Juneteenth vs. Institutionalized Racism


Dennis Jamison image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and Archives—June 18, 2020

Juneteenth vs. Institutionalized RacismFreedom, if it is to be preserved, demands a serious commitment to responsibility that accompanies the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. Without any sense of responsibility, Freedom disintegrates within the civil society and eventually leads to chaos. This is what American citizens are witnessing across the country due to the outright promotion of lawlessness. It is extremely important to note that the current state of lawlessness did not start with the George Floyd murder and ensuing peaceful protests over what many people witnessed by viral distribution of the video of his death. The outright promotion of lawlessness began immediately after Donald J. Trump was elected president.

Democrats have been promoting lawlessness extensively since they lost the 2016 presidential election. The irony is that during the debates only Donald Trump was asked the barbed question of whether he would accept the election results. The Democrat Party has never accepted the election results of the race in 2016. It was subsequently obvious in the rioting that began immediately after Trump’s victory. Some of the same protestors and rioters demonstrated back in November of 2016 that are now involved in “protesting” police brutality and racism across the country. However, the Democrat Party tried to find another means to do “damage control,” which is now slowly emerging as  lawlessness at the highest levels of government.

Democrats are the Party of lawlessness unless they are in “control”

Democrats are the Party of lawlessness unless they are in “control.” And, since they lost their control and were not able to continue unabated with their corruption or promotion of the culture of death, they reacted by behaving the way they have historically, as the Party of slave owner Andrew Jackson. Relatively few Americans realize that Jackson did not willingly accept the results of the presidential election of 1824. He rebelled and would not support John Quincy Adams as president. He formed his “Democratic” Party, with a strong emphasis on “Jacksonian Democracy.” This was the beginning of a major shift in political power in America.

Essentially, the political rivalry between Jackson and Adams revealed fractures in the nation leading to the Civil War that ultimately ripped the nation apart. Adams was the son of John and Abigail Adams, who were both children of Christian ministers, and   who both had serious misgivings about slavery. Jackson was a proud slave owner    who reportedly beat his slaves like other slave owners in the Deep South. These two represented on a personal level the growing divide in America at the time.

That divide in the Union grew wider and wider due to the hypocrisy of slave owners in the southern states. Between 1840 and 1850, slavery either died out, or slaves were emancipated in all of the northern states except New Jersey. And in New Jersey, slavery was limited to the slaves that had been born before 1805. And, by the time of the Civil War, there were only 18 slaves remaining in New Jersey. South of the Mason-Dixon line, however, Democrats refused to dismantle what was referred to as their “peculiar institution” of African slavery. They justified it by explaining slaves were not really human. Therefore, it could be defended even within the higher levels of the federal government. That was institutionalized racism.

The election of Abraham Lincoln, however, set the stage for the proverbial “straw that broke the camel’s back.” The southern Democrats also saw their political balance of power with the north declining as their proportional representation in Congress became increasingly less than 50% of the national population. The Civil War could have solved the political discrepancies in order to retain or expand the Southern power base. The Democrats preferred to fight rather than follow the North in emancipating slaves. Yet, the Civil War broke southern Democrat control over their “Old Dominion.”

The Democrats were forced to emancipate their slaves

The Democrats were forced to emancipate their slaves. After President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated, the basis for his plans for emancipation of the slaves was handled, or mishandled, by the U.S. Army. The southern slave owners had to be forced by the U.S. military to free the southern slaves. This was enforced throughout the South by Army “General Order No. 3.” This military order represented the practical fulfillment of President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. The official record of the final slaves to be freed is from June 19, 1865, which was over two months after Union General Ulysses S. Grant accepted General Lee’s surrender.

General Gordon Granger marched 2,000 Union soldiers into Galveston, Texas, to secure the state and oversee procedures for the emancipation of the slaves. While he stood on the balcony of Galveston’s Ashton Villa, Granger read the contents of “General Order No. 3” to all who had gathered to hear of the liberation. It was an incredible day for the former slaves; however, the U.S. Army needed to enforce the liberation order by taking control over the state of Texas to ensure compliance with the order. As can be imagined, the majority of staunch Confederates were resistant to such radical change  in their lifestyle and social status.

Why is this important today? This event is celebrated as “Juneteenth,” which is also known as Emancipation Day or Freedom Day. It is certainly a holiday that deserves a more substantial place in U.S. history. And, it is likely that when President Donald Trump announced he was changing his upcoming rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma out of respect for Juneteenth, many people may not have known what he meant.

Trump had planned to have his rally in Tulsa this coming Friday, but he changed it to Saturday out of respect for Juneteenth: “We had previously scheduled our #MAGA Rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for June 19th… Unfortunately, however, this would fall on the Juneteenth Holiday.” He went on to note that:

Juneteenth is not the only casualty of genuine recognition by historically challenged Americans

Many of my African American friends and supporters have reached out to suggest that we consider changing the date out of respect for this Holiday, and in observance of this important occasion and all that it represents. I have therefore decided to move our rally to Saturday, June 20th…

Juneteenth is not the only casualty of genuine recognition by historically challenged Americans. Before that holiday could even be established, in order to end slavery in the South, hundreds of thousands of boys and men died fighting during the Civil War. This is one fact that is also almost forgotten, or it is purposefully distorted by revisionist historians who want to fan the divisiveness of racism.

To be sure, institutionalized racism did not originate with the Democrat Party, but they unabashedly promoted dehumanization of an entire race of people for economic benefit. And, Democrats perpetuated institutionalized racism until the days of the Civil Rights Movement. Again, Democrat leaders had to be forced to eliminate their institutionalized racism.

Today, the Democrats use collective “white guilt” to generate a moral weakness in white people. Nonetheless, Democrats of any color are shameless. When a black minister from Washington state requested that President Obama apologize for slavery on behalf of the Democrat Party, Obama made no effort to honor the request. Obama showed the true colors of his Party which takes  zero responsibility for the sake of everyone’s Freedom.

The Future & Safe Havens


QUESTION: Hi martin
Hope you are keeping great and getting better each day.
You mentioned in a previous blog that you would be talking about safe havens if there are any. Is this something you will be talking about in future.
Thanks for keeping me sane in these crazy times.
All the best
M

ANSWER: We are running our models on every country in the world in search of an alternative. There is no question about it, we will release a report quickly on this Great Reset. The computer has been forecasting these events and quite honestly, it has never been wrong. The problem has been it cares not who the actor is, it merely looks at the trend. I have taken great pains to investigate and document the players and their goals. No government will dare even investigate these people and they have enough money to bribes every politician to do their bidding. They are making a serious mistake for what they are doing is cornering the population and they will soon see what a revolution really is all about.

It forecast in 1985 that we would see the first time a third-party candidate could win the White House in 2016. That forecast was made long before anyone even thought of Donald Trump. The event takes place on schedule and we have to fill in the fundamentals. The computer has been forecasting that Western Civilization would crash and burn by 2032 and the financial capital of the world would shift to China. We can see with each passing month how that forecast is unfolding on schedule. NEVER in my wildest dreams would I have suspected that a group of billionaires would ban together to destroy our world economy so they could reshape it in the fashion they desire.

Nevertheless, we are working diligently to try to map out6 the various paths to the future for all of us to take. These people are of course exempting themselves from their own proposals, but they support a 400% increase in taxation on the rest of us great unwashed.

Is Trudeau Hiding Environmental Data Calling Top Secret Because it Exposes his Government?


Armstrong Economics Blog

In Canada, the Trudeau government is refusing to release carbon tax data, saying it is top secret so that Canadians are unable to see the findings of the report. This is pretty standard for if it supported their agenda, they would be the first to release it to the public. Things become secret like the Kennedy Assassination files only when the expose the corruption within the government. Trudeau certain does not want to reveal that all the taxes imposed for the climate never go to anything connected to the climate.

NO Football This Season


There is clearly a deliberate move to keep the world shut down and to force everyone to be tracked and vaccinated. Someone really needs to expose Anthony Fauci for there is a ton of circumstantial evidence that besides being beholding to Bill Gates, he funded the very research to create this type of virus and when scientists complained, he sent it off to Whuan and funded China to do the work he was not allowed to do in the USA. Then we have China and the USA blaming each other with nobody investigating the Billionaires and the World Economic Forum for they are pushing a 400% increase in taxes and to lock down everyone.

Fauci has the audacity to come out and say that for a football season to be possible, they need to create a “bubble” format that would isolate the players from the public and force them to be testes each day. He then elaborated: “Unless players are essentially in a bubble – insulated from the community and they are tested nearly every day – it would be very hard to see how football is able to be played this fall.” Fauci then added: “If there is a second wave, which is certainly a possibility and which would be complicated by the predictable flu season, football may not happen this year.”

Fauci is part of these elitists who think they can just decree and the people must obey. Some cities are imposing the mandatory face masks and the second time you do not have one on you go to prison. This is going to lead to a revoluti0n and these elitists will come to finally realize there are common-sense limitations to their power. The way they are treating this virus with a kill ration of 0.0003% of the population like it is the Black Plague. It is by no means that serious and many people assume they just have a cold.

Fifth Redacted Name in Rosenstein’s Scope Memo Identified as Walid Phares…


An interesting new discovery amid revelations into the background motives of President Obama to weaponize the intelligence apparatus against his political opposition.

Today former Trump campaign foreign policy advisor Walid Phares identified himself as the fifth target in the August 2, 2017, Rosenstein scope memo.  [The redacted section above] With this admission/discovery a more interesting background makes sense.

(Via John Solomon) […] Phares is speaking out for the first time, suggesting that one of the motives of those who made the allegations and sustained the investigation was to hamper the early Trump presidency’s foreign policy goals, including the 45th president’s long-promised plan to cancel the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal.

“In my view, the push against the Trump campaign, and then the transition, and then the administration was on behalf of those who wanted to defend the Iran deal, to protect the interests of the Iran deal,” Phares told Just the News. (link)

.

As the story is told, the DOJ team led by Robert Mueller targeted Phares under the same FARA auspices they used against George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn and Carter Page.  The accusation that Phares was an unregistered foreign lobbyist.

Both George Papadopoulos and Whalid Phares were involved in connecting Egyptian leader Fattah Abdel al-Sisi with President Trump in New York for their first meeting.

(2016 meeting between candidate Donald Trump and President al-Sisi)

President al-Sisi was a key political nemisis of President Obama because of al-Sisi’s position against the Muslim Brotherhood, specifically against Mohammed Morsi, the brotherhood installed dictator of Egypt during the Islamist Spring.

President Obama supported the extremist regime of Morsi, and when the Egyptian people rose up behind General al-Sisi to remove Morsi, President Obama was furious.  Both President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry were consistently at odds with al-Sisi while they were in office.  However, there’s a lot of nuance because the Obama administration were very concerned about allowing the visibility of their support for the Brotherhood to surface.

CTH was very deep in the weeds during this entire timeframe in Egypt, long before candidate Donald Trump ever stepped into the picture.  This new admission by Walid Phares, a highly visible critic of the Brotherhood, now makes a ton of background activity make sense.

“The Obama administration obviously was not happy,” Phares said. “Not just because Donald Trump won the election, but they knew that he was about to change things. The most important point that they were concerned about, and that was not a secret, was the fact that Donald Trump said during the campaign that he will be withdrawing, he will be canceling, he used different terminology, the Iran deal. And the Iran deal was a major strategic achievement of the Obama administration. Definitely, they were not happy with that.”

“And Donald Trump, also during his campaign, was talking about changing, shifting alliances in the region,” he added. “He didn’t want the partnership with the Muslim Brotherhood … So it was a massive change in foreign policy.”

Way back in 2009, shortly after taking office, President Obama chose Cairo, Egypt, as the first destination to deliver a very specific foreign policy speech.  Within the speech Obama outlined a new approach, the U.S. would no longer take interventionist action to maintain stability against radical Islam.  As an outcome of that speech the “Arab Spring” began.

When President Obama ignited the “Islamist Spring” with his speech in Egypt, what he really articulated was a shift in U.S. foreign policy to support The Muslim Brotherhood. As an outcome of the shift in policy President Obama helped kill the regional zookeepers (Hosni Mubarek, Egypt; Ben Ali, Tunisia and eventually Khadaffi in Libya) and Obama unleashed the big cats… radical Islamists.

Political Islam, writ large, is represented by The Brotherhood.  Turkish President Recep Erdogan sees himself as the modern leader of political Islam using the Brotherhood to recreate the Ottoman Empire.

Ben Ali (Tunis), Hosni Mubarak (Egypt) and Khadaffi (Libya), were the first zookeepers removed.  Obama’s U.S. foreign policy supported Muslim Brotherhood replacements like Mohamed Morsi in Egypt.  However, Obama failed in the effort to remove Bashir Assad in Syria; as a result all extremist factions of the Brotherhood gathered to form ISIS.

Factions like al-Qaeda, al-Nusra and ISIS all fall under the umbrella of The Muslim Brotherhood.  The exiled Brotherhood leaders initially fled Egypt to Qatar until they were further driven-out by the Gulf Cooperation Council and ultimately given safe-harbor in Turkey, by Recep Erdogan.

As a gatekeeper between radical Islamist elements and Europe, President Erdogan holds the ultimate leverage and blackmail over his NATO allies.

Erdogan essentially holds the position of power because if Europe does not acquiesce to his demands he can open the gates and flood the EU with extremists.

Erdogan loved to play this power game against the EU and ultimately against the U.S.

President Obama embraced President Erdogan because ideologically the Obama administration and Erdogan both supported political Islam, The Muslim Brotherhood.

Erdogan’s regional arch nemesis has always been Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.  As a general al Sisi had to deal with the outcomes of Muslim Brotherhood extremism, and ultimately remove Mohamed Morsi from office.   President Sisi formed the Arab coalition that is now aligned with President Donald Trump against the radical elements of political Islam known as The Muslim Brotherhood.

The Trump-era U.S/Arab coalition includes Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Yemen.  Additionally the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are aligned against the radical elements within political Islam (The Brotherhood), and the U.S. is supporting the GCC coalition with self-defense military purchases.

This is where the Northern Syria border with Turkey comes into the picture.  Most of the neocon U.S. politicians wanted the U.S. military to continue the role of zookeepers to keep political Islam in check.  In essence the Lindsey Graham and John Bolton position was for the U.S. military to remain in Syria to keep the big cat cages closed.

Senator Graham’s policy viewpoint means no exit from the middle-east, ever.  This view is against the policy view of President Donald Trump.

Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan wanted to be the biggest cat in the zoo.  His goal was/is the recreation of the Ottoman Empire and his alignment with The Muslim Brotherhood is purposeful to achieve this goal.

Ultimately the largest stakeholder in this dynamic is Europe, because they stand the greatest risk if Erdogan is successful and then turns his assembly toward Europe.  Remember, Erdogan as President of Turkey is now the gatekeeper; and Erdogan is also a member of NATO.

Unfortunately Europe refused to defend itself; and the NATO alliance was/is too weak to kick Erdogan out. The EU weakness is visible in their position not take their own ISIS fighters back for trial and punishment; and instead, just like Lindsey Graham, the EU position demanded the U.S. to remain as perpetual zookeepers.

Making matters worse the EU refused to pay for the U.S. to remain as zookeepers, and the EU simultaneously fights the U.S. on trade agreements so they can continue their one-way financial benefits.  This hypocritical and one-sided position is part of the reason why President Trump has long held a view the NATO alliance does not benefit the U.S.

In 2019 Turkish President Erdogan was going to enter Syria regardless of what the EU, NATO or the U.S. said about it. Erdogan has the support of political Islam and ultimately that was what was important to his objectives.

With Europe refusing to stand-up to defend their own interests, President Trump trusted his instincts and took the bold approach to remove U.S. forces from the untenable position of guarding the peace between Syrian factions and Turkish elements.

Instead, President Trump openly supported the Arab coalition and the GCC that has been assembling a military coalition to protect itself from the Muslim Brotherhood. That is why President Trump was willing to support Saudi Arabia with more weapons and U.S. training while withdrawing troops from Syria where the U.S. was having to stand alone to protect the interests of Europeans who will not protect themselves.

In one regional area the U.S. supports and defends Israel, Egypt and Jordan. In the Southern region the U.S. supports the Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Yemen, Bahrain and Qatar).

President Trump then uses economic weapons against Turkey to keep them in check and Trump warned Erdogan about prolonged entry into Syria and what he would do economically against them.  Erdogan made some noise in public about the threat, but he also realized President Trump was serious.  Erdogan realized he could quickly be a target like China; …and Trump doesn’t bluff; …and he’s done it before.

Meanwhile, President Trump continues to use economic weapons against the EU, pulls troops from Germany, and essentially leverages U.S. economic power against the EU for creating this NATO mess and refusing to defend themselves.

When considering a military option, President Trump reserves deployment of military weapons for allies that are: (A) willing to protect themselves, and (B) willing to pay for the support of the U.S. military protection.

[Payment can come directly (cash purchases), indirectly (benefits within trade agreements), or strategically (take action upon demand) the latter is how President Trump gets Saudi Arabia and OPEC to control their oil production valves.]

As a result of this strategic approach; and after President Trump removed U.S. forces from the border and gave Erdogan a taste of what he asked for (war); and after an initial week of severe battles where military casualties were too great to continue; the Turkish government and Kurdish opposition forces in Syria signed a peace agreement.

The border region has been stable ever since, and note U.S. forces are not involved.

We are out of one Syrian quagmire, the area is stable, President Trump’s approach worked; and, perhaps more importantly, Lindsey Graham was taught a lesson.

Quite remarkably Lindsey Graham admitted he was wrong and Trump was right…

However, conversely John Bolton, who relies on a career of blood-brokering, would not admit he was wrong and instead writes a ridiculous dossier.

 

Reports: Internal Messages Organizing Saturday July 4th as Police Strike Day…


This year July 4th falls on a Saturday.

According to two media outlets (NY post) and (Fox) at 3:00pm on July 4th the New York Police Dept. will cease their work shifts in a display of protest against the constant attacks against them by politicians and activists.

Honestly, who can blame them.

National protests against police and law enforcement, primarily driven by the false Marxist ideology of Black Lives Matter, have become outrageous in the extreme.  The announcement in Atlanta by the Fulton County district attorney Paul Howard to charge a police officer with felony murder could be, and arguably should be, the final straw.

New York – […] “Police officers like you and me took an oath to protect strangers regardless of race, class or gender,” states one of the fliers. “Today we are vilified and must stand as one. Enclosed are instructions on how we will get our point across that we are necessary and must be valued.”

The message, which was sent out Thursday morning, also describes how an officer should go about taking a sick day on July 4, 2020 – “the date that we will make our voices heard.”

Independence day seems like just as good a day as any other for police around the entire nation to take a knee and let everyone see what 48 hours without law enforcement would actually look like.

Perhaps a dramatic action is warranted/needed to wake people up to the political agenda and scam behind the “defund the police” movement.  Perhaps July 4th could become the day when people start defending the police.

 

Peter Navarro Shreds John Bolton…


White House Trade Policy Advisor Peter Navarro outlines what many CTH readers are aware of.  John Bolton begged for the job and enlisted Sean Hannity and Mark Levin to get advanced recommendations.  That’s how he got in. However, as National Security Advisor John Bolton never understood the President Trump doctrine, using economics to achieve national security objectives.  Underline it, highlight it, that’s the primary issue.

In this interview Navarro goes full wolverine on Bolton, and deservedly so.  What Navarro outlines is the truthful reality.  You can tell because it aligns at every level with what we watched every day while John Bolton was in the administration. God bless Navarro for truthfully calling the baby ugly.  WATCH:

.

John Bolton felt unimportant in the world of geopolitics because President Trump relied on the economic team of Secretary Mnuchin, Secretary Ross, USTR Lighthizer and Trade Advisor Peter Navarro to achieve national security objectives.

Bolton was the knuckledragger at the end of the table, useful as leverage, where Trump could point to him and say lets make a deal to keep the warmongers like this guy out of the picture. Bolton’s biggest problem was with that Trump doctrine.

President Trump’s foreign policy doctrine is executed through the prism of using economics to achieve national security objectives.

This approach was so fundamentally foreign to Bolton that he couldn’t wrap his mind around how trade and economics could be used instead of dropping bombs.

Note Bolton’s own quote “I had the most futile role of all“.

He was futile because his DC neocon view to achieve national security through military is so far away from the successful strategic deployment of economics that he cannot fathom it.

Bolton had no way to open his mouth at the table because the economic team was speaking a foreign language.

The use of economics requires an entirely different set of skills. The strategic map is not looked at from the position of geographies; the map is viewed from the perspectives of wealth, currency exchanges, trade dynamics, tariffs, rules of commerce and other complex economic contracts that require a completely different frame of reference.

Planning successful outcomes on an economic front requires taking steps, gaming out the opponents financial goals, and taking actions that seem completely disconnected at the time they are happening – but come together much later on.

An example is U.S. energy development: a strong U.S.-Saudi Arabia relationship to coordinate lower oil prices, liquefied natural gas to Poland and simultaneous sanctions against Venezuela. Collectively this type of strategic economic process hurts the affluence of Russia, Iran and China and inhibits their geopolitical influence.

Hurt their strategic affluence, diminish their strategic influence… That’s geopolitical warfare using economics. This type of economic leverage is foreign to the mind of John Bolton who prefers a military approach.

Notice how the strategic economic team are exactly the same as the day the administration began?  The only member who changed in the first term was adding NEC Director Larry Kudlow to replace Gary Cohen after the China tariffs started.

The the economic team are achieving the desired results by following a plan Donald Trump thought about, formulated and expressed for decades. The group has remained consistent because they follow this economic strategy. Secretary Mnuchin, Secretary Ross, USTR Lightizer, Trade Advisor Navarro and NEC Chairman Kudlow are executing a well-defined plan, policy and strategy.

Bolton could never fathom how to be part of that economic strategy.

MRCTV

✔@mrctv

Embedded video

Bolton is clueless, won’t last long…

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

….He didn’t want Bolton anywhere near him. Bolton’s dumbest of all statements set us back very badly with North Korea, even now. I asked him, “what the hell were you thinking?” He had no answer and just apologized. That was early on, I should have fired him right then & there!

21.3K people are talking about this

TheLastRefuge@TheLastRefuge2

“He” = Kim Jong-un. For those who have paid close attention to the Chinese hostage reality, this is evidence of a relationship within the hostage rescue operation that has been entirely missed by all. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1273620783131250690 …

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Replying to @realDonaldTrump

….He didn’t want Bolton anywhere near him. Bolton’s dumbest of all statements set us back very badly with North Korea, even now. I asked him, “what the hell were you thinking?” He had no answer and just apologized. That was early on, I should have fired him right then & there!

102 people are talking about this
Advertiseme

The Big Con – The Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society are Being Funded by Google?…


The Big Con.

What Senator Josh Hawley called the fraud of “the conservative bargain” is taking on an entirely new light thanks to the work of The National Pulse in what should be a game-changing expose’ on just who is funding, or should we say ‘controlling’, key aspects of expressed U.S. conservatism.

President Trump, in a tenuous alignment with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, has previously said the list of judicial nominees presented, considered, nominated and confirmed, were assembled and vetted by two specific groups: The Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation; both of whom claim to hold conservative outlooks.

As a result, it’s a little more than concerning to discover that both organizations are being funded by the ultra-left wing Google ideology.   Yes, the same Big Tech outlet currently working on an advanced directive to block, control, censor and eliminate conservative speech on-line, is financing the organizations who claim to support conservative speech.

That revelation should get some attention…. but it won’t… because the same conservative pundits who are in place to get the attention of conservative Americans, and ultimately control what outrages should garner the attention of conservative thinkers, are financial benefactors of the same organizations under the control of their left-wing financing.

Think about that carefully.

Let that sink in.

Things starting to make sense now?

The standing ovation at CPAC for Paul Ryan’s omnibus spending making sense now?

How many conservative pundits hang the shingle of their bona-fides based on their association with The Federalist Society, The Heritage Foundation, or  The CATO institute?

Do we really think those well known conservative voices, radio hosts, television pundits, booksellers and publication authors would now be part of an expose’ of admission?  Will the crowd of conservative voices stand jaw agape to discover their bank accounts are actually full of Google and Big Tech money?  Doubtful; it would be against their interests.

You can read the FULL LIST of which conservative groups are being funded by Google and Big Tech HERE.  And don’t skip the pearl-clutching justification from the Heritage Foundation at the bottom of the article.

Methinks they doth protest too much.

Senator Josh Hawley is right, the “Conservative Bargain” is based on a fraud…

But don’t worry, you won’t hear Mark Levin, Sean Hannity or Laura Ingraham discuss it; unless, that is, their discussion includes the always popular controlled outrage approach.

When you consider the scale of left-wing Big Tech’s financial control, all of that stuff that we are told to keep us from tarring and feathering the Republican DC leadership, certainly seems like one big uniparty con job.

However, that said, the Supreme Court Judge Gorsuch decisions; and the Supreme Court Justice Roberts decisions take on a new light when you consider their nominations were advanced and confirmed in the best interests of silicon valley.  I digress…

…There are Trillions at Stake

.

Advertisements

Supreme Court Blocks Termination of DACA Program – Justice John Roberts Makes Political Stand…


A supreme court ruling today has blocked the termination of a court-admitted unconstitutional executive action known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals).  The background of the DACA controversy, and the prior position of the court on the sister program DAPA, makes this ruling the most political ruling yet by Chief Justice John Roberts.  [pdf link to ruling here]

The court decision was a 5-4 ruling.  Justice Roberts sided with the four liberal justices in blocking the termination of the executive program.  What makes this ruling outrageous is within the majority opinion of the court they recognize the Trump administration has the legal and constitutional authority to terminate the program; but the court, specifically John Roberts, doesn’t like the way in which the administration might do it.

The crux of Justice Roberts’ opinion is openly political.  The majority admit there is no constitutional protection for DACA recipients, and the Trump administration has the authority to dissolve and reverse the protections under the previous executive action; however, Roberts specifically cites his concern with deportation.

Accepting the argument that benefits provided by DACA were illegal, Roberts observed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), via the DACA dissolution memo of Elaine Duke, could have still retained protection from deportation. Framing the argument of Justice Robert’s concern is that DHS concluded, without any explanation, protection from deportation terminates with the removal of DACA protections and benefits.

Additionally, Roberts added, former DHS Secretary Elaine Duke (2017) did not address whether DACA recipients had counted on the existence of the program in arranging their lives; if she had, he suggested, she “might have considered more accommodating termination dates” for DACA recipients who were in the middle of academic programs, military service or medical treatment.

The core of John Robert’s argument is that DACA recipients, the previously transported children of illegal aliens into the United States, would be subject to deportation if the DACA protections were terminated.

Judge Roberts, and all other justices, concede the executive action could be terminated or reversed because, well, after all it’s not a law; but their majority decision rests on their expressed desire to block deportation.  That’s the fulcrum of the Robert’s opinion.

That is not a legal position, that framework is entirely a political position.

The admission that President Trump has the authority to terminate DACA, and the simultaneous admission they don’t like what Trump might do after the termination, is why I say this is the most political decision to ever come out of the Supreme Court.

To make the issue even more unfathomable, we must remember when the sister program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Arrivals (DAPA) was terminated, Justice John Roberts was on the other side of the argument.  WHAT A CONTRAST.

After the death of Justice Scalia there were only eight justices on the supreme court.  In 2016 the court ruled 4-4 to allow the lower court ruling to stand that terminated the DAPA program (Judge Andrew Hanen).

In the 2016 ruling Justice Roberts supported the termination.   However, in 2020 with an almost identical fact pattern between DACA and DAPA for legal review, Justice Roberts flips his position and blocks the termination.  Yeah, that’s political – nothing more.

♦CONSEQUENCES – President Trump has openly said he was awaiting a ruling in favor of the termination of DACA so that congress would be forced to finally deal with the issue.  The core outlook for President Trump was to use the DACA issue to force resolution inside a much needed immigration bill.

Without a doubt this decision today must be very frustrating.

The ruling doesn’t stop the Trump administration from terminating DACA eventually; it only blocks them from using the 2017 DHS memorandum issued by DHS Secretary Elaine Duke.  Which again points the political nature of this particular decision.

The Trump administration can still use the June 2018 termination memorandum issued by DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen; which was written in support of the previous Duke memo and which the supreme court refused to consider in their review…. Because the SCOTUS wanted to punt the DACA problem to the November 2020 election.

Yes, that’s correct.  The concerns the Supreme Court had with the 2017 DACA termination, memo outlined by DHS secretary Elaine Duke, were reconciled by the 2018 DACA termination memo written by Kirstjen Nielsen…  That’s why SCOTUS refused to review it.

FUBAR.

President Trump Holds Small Business Roundtable With U.S. Governors – 3:00pm Livestream


This afternoon President Trump is holding a roundtable with governors on the reopening of America’s small businesses. The anticipated start time is 3:00pm ET.

UPDATE: Video Added

WH Livestream Link – Fox News Livestream Link – Fox Business Livestream

.

.

.