Trump Lays Foundation To Seize Assets & Arrest George Soros & MANY MORE

President Trump signs Executive Order Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption, otherwise known as the foundation to seize assets of corrupt politicians.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (Public Law 114-328) (the “Act”), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)) (INA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the prevalence and severity of human rights abuse and corruption that have their source, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States, such as those committed or directed by persons listed in the Annex to this order, have reached such scope and gravity that they threaten the stability of international political and economic systems. Human rights abuse and corruption undermine the values that form an essential foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies; have devastating impacts on individuals; weaken democratic institutions; degrade the rule of law; perpetuate violent conflicts; facilitate the activities of dangerous persons; and undermine economic markets. The United States seeks to impose tangible and significant consequences on those who commit serious human rights abuse or engage in corruption, as well as to protect the financial system of the United States from abuse by these same persons.

I therefore determine that serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

I hereby determine and order:

Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

(i) the persons listed in the Annex to this order;

(ii) any foreign person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General:

(A) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse;

(B) to be a current or former government official, or a person acting for or on behalf of such an official, who is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in:

(1) corruption, including the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources, or bribery; or

(2) the transfer or the facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption;

(C) to be or have been a leader or official of:

(1) an entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section relating to the leader’s or official’s tenure; or

(2) an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order as a result of activities related to the leader’s or official’s tenure; or

(D) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section; and

(iii) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General:

(A) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of:

(1) any activity described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section that is conducted by a foreign person;

(2) any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(3) any entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section, where the activity is conducted by a foreign person;

(B) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(C) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (iii)(A) or (B) of this section.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted before the effective date of this order.

Sec. 2. The unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in section 1 of this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and the entry of such persons into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, is hereby suspended. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).

Sec. 3. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the types of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 4. The prohibitions in section 1 include:

(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 5. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 6. For the purposes of this order:

(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;

(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; and

(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Sec. 7. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to this order.

Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including adopting rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to me by IEEPA and the Act as may be necessary to implement this order and section 1263(a) of the Act with respect to the determinations provided for therein. The Secretary of the Treasury may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States. All agencies shall take all appropriate measures within their authority to implement this order.

Sec. 9. The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to take such actions, including adopting rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to me by IEEPA, the INA, and the Act as may be necessary to carry out section 2 of this order and, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the reporting requirement in section 1264(a) of the Act with respect to the reports provided for in section 1264(b)(2) of that Act. The Secretary of State may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 10. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, is hereby authorized to determine that circumstances no longer warrant the blocking of the property and interests in property of a person listed in the Annex to this order, and to take necessary action to give effect to that determination.

Sec. 11. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

Sec. 12. This order is effective at 12:01 a.m., Eastern Standard Time, December 21, 2017.

Sec. 13. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Source: o4news.com

Trump Just Delivered Some Bad News To Entitled Welfare Leeches Who Refuse To Get A Job

After years of bleeding the taxpayers dry with Obama-phones, unlimited benefits, and bottomless food stamps, welfare leeches who refuse to pull their own weight aren’t going to like what President Donald Trump just announced. You’re going to love this.

While Barack Obama will always be remembered as the president who illegally ran guns to drug cartels, empowered a nuclear Iran, and freed a record number of Islamic terrorists, his economic legacy is just as devastating. Like a preteen garnering votes for class president, the former community organizer-in-chief injected taxpayer funds into failed social programs in a bid to secure votes from the perpetually dependent, impoverished, Democrat-run ghettos.

Although 8 years of frivolous spending, terrible deals, and surmounting debt were left to Trump, the “America first” businessman is rescinding Obama mandates faster than the mainstream media can spin a story. However, Trump’s latest repeal is going to have the welfare leeches and career druggies creeping out of the woodwork like never before.

Breitbart reports that the Trump administration has officially unveiled a new regulation which will require drug testing for unemployment benefit recipients as well as a stipulation that they must prove they are “job-ready from day one.” In his signing of the Congressional Review Act (CRA), President Trump was able to repeal an Obama-era mandate that prevented states from drug testing unemployment benefit applicants.

House Ways and Means chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) proposed the repeal, which was sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), explaining that the regulation will crack down on both those who rely on welfare while abusing narcotics that prevent them from obtaining gainful employment as well as those who have no intention of re-entering the workforce.

“President Trump just signed into law my bill that abolishes an Obama-era rule. After five years of battling with the Obama Department of Labor, states like Texas will now be allowed to drug test folks on unemployment to ensure they are job-ready from day one. This is a win for families, workers, job creators, and local economies,” Brady explained.

Although American unemployment is holding at a 17-year record low, the Trump administration’s regulation will undoubtedly tighten up restrictions for such welfare to ensure that it is being utilized as a boost to enter the workforce instead of an incentive to continue to remain jobless.

Previously, Republicans confirmed that the 2016 unemployment mandate only allowed the requirement for jobless Americans to submit drug testing if they were in positions that commonly required it, such as commercial and public transit drivers, airline pilots and crew members, and jobs that require the person to carry a firearm. However, the new regulation will allow states to drug test a wider range of applicants who seek unemployment benefits. Those who fail testing will be subjected to rejection or termination of their welfare.

Strategic Services on Unemployment and Workers’ Compensation President Doug Holmes reiterated that if applicants want benefits, they must be sober and actively seeking out employment, according to The Hill.

“This is an insurance program, it’s not public assistance,” he said. “An individual has to be available and able to work. If they’re not available and able to work, week by week by week, then they don’t meet the requirements to be paid unemployment compensation benefits. If an individual has a significant problem that renders him or her unavailable to work, the appropriate response is to refer them to a place to get help. They should not be paid unemployment benefits.”

Until Trump’s repeal, only 3 states refuted Obama’s mandate to allow drug testing for their unemployment insurance program — Texas, Mississippi, and Wisconsin. Fortunately, all 50 states will be empowered to implement the regulation as early as June, according to the Labor Department.

Welfare was never intended to be an incentive for laziness or lawlessness. On the contrary, these taxpayer benefits were always meant to serve as a springboard for the unfortunate to get back on their feet again.

For 2 terms, former President Barack Obama showed the American people that he cared much more for the welfare abusers, Gitmo terrorists, illegal aliens, and elite political crooks rather than the hard-working citizens he was elected to represent. Now, we have a leader who not only refuses to bow to our global enemies but seeks to empower our nation to reach the level of progress and prosperity it deserves.

Source: Symbol Of Law

Robert De Niro Just Busted In Disgusting Act After Calling Trump A ‘Low Life’ – His Acting Career Is OVER

It was not that long ago that WikiLeaks dropped the Podesta emails which depicted pedophilia in our very own government. Of course, the mainstream media has done its best to sweep this disgusting crime under the rug. However, there are those out there who are determined to root out these perverts hiding in our government and the entertainment industry. Over the last few weeks, new explosive allegations have emerged that point to a circle of high-powered executives and actors engaged in pedophilia and sexual assault.

Harvey Weinstein, an influential film producer, and Kevin Spacey, an Oscar-winning actor, have both been fingered as perpetrators in this sick circle. Now, Robert De Niro another member of Hollywood royalty was just discovered using the services of an international prostitution ring, but this sex ring has an even darker underbelly that will shock everyone.

During the presidential election, the liberal media and Hollywood elites continually based Donald Trump as a “low-life” sexual predator. The allegations stemmed from leaked audio tapes from 2005, of Trump in a locker room speaking crassly to washed-up actor Billy Bush. Of course, the conversation was taken out of context, but that did not stop Robert De Niro from using that audio to blast President Trump as a sexual predator.

Now, De Niro has been caught in a scandal that will not quickly be swept under the rug since the acclaimed actor was caught employing the services of a prostitution ring known to hire underaged children for wealthy, high-powered clients.

According to court documents, John Lichfield, a journalist who works for London’s Independent revealed that the prostitution agency routinely entrapped underage girls as young as 15-years-old, and forced them to have sex with Hollywood’s rich and powerful.

The court documents read like a trashy sex novel, filled with movie stars, high-ranking foreign dignitaries, arms deals, and politicians from the United States. Of course, the mainstream media did all that they could to hide this explosive story and protect Robert De Niro from the damaging discovery.

After discovering the court documents, John Lichfield wrote, “Six people are charged with the running of an international prostitution ring, whose call-girls entertained the actor Robert De Niro, the former tennis player, Wojtek Fibak, two senior (but unnamed) French politicians and several Gulf princes. The agency specialised in tricking, or trapping, star-struck teenage girls into selling their bodies with the promise of careers as models or actresses.”

This horrific discovery of sexual perversion was terrible enough, but the connection between De Niro and sexual predator Harvey Weinstein is even worse. According to sources, the two men were good friends and were often photographed together, and Weinstein frequented De Niro’s exclusive Manhattan restaurant, Tribeca Grill.

The swanky eatery was known as a “luxe magnet for celebrity seekers,” and Weinstein was often found there luring his victims with promises of fame and fortune before sexually assaulting them.

A former employee of De Niro’s at Tribeca Grill opened up to the New York Post about what it was like working in Robert De Niro’s world. The waitress revealed that while De Niro fawned over Harvey Weinstein, catering to his every whim, the Hollywood producer would treat her and her colleagues like human garbage.

“Harvey Weinstein was every bit the sleazy Hollywood caricature recent reports have made him out to be. When I was working as a waitress, I watched numerous times as a string of young women — some seemingly no older than 21 — entered the restaurant for long, flirty dinners with him, even though he was married with five children.

“These women were all the same: vaguely European, always beautiful, stylishly dressed, and totally out of place next to someone like him.

“The ritual for his rendezvous was very firm. Champagne, caviar, and an unspoken rule that Weinstein and his date not be disturbed. The pair would sit close, whispering and touching each other suggestively. After dining, Weinstein and the woman would often disappear for a while, exiting the restaurant through a side door.”

When President Trump said that he was going to drain the swamp, it did not just apply to crooked politicians, in the government. Trump is intent on busting human trafficking rings and the people who prey on innocent children for their nasty sexual pleasure. Earlier this year, President Trump announced a federal investigation into the elite pedophile scandal that has gripped our nation.

After learning of yet another dominant Hollywood individual being embroiled in a sex scandal, it makes sense why these actors, producers, and politicians are scared of President Donald Trump.
 

African Immigrant Has One Question For Liberals Erupting Over Trump’s ‘Shithole’ Comment

The mainstream media has relentlessly attacked President Donald Trump over a rumor that he called certain third-world nations “shitholes.” However, an African immigrant from one of these countries has interrupted the onslaught to ask liberals one brilliant question concerning their outrage.

On Thursday, U.S. lawmakers leaked to the press that President Donald Trump had made unsavory comments about some of the world’s most economically destitute and politically ravaged nations, allegedly asking, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Lawmakers claim that Trump named Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries that produce a large number of immigrants to the U.S. to prove his point.

Immediately, liberals and the mainstream media purported this unfounded allegation as indisputable fact, once again triggering the left’s patent political meltdown. However, just as the MSM and its easily-swayed audience members launched their vicious attack on Trump, one African immigrant has raised a question to these outraged leftists that unquestionably deserves an answer.

As a Nigerian immigrant to the U.S. and graduate of Georgia Military College, Chibuzo Ezeani has worthier insight and opinion on President Donald Trump’s recent alleged comments than any social justice warrior. Just after hearing the mainstream media perpetuate the rumor that Trump called African nations like his home country “shitholes,” Ezeani took to Facebook to ask the offended virtue-signaling leftists a brilliant question.

“If African countries are not shithole countries, why then should we be struggling to run away from them into European, Asian, and American countries respectively?” he asked.

Ezeani explained that he doesn’t “feel a bit offended by” Trump’s supposed comment and instead proceeded to educate ignorant liberals and the left-leaning MSM. Along with agreeing with Trump, Ezeani blamed African leaders for “allowing African countries to be such shithole countries,” and whose policies lead to “Africans selling out whatever belongings” they have and “running to western embassies in their various countries to beg for visas.”

Furthermore, Ezeani thanked Trump for having the “guts to say” what most people are thinking, adding that if his words aren’t accurate, “we Africans should not be running away from our continent to the Western world.”

Having left Nigeria for a better life in America, Chibuzo Ezeani understands firsthand just how devastated these countries are and why immigrants are flocking to our shores. Aside from applauding President Donald Trump’s politically incorrect yet truthful talk, Ezeani turned his focus to liberals, chastising them for their hypocritical condemnation and ingratitude of such a wonderful nation and leader.

“President Trump can work to make America great again, and that is a positive thing and nothing wrong with that,” he wrote in a follow-up post. “But why not our African leaders work to make African continent great again? Why can’t the Nigerian leaders say the same thing as Trump had said and work to make Nigeria nation great again? Why can’t the Black leaders in America work to make the black neighborhoods great again?”

Again, Ezeani called on those feigning misplaced outrage over Trump’s alleged comments to question why people across the globe are dying to get into the U.S. if their countries are so magnificent and America is such a miserable place for foreigners.

“Can we for once ask ourselves why we the African people keep running away from our own countries into the western countries to live despite the fact that most of our countries have wealth of mineral resources?” Ezeani once again asked. “Why must we keep on living in the white people’s countries if we have our own countries? All happened because our African leaders are very cruel, self-centered, shameless, treacherous, and very stupid. I like how Trump usually calling spade a spade, many others believed and agreed the same, but can’t just say it as is.”

Ezeani then confirmed the alleged comment, arguing that many of the countries Trump’s critics are defending are “worse than shitholes” thanks to the “foolishness of their various corrupt leaders.” Ezeani demanded to know who we are supposed to blame, “the president of the United States who boldly called them out for what they are or the African countries’ leaders who are so corrupt that they don’t give a damn?”

Although they’ve done nothing to help minorities do better for themselves, liberal hypocrites are ever ready to censure anyone who suggests that America is great. In fact, it is because of our exceptional values and freedoms that people around the world are risking their lives to come here. Of course, if these outraged liberals think these countries are so much better, perhaps they’d rather go live in them instead of virtue signaling from the comfort and safety of their computer screen.

Source: Mad World News

Muslims Call Mayor ‘Anti-Muslim’ For Banning Halal, He Shuts Them Up In 2 Brilliant Words

After a mayor banned halal, Muslims labeled him “Islamophobic” in an attempt to get him to cave on his decision. However, instead of submitting to political correctness, the clever mayor offered 2 brilliant words that immediately shut them up.

Europe continues to commit cultural suicide by admitting a ceaseless flood of mostly Muslim male migrants. When faced with legitimate examination and criticism of Islam’s fundamentals, Muslims and their liberal allies avoid meaningful debate at all costs, attacking their opponents with ad hominem name-calling and accusations of bigotry.

Disturbingly, many who’ve stood up against Islam’s war on Western values and freedoms fall silent when faced with the left’s incessant excoriation, beaten down by accusations of mythical “Islamophobia.” Fortunately, there are still a few bold patriots who not only refuse to back down amid the criticism, they’ve also learned to fight fire with fire.

After banning pork-free halal meals in schools, which were being offered to appease the demands of the Muslim minority, Beaucaire Mayor Julien Sanchez was immediately attacked by the Islamic community and their useful liberal idiots. The French official was soon labeled Islamophobic and “anti-Muslim” for refusing to force schools to change their entire menu to suit the Islamic compulsion for halal meals. Unfortunately for them, they picked the wrong infidel.

According to the Express, when 34-year-old Beaucaire Mayor Julien Sanchez heard that Muslims and liberals were accusing him of being “anti-Muslim” for rejecting their demands for halal school lunches, he cleverly turned their argument against them, alleging that they “are anti-Republican” in reference to their rejection of the Republic of France’s values and laws.

The young but incredibly brilliant mayor officially abolished his liberal predecessor’s submissive legislation, which required all schools to abstain from serving pork as well as offer meat that has been barbarically slaughtered in accordance with halal standards.

Mr Sanchez, told a local daily when announcing the new menu policy last month, said, “Pork-free substitution meals are anti-Republican.”

He said, “If you defend the values of the Republic and fight against communitarianism you’re branded an Islamophobe, which I am not. I’m not scared of anyone but I’m also not looking to stigmatise anyone. What’s wrong with pork? If it was a medical issue then I could understand, but the issue we’re dealing with here is religious, not medical… And religion has no place in schools.”

Expectedly, ignorant liberals continued to shill for the estimated 150 Muslim students whose families demanded halal, alleging that the decision would also affect Jewish students, the Daily Mail reports. However, they simply couldn’t argue his position that Muslims are being anti-Western, choosing to avoid his accusation altogether.

Marlene Schiappa told BFM TV the decision was “a typical example of someone brandishing secularism as an anti-Muslim political weapon, or anti-Jewish for that matter.”

The opposition leader in Beaucaire, Laure Cordelet, called it “an attack on the rights of children” which “stigmatises the Maghreb (north African) community and can in no way be justified in the name of secularism.”

Of course, Muslims are threatening to protest Mayor Julien Sanchez’s decision, demanding their minority rights, which their own religious law denies religious minorities. Still, Sanchez isn’t backing down and maintains that the Muslim minority want to live in France and have their foreign law too, which he will not recognize.

Thankfully, this mayor is standing strong against the tiny yet powerful Muslim minority’s attempt to impose Sharia law restrictions on the masses. It always begins the same — when Muslims are the minority, they whine about discrimination and demand their minority rights, but when they are the majority, there are no minority rights. Sharia law was not intended for only Muslims but for all mankind, as the Quran commands Muslims to establish it in every nation on earth.

Mayor Sanchez knows that although Muslims begin with small demands like halal meat, prayer breaks, or the right to wear the veil, these compulsions are just as required by Islamic law as more violent and oppressive ones. For example, Quran 33:59 commands men to order women to cover themselves, while 4:34 prescribes physical beatings for women who disobey their husbands. More disturbingly, 5:33 prescribes crucifixion for anyone insulting Islam and its tenents, while 9:29 commands Muslims to war with unbelievers until they have overthrown manmade law and established Sharia law.

Mayor Julien Sanchez is refusing to bow to political correctness and Sharia law in order to protect his people, culture, and freedoms. He is a beacon of hope in Europe as many countries are allowing the Muslim minority to slowly transform their nations into the same oppressed wastelands that their new guests claim to have fled.

Source: Mad World News

2 Million Rounds Of Ammo That ‘Went Missing’ Under Obama Turns Up In Enemy Hands

According to an insider report from the office of the Quartermaster at the Pentagon, the 2 million rounds of ammunition that “went missing” during Obama’s reign of terror were seized by US forces in Afghanistan and have been returned to the military inventory.

Brig. General George Mason’s assistant Chief of Staff all but confirmed the report, saying that the matter has been turned over to those in charge of accountability. She hinted that this is exactly the kind of thing that could end up before Congress:

“This was a huge violation of the public trust, not to mention an incredibly bold theft from the US taxpayer. Sourcres say the Taliban paid nearly a dollar a round. Someone in Obama’s circle pocketed that money.”

LLOD correspondent Skip Tetheluda contacted Congressman Trey Gowdy’s office, who would not confirm or deny any of the allegations. Angela Corning, Gowdy’s publicist, says the Congressman would certainly be eager to look into the details if this pans out, which is looking pretty good right about now.

The ammo went missing in early spring, 2010, while Hillary Clinton was still Secretary of State. The issue was handled as an “inventory discrepancy” and swept under the rug. Well…that rug has been lifted and what’s underneath is just, filthy.

California Lady Moves to Red State, Suddenly Sends Unexpected Message to Lib Friends Back Home

Is it all liberals or just those that live in California that seem to think those who live in the Midwest are ‘backwards’. Maybe it’s just that middle America to most is considered the ‘Bible belt’ and they just try to avoid our red states.

Leah Singer a California writer said, “I used to say I’d never move to a red state. And then I did. And it’s changed my life for the better…”

Leah Singer, a freelance writer, never imagined that she would end up in Trump Country… but when she moved to Indiana not long ago, her entire perception changed.

In an editorial piece published last weekend in the Indianapolis Star, the author sent a clear message to liberal friends back in California and throughout the country: You might be wrong about “red states.”

“I used to say I’d never move to a red state. And then I did. And it’s changed my life for the better,” Singer admitted.

As a “California girl,” the writer explained that the left-leaning West coast sees itself as a bastion of “diversity,” but Singer hinted that it was less of a paradise for anybody who didn’t parrot the liberal talking points.

“I was raised in California, where we like to believe diversity is applauded and opportunities abound,” she explained. “In many ways, California’s blue state bubble can be a very safe place to live if you subscribe to the popular liberal politics.”

In other words, it was diverse only if you thought and talked the same as everyone else, which kind of defeats the point. Regardless, Singer was a bit apprehensive about starting her new life in a conservative region.
“Over and over, I was questioned about why I would ever leave the Golden State for a ‘flyover’ red state. This phrase alone troubled me, and the implied perception that one flies over the Midwest just to get to their East or West coast home,” she stated.

Like sheltered people naively asking about a faraway land they’ve only vaguely heard about, the writer’s West coast friends had a lot of curiosity about how things were in America’s heartland.

“As I settled into life in the Midwest, I heard the same assumptive questions: ‘Did everyone you know vote for Donald Trump?’ ‘Are there African-American, Jewish, Asian, LGBTQ people in Indiana?’ ‘Do people make fun of you for listening to National Public Radio?’” Singer recalled.

The coastal transplant quickly realized that her past impressions of conservative America were nowhere near the reality.

“As I got to know my new Midwest home, I realize how living in a bubble and subscribing to the Middle America stereotypes is truly damaging to this country,” she explained.

“Never does one ask how the Indiana public schools provide many opportunities that have been cut from California’s public schools because of one budget crisis after another,” Singer continued.

“Never does one ask about the low cost of living that is allowing us to pay off the mountain of debt we accrued in California. And never does one ask about my fellow community members, who are running successful businesses, enriching the city’s arts and making a difference for the local environment.”

She noticed something that “enlightened” coastal liberals often ignore: Places such as California may not be as truly diverse as they pretend to be.

“Southern California is diverse racially and religiously; it really is not with respect to class or working poor,” the writer revealed.

“This is especially the case in San Diego County, where it’s becoming more difficult for middle-class families to own a home or afford rent, with 41% of homeowners and 57% of renters spending 30% or more of income on housing, all while incomes stay stagnant, according to the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce.”

In simple terms, many places in liberal enclaves have become so expensive to live that economic diversity is a thing of the past. It’s a bit like pretending that a gated community where everyone is a doctor or lawyer and drives a BMW is “diverse” — different racial boxes may be checked but it’s all a bit boring.

In the end, Singer’s positive experience with the Midwest helped her realize that many coastal elites purposely bury their heads in the sand when it comes to real diversity within the United States.

“(H)ow many of these people travel within their own country to get to know the ‘other?’ Why travel the globe, but not make an effort to get to know your Midwest neighbor?” the author asked.

“Living in Indiana, I now have an understanding of America that I did not before. I wish more people living outside the middle took the time to get to know the others living a few states away. I did, and I am a better person because of it,” she concluded.

Amen! Those who live in the Midwest or the ‘Bible belt’ are actually some of the hardest working, downright friendly and patriotic people you will ever meet.

Source: Conservative Tribune

Pelosi Heavily Slurs “PRESCRIPTION DRUGS” On LIVE TV Meltdown! Mentally UNFIT! RESIGN NOW!

Nancy Pelosi was at it again doing her best “Aunt Clara” imitation, for those youngsters not familiar with the bubbling mumbling zany aunt of Samantha Stevens in the classic 1960’s sitcom “Bewitched,” played by character actress Marion Lorne, who would create all sorts of chaos, confusion and mayhem. However Pelosi (sad to say) “isn’t play acting,” she’s the real deal, as this brief video clip reveals.

The Democratic Minority Leader is no stranger to putting her 77-year old foot in her mouth, like the lovable, scatterbrained “Aunt Clara” when Nancy speaks confusion follows.

This week the California lawmaker just returned to Washington to hold her weekly press conference, and instantly began doing her best “Aunt Clara” imitation, mumbling stumbling and repeating words and having one of those “senior moments” trouble saying “Martin Luther King” and slurring “prescription drugs.”

Pelosi had intended to use Rev. Martin Luther King’s legacy as a political talking point in pushing a progressive agenda of socialized medicine, however, what ensued was a rambling, incoherent performance, reminiscent of her past performances, which seems to have become more problematic with each year.

The congresswoman retreated to her notes time and again attempting to display a cohesive presentation to the media that had gathered to report on her press conference.

At one point she stumbled within her remarks appearing confused saying she was “inspired by Dr. King’s call for fairness, opportunity, and… equal oppor— opportunity, and equal acc— uh, acc– access to equality.”

She continued speaking appearing more lucid saying: “It’s really sad the Republicans tax cut.”

Then moments later she looked at the ceiling as if trying to remember her next line, then blurting out “86”, then exclaiming “83% of the benefits go to the top one percent,” she said. “It’s really sad,” she repeated.

Once again suffering a momentary lapse, slurring her words she continued: “prescription drugs.”

“What has happened this week that is…” she said, trailing off and staring at reporters.

“I don’t want to say different,” she finally continued, before correcting herself.

The bizarre press conference ended leaving journalists with a lot more questions regarding Pelosi’s mental health.

Source: Every Day Conservative

TRUMP Did it AGAIN!They Are HEADING To MICHIGAN NOW!

When Candidate Donald Trump said we would be winning so much that we were going to get tired of winning he wasn’t kidding.

Today Fiat Chrysler announced it will immediately be moving production of heavy-duty Ram trucks from Mexico to Michigan. And on top of that paying bonuses to US workers in response to the passage of Trump tax reform late last year in where corporations and the middle class got a huge tax cut and the Obamacare Mandate was repealed.

Fiat Chrysler went on to confirm they will be investing over $1 billion dollars in its Warren Truck Assembly Plant. A plant that will be used to make the Ram Heavy Duty Truck starting in late 2020. That truck is currently made in Saltillo, Mexico, where workers will continue to make commercial vehicles to sell in the US and international markets.

Fiat Chrysler did also confirm that the Warren plant will add 2,500 new jobs to the dying Michigan economy. The car company also plans to pay $2,000 bonuses this spring to about 60,000 hourly and salaried US employees but confirmed Senior executives won’t getting the bonus. Fiat Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne stated the company had to tweak its manufacturing model in order to keep up with that he lauded as “improvement to the US business environment under the current administration.”

He added that part of this tweak is that employees should also share in the tax savings.

Top 3 Conservative Wins in the Tax Plan

Last night, the final Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was released, following the House-Senate conference that took the best ideas from both plans and made a better, more conservative bill. This is the first major tax reform in a generation.

It’s hard to choose, but here are the top three conservative wins:

1. It is a major tax cut for hardworking families.

Our plan lowers individual tax rates, making sure Americans get to keep more of their hard-earned money. It also nearly doubles the standard deduction, meaning that the “zero bracket,” which the federal government doesn’t tax at all, will be expanded to $12,000 for single filers and $24,000 for married couples. Our plan also doubles the Child Tax Credit from $1,000 to $2,000 for each child—bringing relief to folks raising families.

What do these updated provisions mean for real people? The average family of four making $73,000 a year will see a tax cut of $2,059. That goes a long way when budgets are tight. It could mean more money to save for children’s college, a reserve for an emergency, or a vacation at the beach for a week in the summer. Bottom line: This new tax code eliminates the carve-outs for special interests, prioritizing the American people over the well-connected.

2. It eliminates Obamacare’s individual mandate penalty tax:

This is the crux of Obamacare—the individual mandate makes it illegal for people not to purchase a health care plan, and the government levies a major fine if people make the choice not to purchase a plan. The individual mandate’s purpose is to make young people, who are generally healthier, bear the burden of health care costs in this country.

The consequences of the individual mandate are dire, especially because Obamacare has driven up the cost of health care across the country, making premiums so expensive that many folks cannot afford health care at all. Therefore, the individual mandate punishes people for making decisions that make the most sense for them and their family. The government has no place in unnecessary, burdensome mandates, and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act does away with it, giving people much-needed relief and flexibility to buy the health care that’s right for them if they choose.

3. It opens up part of ANWR for energy development.

There is a section of non-wilderness federal land in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), located in Alaska, that is known to be abundant in oil reserves. Unfortunately, it has been previously banned for energy development, thanks to the insistence of special interests. This ban goes against the petitions of the Alaska delegation, which understands the benefits that oil drilling would bring to the state. If it becomes law, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will open this area up for energy exploration and development.

This would mean more energy developed here at home, instead of relying on other nations for our nation’s energy needs. Developing homegrown energy is always preferable, especially because some of these nations are hostile to the United States and our interests. It also means revenue of almost $1 billion in 10 years streaming into the United States Treasury, helping pay for the tax cut that Americans need and deserve. Developing this portion of ANWR also means thousands of good-paying jobs in Alaska and throughout the country. It would give the U.S. economy the boost that comes with major energy development.

Can someone please explain to me why the left hates this tax plan so much? It’s obvious it works for the middle class and corporations, while at the same time taxing the nuts in Hollywood who believe they should pay more taxes to make themselves feel better about the fact they are just a bunch of elitist overpaid and glorified pretenders.

Source: Freedom Daily
 

How The Clinton Foundation Turned Haiti Into A Sh*thole

In January 2015, a group of Haitians surrounded the New York offices of the Clinton Foundation. They chanted slogans, accusing Bill and Hillary Clinton of having robbed them of “billions of dollars.” Two months later, the Haitians were at it again, accusing the Clintons of duplicity, malfeasance, and theft. And in May 2015, they were back, this time outside New York’s Cipriani, where Bill Clinton received an award and collected a $500,000 check for his foundation. “Clinton, where’s the money?” the Haitian signs read. “In whose pockets?” Said Dhoud Andre of the Commission Against Dictatorship, “We are telling the world of the crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.”

Haitians demanding justice.

Haitians like Andre may sound a bit angry, but he and the protesters had good reason to be disgruntled. They had suffered a heavy blow from Mother Nature, and now it appeared that they were being battered again — this time by the Clintons. Their story goes back to 2010, when a massive 7.0 earthquake devastated the island, killing more than 200,000 people, leveling 100,000 homes, and leaving 1.5 million people destitute.

The devastating effect of the earthquake on a very poor nation provoked worldwide concern and inspired an outpouring of aid money intended to rebuild Haiti. Countries around the world, as well as private and philanthropic groups such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army, provided some $10.5 billion in aid, with $3.9 billion of it coming from the United States.

Haitians such as Andre, however, noticed that very little of this aid money actually got to poor people in Haiti. Some projects championed by the Clintons, such as the building of industrial parks and posh hotels, cost a great deal of money and offered scarce benefits to the truly needy. Port-au-Prince was supposed to be rebuilt; it was never rebuilt. Projects aimed at creating jobs proved to be bitter disappointments. Haitian unemployment remained high, largely undented by the funds that were supposed to pour into the country. Famine and illness continued to devastate the island nation.

The Haitians were initially sympathetic to the Clintons. One may say they believed in the message of “hope and change.” With his customary overstatement, Bill told the media, “Wouldn’t it be great if they become the first wireless nation in the world? They could, I’m telling you, they really could.”

I don’t blame the Haitians for falling for it; Bill is one of the world’s greatest story-tellers. He has fooled people far more sophisticated than the poor Haitians. Over time, however, the Haitians wised up. Whatever their initial expectations, many saw that much of the aid money seems never to have reached its destination; rather, it disappeared along the way.

Where is the money?

Where did it go? It did not escape the attention of the Haitians that Bill Clinton was the designated UN representative for aid to Haiti. Following the earthquake, Bill Clinton had with media fanfare established the Haiti Reconstruction Fund. Meanwhile, his wife Hillary was the United States secretary of state. She was in charge of U.S. aid allocated to Haiti. Together the Clintons were the two most powerful people who controlled the flow of funds to Haiti from around the world.

The Haitian protesters noticed an interesting pattern involving the Clintons and the designation of how aid funds were used. They observed that a number of companies that received contracts in Haiti happened to be entities that made large donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Haitian contracts appeared less tailored to the needs of Haiti than to the needs of the companies that were performing the services. In sum, Haitian deals appeared to be a quid pro quo for filling the coffers of the Clintons.

For example, the Clinton Foundation selected Clayton Homes, a construction company owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, to build temporary shelters in Haiti. Buffett is an active member of the Clinton Global Initiative who has donated generously to the Clintons as well as the Clinton Foundation. The contract was supposed to be given through the normal United Nations bidding process, with the deal going to the lowest bidder who met the project’s standards. UN officials said, however, that the contract was never competitively bid for.

Clayton offered to build “hurricane-proof trailers” but what they actually delivered turned out to be a disaster. The trailers were structurally unsafe, with high levels of formaldehyde and insulation coming out of the walls. There were problems with mold and fumes. The stifling heat inside made Haitians sick and many of them abandoned the trailers because they were ill-constructed and unusable.

The Clintons also funneled $10 million in federal loans to a firm called InnoVida, headed by Clinton donor Claudio Osorio. Osorio had loaded its board with Clinton cronies, including longtime Clinton ally General Wesley Clark; Hillary’s 2008 finance director Jonathan Mantz; and Democratic fundraiser Chris Korge who has helped raise millions for the Clintons.

jkh24khj

Normally the loan approval process takes months or even years. But in this case, a government official wrote, “Former President Bill Clinton is personally in contact with the company to organize its logistical and support needs. And as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has made available State Department resources to assist with logistical arrangements.”

InnoVida had not even provided an independently audited financial report that is normally a requirement for such applications. This requirement, however, was waived. On the basis of the Clinton connection, InnoVida’s application was fast-tracked and approved in two weeks.

The company, however, defaulted on the loan and never built any houses. An investigation revealed that Osorio had diverted company funds to pay for his Miami Beach mansion, his Maserati, and his Colorado ski chalet. He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering in 2013, and is currently serving a twelve-year prison term on fraud charges related to the loan.

Several Clinton cronies showed up with Bill to a 2011 Housing Expo that cost more than $2 million to stage. Bill Clinton said it would be a model for the construction of thousands of homes in Haiti. In reality, no homes have been built. A few dozen model units were constructed but even they have not been sold. Rather, they are now abandoned and have been taken over by squatters.

THE SCHOOLS THEY NEVER BUILT

USAID contracts to remove debris in Port-au-Prince went to a Washington-based company named CHF International. The company’s CEO David Weiss, a campaign contributor to Hillary in 2008, was deputy U.S. trade representative for North American Affairs during the Clinton administration. The corporate secretary of the board, Lauri Fitz-Pegado, served in a number of posts in the Clinton administration, including assistant secretary of commerce.The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, “built” is a term with a very loose interpretation. For example, the newspaper located a school featured in the Clinton Foundation annual report as “built through a Clinton Global Initiative Commitment to Action.” In reality, “The Clinton Foundation’s sole direct contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and tree-building activity.”

“The Clintons claim to have built schools in Haiti. But the New York Times discovered that when it comes to the Clintons, ‘built’ is a term with a very loose interpretation.”

USAID contracts also went to consulting firms such as New York–based Dalberg Global Development Advisors, which received a $1.5 million contract to identify relocation sites for Haitians. This company is an active participant and financial supporter of the Clinton Global Initiative. A later review by USAID’s inspector general found that Dalberg did a terrible job, naming uninhabitable mountains with steep ravines as possible sites for Haitian rebuilding.

Foreign governments and foreign companies got Haitian deals in exchange for bankrolling the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation lists the Brazilian construction firm OAS and the InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB) as donors that have given it between $1 billion and $5 billion.

The IDB receives funding from the State Department, and some of this funding was diverted to OAS for Haitian road-building contracts. Yet an IDB auditor, Mariela Antiga, complained that the contracts were padded with “excessive costs” to build roads “no one needed.” Antiga also alleged that IDB funds were going to a construction project on private land owned by former Haitian president Rene Preval — a Clinton buddy — and several of his cronies. For her efforts to expose corruption, Antiga was promptly instructed by the IDB to pack her bags and leave Haiti.

In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians.

Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti.

Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011.