in the nation.

The book, “American Carnage,” states that Trump saw Ocasio-Cortez on a cable news show and said: “I called her Eva Perón. I said, ‘That’s Eva Perón. That’s Evita.”

Trump reportedly told his team to contact then-Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) — who Ocasio-Cortez upset in the Democratic primary — to tell him that “he better get off his fat ass and start campaigning.”

According to the Telegraph, both Eva Perón and her husband were Nazi sympathizers:

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Latin America’ aims to highlight a series of little known controversies about leading leftist figures in the history of the continent…

…Mr Peron helped many Nazis fleeing Europe after the Second World War to find a safe haven in Argentina, including Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele.

According to the new book: “It is still suspected that among her [Eva Peron’s] possessions, there were pieces of Nazi treasure, that came from rich Jewish families killed in concentration camps.”

It’s worth noting that Ocasio-Cortez’s comments come after she has engaged in weeks of Holocaust trivialization by falsely comparing immigrant detention facilities to concentration camps. Liberal Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz said that Ocasio-Cortez’s repeated false comparison makes her a “Holocaust denier,” which is a form of anti-Semitism.

D Is for Damaged, Dangerous and Delusional

He forgot, demoncrap

If you watched either or both of the two Democratic Party presidential candidate debates, and if you are a liberal, a conservative or a centrist, you had to have been depressed. The intellectual shallowness, the demagoguery and the alienation from reality were probably unprecedented in American political history. Only a leftist, a socialist or a communist could have gone to bed a happy person on either night.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.: “(The economy is not doing great) for the African Americans and Latinx whose families are torn apart, whose lives are destroyed and whose communities are ruined.”

Two things stand out: First is Warren’s morally reprehensible and false description of the economy. She never explains how the American economy is tearing families apart, destroying lives or ruining communities. Aside from being baseless, it is another left-wing libel against America.

My only response to this statement is to ask, Do most Democrats find that a compelling argument? Do they not realize what a non sequitur it is — and therefore how demagogic?

Billionaires, like non-billionaires, pay off their debts because they do not incur debts they cannot repay, not because they are billionaires. Senator Klobuchar apparently believes that non-billionaires need not pay off their debts. Every Democrat who addressed this issue said American society should repay student debts — which amount to $1.6 trillion. The party of “fairness” thinks it’s fair that every student who repaid his or college debts — and every young American who never went to college — must pay off that debt.

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro spoke in Spanish. Perhaps they — like all on the left — are unaware of the importance of all Americans speaking English in uniting the most ethnically disparate nation in human history. You cannot say “diversity is our strength” if you do not work to unite all the diverse cultures into Americans. And you cannot unite Americans without one language……..

O’Rourke: “This economy has got to work for everyone. And right now, we know that it isn’t.”

This is just not true. Given some of the lowest unemployment rates in modern American history, this economy seems to be working quite well — certainly for all those willing to work.

Booker: “This is actually an economy that’s hurting small businesses and not allowing them to compete.”

The question I always want answered when someone on the left tells an outright lie is, Does he or she believe it? Someone should ask this of Cory Booker. As the National Federation of Independent Businesses announced last month: “Optimism among small business owners has surged back to historically high levels, thanks to strong hiring, investment, and sales,” said NFIB President and CEO Juanita D. Duggan. “The small business half of the economy is leading the way, taking advantage of lower taxes and fewer regulations, and reinvesting in their businesses, their employees, and the economy as a whole.”

De Blasio: “There’s plenty of money in this country. It’s just in the wrong hands. Democrats have to fix that.”

The notion that America’s money is “in the wrong hands, (and) Democrats have to fix that” should frighten every American who believes in private property and who opposes dictatorships and theft.

Castro: “I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom; I believe in reproductive justice.”

Here’s an important rule: Whenever anyone adds an adjective to the word “justice,” know that the person is not speaking about justice but about something else entirely. “Social” justice is another such example.

Castro boldly proclaimed his view that unauthorized border crossing should be decriminalized and announced, “In my first 100 days with immigration reform (I) would put undocumented (i.e., illegal) immigrants, as long as they haven’t committed a serious crime, on a pathway to citizenship.”

Though not one Democrat candidate used the term, every single one believes in open borders.

NBC reporter Lester Holt: “So, a show of hands: Who as president would sign on to the 2015 nuclear deal as it was originally negotiated?”

Every Democrat was for returning to the original Iran nuclear agreement. For those Americans who believe Iran is the greatest threat to peace in the world, and the greatest sponsor of international terrorism, this alone should determine their vote.

I have chosen only a few examples — and only from the first debate — to illustrate how low the Democratic Party has sunk morally and intellectually. Americans who love America — or just love reason or truth or real people, as opposed to abstract ideas — cannot justify voting Democrat in 2020.


John R. Lott, Jr. and Andrew Pollack: Dems and gun control — they want it whether it works or not

The two Democratic presidential debates last week in Miami were marked by calls to remember Florida’s Parkland High School shooting, which occurred only 50 miles away from where the debate took place. The Democrats agreed on two solutions to stop these attacks: impose background checks on private transfers of guns, and ban “military-style” “weapons of war.”

Even when the questions weren’t about gun control, candidates still found ways to bring up the topic.

Many Democrats have a hard time believing that their opponents want to save lives. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., claimed during the debate, “It’s the greed of the NRA and the gun manufacturers that make any progress impossible.” Congressman Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., argued, “The NRA is taking orders from the gun manufacturers, that’s the problem.”

But it isn’t a question of who is getting paid off by gun makers. Some people think that banning guns makes people safer, just as others sincerely believe that such bans will disarm and endanger law-abiding citizens.

Many terrorist types want to kill as many people as possible, and are drawn to gun-free zones where regular citizens are prohibited from being able to protect themselves.

One of the authors here, Andrew Pollack, experienced first-hand the disastrous consequences of gun-free zones. His daughter died in the Parkland massacre.

While all the candidates endorsed full health care coverage for illegal immigrants, none talked about providing funds to help cover mental illness for Americans. Gun control was their only solution.

Dem Disarmament Dialogue: ‘Keep Your Pistols, Rifles, Shotguns…But’

Okay, I’ll keep what they want us to keep,
but I think I’ll still keep what they don’t want us to have too.
And they can all osculate my Gluteus Maximus.

Democrats lined up for ‘Night 2’ of their opening debates, and gun control was on their agenda.
In remarks reminiscent of the promises of a former president who assured Americans they could keep their doctors and health care plans, Democratic presidential hopeful Rep. Eric Swalwell brought his gun control demagoguery to Debate Night No. 2, insisting, “Keep your pistols, keep your rifles, keep your shotguns, but we can take the most dangerous weapons from the most dangerous people.”

Near the end of Thursday evening’s “top tier” debate between candidates—an evening that saw front-runner Joe Biden pounded by Sen. Kamala Harris on the race issue—the question of guns was raised and several Democrats took the bait. Thursday night’s debate drew a larger audience than the Wednesday evening session with lower rung candidates.

Swalwell stuck to his gun control scenario of getting citizens to surrender their so-called “assault weapons” in a mandatory “buy-back” that amounted to forced surrender of firearms in exchange for payment. He talked about frightened children with rhetoric that would scare any youngster, explaining how—as reported by ABC News—“parents now send their kids to school remembering what they’re wearing ‘in case we have to identify them later.’” He hasn’t changed his focus since mid-April when Ammoland profiled his proposal.

Sen. Bernie Sanders chimed in, declaring that the United States is experiencing a “gun crisis” and vowing that he would ban the sale and distribution of “assault weapons.”

Harris declared she would “give the United States Congress 100 days to pull their act together, bring all these good ideas together and put a bill on my desk for signature, and if they do not, I will take executive action and I will put in place the most comprehensive background policy we’ve had.”

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, citing his military service in Afghanistan, remarked, “As somebody who trained on weapons of war, I can tell you that there are weapons that have absolutely no place in American cities or neighborhoods in peacetime. Ever.”

Biden’s contribution was little more than a cliché, “If more guns made us safer, we would be the safest country on Earth.”

The former vice president also insisted that “smart gun” technology should become mandatory.

“We should have smart guns,” Biden stated. “No gun should be able to be sold unless your biometric measure could pull that trigger. It’s within our right to do that; we can do that. Our enemy is the gun manufacturers, not the NRA — the gun manufacturers.”

It was an extension of the anti-gun-rights rhetoric during the first evening debate in Miami between the “lower tier” candidates, which suggested to rights activists burning up social media that none of the candidates understands that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right rather than a regulated government privilege.

It amounted to more regulations, more restrictions and more demonization of firearms. And it rang hollow with Second Amendment activists.

The election is 16 months over the horizon. Between now and then, all of these Democrats will be traveling the country trying to sell themselves, and their programs. When it comes to selling gun control, they will soon discover that rights activists from Kotzebue to Key Biscayne aren’t buying.

Supreme Court: Bad Day for Everyone, Especially Roberts

Just me, but keeping the drawing of district boundaries left to the state legislatures is ever so much more so worse for the demoncraps than not being able to ask for citizenship on a census form.


Today the Supreme Court issued two major opinions with profound implications for American politics. It blocked, for now, adding a question about citizenship on the 2020 Census in Department of Commerce vs. New York. In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court permanently killed off allowing federal courts to decide that a legislative map gave one side too much of a partisan advantage.

It was a bad day for the right, a very bad day for the left, and an extremely bad day for Chief Justice John Roberts.

First, the very bad day for the left. For years, the institutional left has been trying to strip state legislatures of power and give it to federal courts. They wanted federal judges to have the power to say that a given legislative map helped one political party too much. For example, if a state voted 52 percent to 48 percent, then state and congressional legislative lines should apportion power in roughly the same percentages. If they didn’t, federal courts should get to decide the legislative lines.

Giving federal courts the power to rule on partisan imbalances in legislative lines has been a top priority of Democrats and leftist process hounds for years. Why? Because the vast majority of America, when considered state by state, leans right and elects Republicans to majorities in state legislatures. They wanted federal judges in those states to blunt the power of state legislatures.

Today the Supreme Court drove a final stake through the heart of partisan gerrymandering cases. They are done, dead, RIP. Consider this their obituary.

The Court ruled that these are political questions, that the Constitution vests power in state legislatures to draw their own lines and to set the rules of line drawing. Power should reside with the people, not federal courts with life tenure.

That makes it a very, very bad day for funders who had poured millions of dollars into the left’s efforts to have federal courts erode decisions made by Republican state legislatures.

But in another decision, it was a bad day for the right and those who want to collect data on how many aliens are in the United States. The Court blocked, for now, the proposed citizenship question on the 2020 Census.

If that wasn’t bad enough, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote along with the four liberal justices. Writing for the Court, Roberts agreed that Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross had the power and authority to add the question, but something just didn’t smell right.

Over the last few weeks, the ACLU has bombarded the Court with letters, missives, complaints, and self-proclaimed bombshells containing conspiracy theories on the “real” origins of the Census question. It’s not as bad as O.J.’s quest for the real killer, but it’s close.

Naturally the compliant leftist media at CNN and the Washington Post has had an endless parade of stories. See, they know who still takes the mainstream media seriously, and today they won five votes to block the question.

It’s a shame that five votes validated these extracurricular mob tactics after the briefing was complete. It provides a roadmap for future last-minute efforts to influence the Supreme Court. One suspects Chief Justice Janice Rogers Brown or Chief Justice Edith Jones would not have sided with the left to block the Census question. Whether or not the citizenship question can still be added to the Census before the printer needs the final proofs remains to be seen.

Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam


“This is the third tech insider who has bravely stepped forward to expose the secrets of Silicon Valley.  These new documents, supported by undercover video, raise questions of Google’s neutrality and the role they see themselves fulfilling in the 2020 elections.”

I missed downloading this from Veritas’ account on YouTube (owned by Google) before they deleted it. I’ve downloaded the vid from Vimeo and I’m going to upload it on my YouTube account and see how long it lasts there.

Expert: ‘Only Matter of Time Before Illegal Alien Voting is Expanded’

Elected Democrats will soon attempt to expand voting rights in deep blue states for illegal aliens, an election fraud expert says.

Last week, Democrats in New York state approved and signed into law a plan to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens with the backing of the business lobby. The law allows for the state’s 725,000-strong illegal alien population to be eligible for the same driver’s license that American citizens are afforded.

Already, state officials have said the law will effectively give illegal aliens the ability to vote as New York registers citizens to vote at state Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) offices.

“This is the first step towards the expansion of a number of things that normalize the rights of illegal aliens,” Eggers said.

“It’s only a matter of time before we see the expansion of illegal alien voting in state elections and eventually the Left pushing for illegal alien voting in federal elections,” Eggers continued.

Moulton: We Should Debate Whether Handgun Ownership Should Be Allowed

Idea – Lead Balloon/ Presidential Campaign – same same

Rep. Seth Moulton (demoncrap, Masshole.), a Demoncrapic presidential candidate, said there should be a debate in the United States about whether ownership of handguns should be permitted during an interview with the New York Times.

The New York Times asked Moulton and other candidates whether anyone would own handguns in an ideal world.

“In an ideal world, we would not have weapons of war on our streets,” Moulton began.

Moulton added that assault rifles should be outlawed.

Moulton’s campaign has failed to gain traction, and he did not qualify for the first Democratic debate in Miami next week.

Liberals’ National Popular Vote Scheme Is Unconstitutional and Dangerous

As of now, fourteen states have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which attempts to eliminate the Electoral College as set forth in the United States Constitution. There have been many good articles written about the legality of interstate compacts to achieve the desired National Popular Vote goals. The author does not need to rehash all of those problems but believes that there are three additional ways that the NPVIC is both unconstitutional and dangerous.

Constitutional Flaw #1: Non-Republican Form of Government

Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution says in part that “[t]he United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” The United States is a constitutional republic, where people elect their senators and representatives at the national level. At the state level, this is copied by every state except for Nebraska, which has a unique unicameral Legislature. A Republican form of government, by its definition, means that people elect representatives to represent them in running the government. This is done so that the people are not encumbered with the daily operations and voting to run the state or federal government.

A fundamental problem with the NPVIC is that it is inherently not a republican form of government for a specific state to select that state’s Electors. Once a state Legislature decides to ask its citizens their preference through a popular vote, there must be a rational basis as to how the vote of the state’s citizens is used to select that state’s electors. It is not rational that the people’s decision could be overruled by the votes of citizens of unrelated states. The following comparison is between two states in the NPVIC who are at the extremes of the Popular Vote Range for the 2016 election…………….

In the 13 presidential elections that the author can remember, he has felt emotions ranging from being thrilled, being happy, being worried, and being disgusted with the results.  Since we live in a great country, where honest Americans can have different views, the author is sure that many people felt differently.  Unfortunately, the fact that someone doesn’t like who wins specific elections is no excuse for trying to dramatically change the genius of our presidential election system.  This paper shows how the NPVIC would not only be unconstitutional in three key ways, but would potentially be dangerous to our nation.


AOC, Tlaib, and Omar May Be a Triumvirate of Idiocy, But Every Conservative’s Best Friends

Vladimir Lenin once proclaimed, “Show me who your friends are, and I will tell you what you are.” Perhaps in this day of Russian hoax hysteria, quoting a devout socialist dictator may seem a bit, unnecessarily dramatic. But even as a blind squirrel will find the occasional nut, old Vlad had an insightful and, as it turns, prescient point. After all, if you work in a sewer, you will smell like sewage. If you ride in cars with drug dealers, you may, fairly or not, be called a drug runner.

This realization is, in this current political climate, proving as valuable now as it did in post-Tsarist Russia. Democrats, much to the delight of Republicans everywhere, are becoming almost exclusively known as the party of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar.

In a recent “60 Minutes” interview with Lesley Stahl, House Speaker and Democrat stalwart Nancy Pelosi tried to dismiss, or at least downplay, the influence of her party’s new firebrands. But has that sentiment been bought, believed, or even echoed by anyone in the DNC? Or by the public?

Broadly speaking, this country is divided into thirds. Conservative, liberal, and independent. Naturally, conservatives will, by and large, oppose anyone from the extreme left. Liberals will oppose anyone from the right. The fight for American political control rests with 34% of Americans that reside in the center, unaffiliated with either party or extreme. That is the battle each party must strive to win if they have any hopes of controlling the House, the Senate, or, the greatest prize, the White House.

AOC, Tlaib, and Omar are the greatest weapons a party can deploy to win those centrist Americans so needed to be successful. Fortunately for conservatives everywhere and President Trump’s re-election, and to the detriment of Nancy Pelosi’s House majority, they are not weapons used wisely by Democrats.

Every time one of these mental samurais speaks, one can feel the seismic shift in the 40 House seats Trump won in 2016 but elected a Democrat to Congress in ’18. Every time the aforementioned whiz kids of the leftist class rear their heads, Trump’s 304 Electoral Votes looks like a Patriot’s half-time score before Tom Brady enters the game.

Biden Suggests ‘Physical Revolution’ Against Republicans

Anyone still wondering why they want political opposition disarmed? We’ve always heard the line that it had the look they planned something that we would take ‘exception’ to if they tried it. Biden again displays his utter honest stupidity.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden appeared to suggest using violence against Republicans on Monday in response to a question about how he as president would deal with opposition to his agenda in the Senate from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Biden, currently the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, made the remarks at the Moral Action Congress of the Poor People’s Campaign in Washington, D.C.

MSNBC’s Joy Reid asked Biden: “How would you get past either a majority Republican Senate in which Mitch McConnell was determined to kill all of these ideas or even a Mitch McConnell in the minority who repeated the consistent filibustering when you were vice president and anything that came from the Obama-Biden administration Mitch McConnell considered dead on arrival?”

“Joy, I know you’re one of the ones who thinks it’s naive to think we have to work together,” Biden responded. “The fact of the matter is if we can’t get a consensus, nothing happens except the abuse of power by the executive.”

“There are certain things where it just takes a brass knuckle fight,” Biden continued, later adding: “Let’s start a real physical revolution if you’re talking about it.”


Swalwell: If Elected President, I Will Fire Jared Kushner on Day One

Yes, this guy is that stupid.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D., Calif.) declared in a new interview he would fire Jared Kushner on the first day of his presidency, although that would suggest Kushner would have remained in the White House under a new administration.

Kushner is President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a White House senior adviser, and he has been tasked with developing a peace plan between Israel and the Palestinians………..

Setting aside the unlikelihood of Swalwell even winning the Democratic nomination and ultimately the presidency, it is unlikely Kushner would be a holdover from the Trump administration to his. For instance, President Trump did not have to fire senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett when he took office; she just left.

Joe Biden: Build ‘James Bond-Style’ Guns That Don’t Fire Without DNA Match

The idiot who told you that you only need a shotgun and blasting it in the air or through the door at a burglar is good enough, seems actually demoncrap-for-brains stupid enough to believe hollywierd is reality. If course as has been said many times before, liberalism is a mental illness.

Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden told an audience in New York City that we have the “capacity” to build “James Bond-style” guns that do not fire without a DNA match.
Biden suggested this technology has been around a long time and cited the example of two dealers who faced massive public pushback after trying to sell “smart guns” years ago.

Four things Biden left out:
1. The “smart gun” in this case was radio-activated by a watch that was paired with the gun. This means anyone who stole the gun and the bracelet could shoot the firearm with no problem.
2. The gun was only made in .22 LR and costs $1,800.
3. The “smart gun” in this case was defeated by a man armed with $15 worth of magnets.
4. Considering all these failures, consumers feared a law in New Jersey would trigger a requirement that dealers could only sell “smart guns,” thereby forcing consumers to purchase an $1,800, radio-activated .22 LR pistol that had been defeated by a guy with a pocket full of magnets.

Nonetheless, Biden said:

If I get elected president of the United States of America with your help, if that happens, guns, we have the capacity now in a James Bond-style to make sure no one can pull a trigger unless their DNA and fingerprint is on it.
We have that capacity to do it now. You know it. But what happens?
The gun manufacturers, when two folks started to sell some of those guns to two dealerships, they said we’re going to shut you down.
My god, we don’t have to worry about the 2nd Amendment. Imagine all the people who would be alive today if the only person who could buy a gun is qualified because of background checks and they’re the only ones that can pull the trigger?
So my point is there are so many things we have the capacity to do.

The “smart gun” technology push was adopted as a go-to for Democrats during the Bill Clinton administration. It has not yet succeeded because the public has yet to be persuaded of the viability of such technology.

“James Bond-style” guns worked on the big screen because they were props in movies.

Denver council member wins with promise to impose communism ‘by any means necessary

‘By Any Means Necessary’ – was first heard from Malcolm X. It means “up to and including violence”.  Communists have adopted it as an identifying catch phrase. SeedyBacca is making sure her bona fides are in order.

Candi CdeBaca won a runoff race last week against former Denver city council president Albus Brooks, and she did it by promising to implement communist policies “by any means necessary.”

CdeBaca was among three candidates that unseated incumbents in the Tuesday runoff, preliminary results show, and she’s already drawing comparisons to Socialist Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 29-year-old who unseated 10-term incumbent Joe Crowley in New York’s 14th congressional district in 2018.


Rep. Eric Swalwell rolls out gun control plan

Rep Swalledhead (Demoncrap California) is currently polling at 0% which means that even those who voted for him don’t think he’s got what it takes to be president.

Outside the National Rifle Association headquarters in Fairfax, Va., 2020 candidate Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., rolled out his complete gun control plan for the nation.

The issue of gun violence has been central to his campaign, and accompanying Swalwell were some family members of victims of gun violence.

In his plan, the California Democrat reiterated that, if elected president, he will ban and buy back “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons,” with the exception of storing them at shooting ranges and hunting clubs. As he has said before, Swalwell’s plan states they will criminally prosecute any person caught defying the buyback, including the possibility of jail time.

In his plan, the California Democrat reiterated that, if elected president, he will ban and buy back “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons,” with the exception of storing them at shooting ranges and hunting clubs. As he has said before, Swalwell’s plan states they will criminally prosecute any person caught defying the buyback, including the possibility of jail time.

Unveiled today, Swalwell’s plan also includes:

A 48-hour cooling-off period between the time a person purchases a firearm and the time they take possession of it.
Implement background checks for all firearm and ammunition purchases.
Require that liability insurance be purchased before a person can buy, trade, or otherwise receive a firearm.
Create a national firearm registry that is linked to individual firearms, and require that all purchases, transfers, and donations of firearms be mandatorily registered.
Prohibit individuals from purchasing more than one handgun per 30-day period.
Prohibit the online sale of ammunition.
Ban and buy back bump stocks, large-capacity magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and silencers.
Prohibit individuals from hoarding ammunition in quantities exceeding 200 rounds per caliber or gauge.
Repealing the Protection for Lawful Commerce in Guns Act.
Prohibit states from arming teachers.
“We’re not just here to stand up to the NRA … we’re here to beat the NRA,” Swalwell said

Wow: Whoopi Had To Correct Swalwell On Facts Surrounding Virginia Beach Shooting Despite His Anti-Gun ‘Expertise’

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) on Wednesday made an appearance on “The View.” Naturally, the discussion turned to his desire for gun control, especially after last week’s tragic shooting in Virginia Beach. When asked what could be done to keep this from happening again, Swalwell reiterated his desire for an “assault weapons” ban and buyback program.

“First, ban and buyback every assault weapon in America. I’m the only candidate calling for that. That will go a long way. Kids are sitting paralyzed with fear in their classrooms today and you can’t measure that,” Swalwell explained. “We can measure the deaths and the loss and we mourn the dead, but the fear that a kid has in their classroom today, you can’t measure that.”

Whoopi Goldberg did, however, remind Swalwell of one important tidbit: the Virginia Beach shooter was an average guy and he carried his attack out with “regular guns” – a handgun – and not an AR-15.

What’s ironic is Swalwell citied Chicago’s shootings this past weekend

“Southside Chicago this weekend. 50 shootings. 50 people were shot. 10 people killed. That’s different than the church shootings and the school shootings. Those are blocks that we’ve failed to invest in. People don’t have hope,” he said.

According to Swalwell, if Chicago had “jobs and healthcare not just liquor stores and payday lenders on the streets” then the city would be safer.

Swalwell must not know that Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation and yet the city has some of the highest crime. The two are more connected than he’s aware of or would like to admit.

There are so many things wrong with Swalwell’s assumptions regarding an “assault weapons” buyback program.

1) Anti-gunners can never really explain what an “assault weapon” is. Basically, if it’s big, black, scary and goes PEW PEW then it’s very “assaulty.”

2) What makes him think that gun owners are willingly going to turn over their firearms? Surely he’s heard of MOLON LABE before. And trust me, that’s not just a phrase. It’s a mindset and a lifestyle. Patriotic Americans will fight for their right to keep and bear arms, not because it’s about having a specific gun but because our Founding Fathers warned us about a government becoming too tyrannical. And they wanted people to stand up to those types of governments. That can’t be done if the public is disarmed.

3) Let’s call this what it is. It’s a road to firearm confiscation. Every time we give anti-gunners an inch they take a mile. It happened with background checks. It happened with the Assault Weapons Ban. And it’s happening again on a grander scale. They phrase this as a “well, you don’t really need that gun” or “it’s just this one thing we want to get rid of.” It’s a slippery slope that leads to an out right ban on all firearms.

As Larry Keane at the National Shooting Sports Foundation said: “It is a clarion call to all voters, not just gun voters. The danger isn’t law-abiding gun owners. It’s politicians who pervert the Constitution to serve their political ambitions and warped vision that citizens serve the government instead of the values of our Founding Fathers that deemed the government is designed to serve its citizens.”