Showing posts with label make America awesome. Show all posts
Showing posts with label make America awesome. Show all posts

Monday, February 15, 2016

REPORT: Ted Cruz Entered US Illegally in 1974


Jim Hoft Feb 12th, 2016 9:09 am

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. a retired colonel with 29 years of experience in the US Army Reserve, argues that Senator Ted Cruz entered the United States illegally as a child in 1974. His parents failed to file a CRBA form which is required by US law.Ted’s parents did not fill out the required form until 1986.

It would be nice if the Cruz camp cleared this up for Republican voters.
Via Family Security Matters:

Exactly how and when did Ted Cruz obtain U.S. citizenship?

The fact that it is still an open question at this stage of the Presidential campaign is a testament either to the galactic ignorance of our political-media elite or their willingness to place political expediency ahead of the Constitution and the law.

There is no third alternative.

Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada on December 22, 1970 and remained a Canadian citizen until he officially renounced it on May 14, 2014, eighteen months after taking the oath of office as a U.S. Senator. At the time of his birth, Cruz’s father was a citizen of Canada and his mother was a U.S. citizen.

Legally, Cruz could have obtained US citizenship through his mother consistent with Public Law 414, June 27, 1952, An Act: To revise the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality and for other purposes [H.R. 5678], Title III Nationality and Naturalization, Chapter 1 – Nationality at Birth and by Collective naturalization; Nationals and citizens of the United States at birth; the relevant section being 301 (a) (7):

“a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.”


In that case, Cruz’s mother should have filed a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America (CRBA) with the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate after the birth to document that the child was a U.S. citizen.

According to Cruz spokeswoman Catherine FrazierCruz’s mother did register his birth with the U.S. consulate and Cruz received a U.S. passport in 1986 ahead of a high school trip to England.

There are two apparent contradictions regarding how and when Ted Cruz obtained US citizenship.

First, according to theCanadian Citizenship Act of 1946, also referred to as the “Act of 1947,” Canada did not allow dual citizenship in 1970.The parents would have had to choose at that time between U.S. and Canadian citizenship.Ted Cruz did not renounce his Canadian citizenship until 2014. Was that the choice originally made?

Second, no CRBA has been released that would verify that Ted Cruz was registered as a U.S. citizen at birth.

It has been reported that the then nearly four-year-old Ted Cruz flew to the U.S. from Calgary, Alberta, Canada in 1974.

Ted Cruz could not have entered the U.S. legally without a CRBA or a U.S. passport, the latter of which was not obtained until 1986.

If Ted Cruz was registered as a U.S. citizen at birth, as his spokeswoman claims, then the CRBA must be released.Otherwise, one could conclude that Cruz came to the U.S. as a Canadian citizen, perhaps on a tourist visa or, possibly, remained in the U.S. as an illegal immigrant.

It is the responsibility of the candidate for the Presidency, not ordinary citizens, to prove that he or she is eligible for the highest office in the land. Voters deserve clarification


Saturday, February 13, 2016

Obama Vows Supreme Court Nomination After Justice Scalia’s Death

by CHARLIE SPIERING13 Feb 201629

President Obama reacted to the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia after wrapping up his golf game in California this afternoon.

“Tonight we honor his extraordinary service to our nation and remember one of the towering legal figures of our time,” Obama said, describing him as a “brilliant legal mind with a pugnacious style, incisive wit, and colorful opinions.”

The president made his statement at Rancho Mirage, California.

But Obama quickly vowed that he would nominate a replacement to the Supreme Court and expected the Senate to confirm his choice.

“I plan to fulfill my constitutional responsibilities to nominate a successor in due time,” he said. “There will plenty of time for me to do so and for the Senate to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote.”

Obama said he took his constitutional responsibilities “seriously.”

“They’re bigger than any one party,” he added. “They’re about our democracy.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,barack obamaAntonin Scalia

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia dies at 79

www.washingtonpost.com

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the intellectual cornerstone of the court’s modern conservative wing, whose elegant and acidic opinions inspired a movement of legal thinkers and ignited liberal critics, died Feb. 13 on a ranch near Marfa, Tex. He was 79.

The cause of death was not immediately known.

In a statement Saturday, Chief Justice John G. Roberts said: “On behalf of the Court and retired Justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice Antonin Scalia has passed away. He was an extraordinary individual and jurist, admired and treasured by his colleagues. His passing is a great loss to the Court and the country he so loyally served. We extend our deepest condolences to his wife Maureen and his family.”

In the first official notice of Justice Scalia’s death, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said: “Justice Antonin Scalia was a man of God, a patriot, and an unwavering defender of the written Constitution and the Rule of Law. His fierce loyalty to the Constitution set an unmatched example, not just for judges and lawyers, but for all Americans. We mourn his passing, and we pray that his successor on the Supreme Court will take his place as a champion for the written Constitution and the Rule of Law.”

Justice Scalia, the first Italian American to serve on the court, was nominated by President Ronald Reagan in 1986 and quickly became the kind of champion to the conservative legal world that his benefactor was in the political realm.

An outspoken opponent of abortion, affirmative action and what he termed the “so-called homosexual agenda,” Justice Scalia’s intellectual rigor, flamboyant style and eagerness to debate his detractors energized conservative law students, professors and intellectuals who felt outnumbered by liberals in their chosen professions.

“He has by the force and clarity of his opinions become a defining figure in American constitutional law,” Northwestern University law professor Steven Calabresi said at a Federalist Society dinner honoring Justice Scalia at the 20-year mark of his service on the Supreme Court. He took his seat Sept. 26, 1986.

Justice Scalia was the most prominent advocate of a manner of constitutional interpretation called “originalism,” the idea that judges should look to the meaning of the words of the Constitution at the time they were written.

He mocked the notion of a “living” Constitution, one that evolved with changing times, as simply an excuse for judges to impose their own ideological views.

Critics countered that the same could be said for originalism — and that the legal conclusions Justice Scalia said were dictated by that approach meshed neatly with the justice’s views on the death penalty, gay rights and abortion.

It is hard to overstate Justice Scalia’s impact on the modern court. Upon his arrival, staid oral arguments before the justices became jousting matches, with Justice Scalia aggressively questioning counsel with whom he disagreed, challenging his colleagues and often dominating the sessions.

He asked so many questions in his first sitting as a justice that Justice Lewis F. Powell whispered to Justice Thurgood Marshall: “Do you think he knows the rest of us are here?”

Justice Scalia was just as ready for combat outside the court. He relished debating his critics at law schools and in public appearances, although he sometimes displayed a thin skin.

He tired of questions about his prominent role in the court’s 2000 decision in which halted a recount of the presidential vote in Florida and effectively decided the presidency for Republican George W. Bush. His response to those who raised questions years later: “Get over it.”

Despite his impact on the legal world, Justice Scalia’s views were too far to the right for him to play the pivotal roles on the court that his fellow Reagan nominees — Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy — eventually assumed.

Justice Scalia was far better known for fiery dissents than landmark majority opinions. One exception was the court’s groundbreaking 2008 decision in.

An avid hunter and a member of his high school rifle team, Justice Scalia wrote the court’s 5-to-4 ruling that held for the first time that the Second Amendment afforded a right to gun ownership unrelated to military service.

“His views on textualism and originalism, his views on the role of judges in our society, on the practice of judging, have really transformed the terms of legal debate in this country,” Elena Kagan said about Justice Scalia when she was dean of Harvard Law School, alma mater to both. “He is the justice who has had the most important impact over the years on how we think and talk about law.”

After Kagan was nominated to the court by President Barack Obama, she and Justice Scalia became friends and hunting buddies — despite their distinct ideological differences and the fact that Kagan had never shot a gun. They went to Wyoming together in 2012 in hopes of Kagan bagging a big-game trophy like the elk, nicknamed Leroy, whose mounted head dominated Justice Scalia’s Supreme Court chambers.

But she shot only a white-tailed deer, which Justice Scalia later laughingly said “she could have done in my driveway” at his suburban Virginia home.

‘You’re not everybody else’

Antonin Gregory Scalia — “Nino” to family, friends and colleagues — was born in Trenton, N.J., on March 11, 1936, and grew up in the New York City borough of Queens. His father, Salvatore, came through Ellis Island at 17; he learned English and became a professor of romance languages at Brooklyn College.

Justice Scalia’s mother, the former Catherine Panaro, was a second-generation Italian American and an elementary school teacher. Not only was Nino their only child, he was the only child of his generation on either side of the family.

The whole extended clan doted on him, biographer Joan Biskupic reported in her biography “American Original,” and expected achievement. “You’re not everybody else,” Catherine would say, according to Biskupic. “Your family has standards, and it doesn’t matter what the standards of [others] are.”

In 1953, he graduated first in his class at St. Francis Xavier, a military prep school in Manhattan, and won a naval ROTC scholarship but was turned down by his first choice of college, Princeton.

A devout Catholic, he attended his second choice, Georgetown University, where he was the valedictorian of the class of 1957. In his graduation speech, he exhorted his fellow students: “If we will not be leaders of a real, a true, a Catholic intellectual life, no one will!”

Justice Scalia then entered Harvard Law School, where he was editor of the law review and graduated magna cum laude in 1960. That same year, he married Maureen McCarthy, a Radcliffe student he’d met on a blind date.

She, too, came from a small family, but they made up for it, with five sons and four daughters and literally dozens of grandchildren.

“We didn’t set out to have nine children,” Justice Scalia told Lesley Stahl on the CBS show “60 Minutes.” “We’re just old-fashioned Catholics, playing what used to be known as ‘Vatican Roulette.’ ”

He added that the other four sons were relieved when their brother Paul decided to “take one for the team” and become a priest.

The Scalias moved around. After traveling across Europe for a year while he was a Harvard Sheldon Fellow, the newlyweds moved to Cleveland, where Justice Scalia joined the Jones Day firm in 1961.

On the cusp of becoming partner, he left private practice in 1967 to become a law professor at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.

In 1971, he became general counsel to the new Office of Telecommunications Policy in the Nixon administration; the agency spurred development of the nascent cable industry. From 1972 to 1974, he was chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States, followed by three years as assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel.

After Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, won election to the White House, Justice Scalia returned to academia as a professor at the University of Chicago law school.

Then Reagan came into office in 1981 and the next year nominated Justice Scalia to the influential U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. His name quickly appeared on short lists of potential Supreme Court nominees.

Reagan in 1981 made good on a campaign promise to appoint the court’s first woman with his choice of O’Connor, then an Arizona state judge and former legislator. His next chance to leave an imprint came five years later, when Chief Justice Warren Burger announced that he was stepping down.

The president decided to elevate Justice William H. Rehnquist to the chief’s job, and Justice Scalia and fellow D.C. Circuit Judge Robert H. Bork became the finalists for the opening. Bork was the more experienced jurist and a conservative icon, but the 50-year-old Scalia was almost a decade younger and brought the added political benefit of being Italian American.

Justice Scalia got the nomination. After a testy Senate battle over Rehnquist’s elevation, Justice Scalia sailed through his confirmation hearings and was approved 98 to 0.

Future vice president Joseph R. Biden, then a Democratic senator from Delaware and a stalwart of the Judiciary Committee, later said that his vote for Justice Scalia was the one he most regretted — “because he was so effective.”

Textualism and originalism

Justice Scalia set out immediately to make his views known — and became exactly the justice conservatives had hoped for.

He had been an influential early supporter of the Federalist Society, a group that political scientist Steven Teles called “the most vigorous, durable and well-ordered organization to emerge from [the] rethinking of modern conservatism’s political strategy.”

Reliance on legislative history as a key element of interpreting statutes was once commonplace. But Justice Scalia railed against the practice, saying that only the words of the statutes matter — a view known as textualism. He likened judges’ use of secondary sources such as committee reports or statements made by members of Congress during floor debates to “looking over the faces of the crowd at a large cocktail party and picking out your friends.”

Even though most justices continued to think legislative history was valuable in interpreting statutes, lawyers arguing before the court learned that they

George Clooney Nailed America’s Hate-Speech Problem, Says Business Insider

by BREITBART NEWS12 Feb 20161819
George Clooney, while promoting Hail, Caesar! at the Berlin Film Festival, explained that “hate speech” frequently heard on the campaign trails in American presidential politics is just “extreme voices” that “don’t survive.”
In an interview reported by Business Insiderthe actor commented:



I mean there are some extreme voices out there. I always have to caution people when they watch American politics that we go a little crazy during the political season and it’s a very long season. And the xenophobic, fascist sort of ‘no muslims are going to come into the United States,’ that’s never going to happen, you know, that’s not going to happen in the United States.
That’s not who we are, that’s not who we have ever been, that’s not how this country was formed.

Clooney adds that these voices don’t represent  America, “So you are going to hear some of these louder voices that are extreme, and a much smaller percentage of the country that always come up during these moments, but they don’t ever survive and we get past this.”
Read More Stories About:

Friday, February 12, 2016

Trump Up +16 In Latest SC Poll; Cruz Beats Rubio +5

Getty

by JOHN NOLTE12 Feb 20160

After a dry spell of nearly a month, and all the political drama and actual voting that has taken place in Iowa and New Hampshire, we finally have a new poll out of South Carolina, where the next round of voting begins in less than 10 days. And, quite incredibly, it shows that … almost nothing has changed. Donald Trump is still up by double digits, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is in second, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)is in third.

The Augusta Chronicle poll, taken on February 10 and 11, almost perfectly mirrors its immediate predecessor, a NBC poll taken during the third week of January. With 36% support, Trump is in first place by +16 points. Cruz is in second with 20%. Rubio jumped a statistically insignificant +1 to enjoy 15% support.

Jeb Bush jumped +2 to 11%.

The only notable change is Kasich’s leap from 1% to 9%. That’s a nice jump … into fifth place.

The best news is for Trump, who has managed to hold on to a substantial lead. The news for Rubio is mixed. After that brutal debate performance, the Florida senator’s support didn’t crater in South Carolina like it did in New Hampshire. Nevertheless, he’s still stuck -21 points behind Trump. On the flip-side, he is leading in the Establishment Lane, and holding that lead will become increasingly important as this primary campaign rolls on.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,South CarolinapollTrump2016 Polls

PBS' Donor-Moderator Fails to Ask About Clinton Foundation

www.breitbart.com

Morry Gash / Associated Press

by Joel B. Pollak11 Feb 20160

11 Feb, 201611 Feb, 2016 The PBS moderators at Thursday night’s Democratic debate failed to ask former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton any questions about the Clinton Foundation, despite news earlier in the day that the State Department had sent it a subpoena for documents about its activities during her tenure in office.

Co-moderator Judy Woodruff happens to be a donor to the Clinton Foundation, and faced criticism from the PBS ombudsman in 2015 for giving to the Clintons.

Woodruff is one of several journalists who has contributed to the Clinton Foundation, which has beencriticized as a “slush fund” for the Clintons’ own expenses, rather than on direct giving to charitable programs.

PBS has covered the potential conflict of interest for Hillary Clinton, who has been accused of using her position as Secretary of State to direct donations to the foundation. Emails to that effect are suspected of being on her private email server.

The subpoena to the foundation from the State Department inspector general sought “documents about the charity’s projects that may have required approval from the federal government during Hillary Clinton’s term as secretary of state,” according to the Washington Post, which broke the story Thursday.

The subpoena also apparently sought information on Clinton aide Huma Abedin, “who for six months in 2012 was employed simultaneously by the State Department, the foundation, Clinton’s personal office, and a private consulting firm with ties to the Clintons.”

Neither Woodruff nor co-moderator Gwen Ifill broached the subject. Clinton’s rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), has also declined to criticize her for her emails and potential conflicts of interest.

Voters, however, have noticed. Exit polls from New Hampshire showed that 5% of Democrats saw Clinton as trustworthy, versus 93% for Sanders.

COMMENTS

DNC allowing donations from federal lobbyists and PACs

www.washingtonpost.com

The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees.

The decision, which may provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, was viewed with disappointment Friday morning by good government activists who saw it as a step backward in the effort to limit special interest influence in Washington.

“It is a major step in the wrong direction,” said longtime reform advocate Fred Wertheimer. “And it is completely out of touch with the clear public rejection of the role of political money in Washington,” expressed during the 2016 campaign.

The change in the rules, already apparent to leading Washington lobbyists, was quietly introduced at some point during the past couple of months.

The ban was both a symbolic and substantive way for Obama to put his stamp on the party in 2008 when he promised voters “we are going to change how Washington works.”

Since it was introduced, lobbyists and corporate advocates in Washington have complained about the ban and other limitations imposed by Obama. The only portion of the old rules now remaining in place is that lobbyists and PAC representatives will still not be able to attend events that feature Obama, Vice President Biden or their spouses, according to Mark Paustenbach, deputy communications director for the DNC.

“The DNC’s recent change in guidelines will ensure that we continue to have the resources and infrastructure in place to best support whoever emerges as our eventual nominee,” Paustenbach said in an email. “Electing a Democrat to the White House is vital to building on the progress we’ve made over the last seven years, which has resulted in a record 71 straight months of private-sector job growth and nearly 14 million new jobs.”

Last summer the DNC announced it was lifting a ban on lobbyist contributions to convention-related expenses. At the time, DNC officials said the move was necessary because Congress had eliminated about $20 million in federal funding for the quadrennial party gatherings.

The DNC’s recent, sweeping reversal of the previous ban on donations from lobbyists and political action committees was confirmed by three Democratic lobbyists who said they have already received solicitations from the committee. The lobbyists requested anonymity to speak freely about the committee’s decision, which has been otherwise kept quiet.

For the most part, they said, the DNC is back to pre-2008 business as usual. The DNC has even hired a finance director specifically for PAC donations who has recently emailed prospective donors to let them know that they can now contribute again, according to an email that was reviewed by The Washington Post.

The decision is the latest move likely to inflame tensions between the DNC and supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who has railed against lobbyist influence, particularly those representing Wall Street.

Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, has set up a joint fundraising committee with the DNC and the new rules are likely to provide her with an advantage.

The new rules have already opened up opportunities for influence-buying “by Washington lobbyists with six-figure contributions to the Hillary Victory Fund,” said Wertheimer, suggesting that lobbyists could also face “political extortion” from those raising the money.

Sanders has made his small-dollar-infused campaign a hallmark of his stump speech, boasting that he is the candidate of the little guy, to the point where supporters in Iowa could finish the portion of his stump speech in which he crowed that the average donation was $27.

In recent months Sanders’s supporters have accused the DNC of trying to prevent more primary debates, trying to tilt the race in Clinton’s direction. Just this week his backers were enraged that the DNC allowed the senior members of the Congressional Black Caucus to use the committee’s Capitol Hill headquarters to announce that their PAC had endorsed Clinton over Sanders.

Sanders backers have also expressed concern that the DNC is not playing a more vigorous role in checking out disputes over voting in the recent Iowa caucuses, which Clinton narrowly won.

COMMENTS

Hillary wins more delegates despite getting crushed.

ELECTION 2016

Limbaugh: 'Wait 'til Bernie finds out New Hampshire was rigged'

Published: 2 days ago


 JOE KOVACS 
About | Email Archive

 

image: http://mobile.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png

 Read

     1.6K

Republish
Reprint

image: http://mobile.wnd.com/files/2014/08/hillary_clinton_16.jpg

Despite being the victim of a popular vote landslide in the New Hampshire Primary on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton is actually a winner when it comes to the number of delegates earned.

The former secretary of state is leaving the Granite State with at least two more delegates than Sen. Bernie Sanders, even though Sanders won by a margin of 60 to 38 percent of votes.

How is this possible?

New Hampshire not only has 24 “pledged” delegates, which are awarded based on the results of the popular vote, it also has eight “superdelegates,” who are free to lend their support to the candidate of their choice irrespective of the vote.

The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’

Though Mrs. Clinton had only nine pledged delegates through the voting process, she has an additional six superdelegates as of Wednesday morning, giving her a total of 15.

Sanders has 13 delegates, all of which he won through the popular vote. Two superdelegates are uncommitted at this point. So even though the results appeared to be a massive win for Sanders, the delegate count, where it matters, tells a different story.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh commented on the absurdity of the Democratic Party process, saying, “What kind of system is that? You go in and you get skunked, you get schlonged, your get landslided out by 22 points and you leave the state with two more delegates than Bernie. Bernie’s always talking about how this system’s rigged and that system’s rigged, the economy is rigged and Wall Street’s rigged. Wait ’til he finds out that New Hampshire was rigged.”

image: http://mobile.wnd.com/files/2016/01/rush-limbaugh-thinking-thinker-600.jpg

Radio host Rush Limbaugh

Overall, Clinton holds a commanding lead over Sanders, with 394 delegates compared to 42 for Sanders.

Limbaugh, meanwhile, said the left-leaning media is in “full-fledged panic” over the fact that Donald Trump won the Republican side of the New Hampshire primary, collecting more than twice the votes of his nearest competitor, Ohio’s John Kasich.

Do you support Donald Trump’s no-nonsense candidacy? Tell the world with this brand new magnetic bumper sticker: “DONALD TRUMPS THE REST”

As WND reported, the New York Daily News featured a bluntly offensive lead story that calls out voters as stupid for picking Donald Trump.

The newspaper tweeted: “Front page: DAWN OF THE BRAIN DEAD – Trump comes back to life with N.H. win.”

image: http://mobile.wnd.com/files/2016/02/NYDailyNews.png

The New York Daily News responded to Donald Trump’s win in New Hampshire.

The cover itself showed Trump with a white-painted face and huge red-painted lips drawn into a smile – akin to the Joker in Batman movies. And its headline, in all caps, blasted “Dawn of the Brain Dead.”

The subtitle read: “Clown comes back to life with N.H. win as mindless zombies turn out in droves.”

RELATED: Newspaper calls voters ‘mindless zombies’ over Trump win

Limbaugh opined: “When the media starts insulting and blaming the voters as being stupid idiots, you know that full-fledged panic has set in. Because this means that they are unable to control the outcome. And that is what the media lost when they lost their monopoly, their inability now to control the outcome, to control the message, to control how people vote, to control what people think, to control what people’s opinions are. It’s all out the window, and everybody that considers themselves to be part of the establishment is facing a major, big-time rejection today.”

“On the Republican side,” Limbaugh said, “this would not be happening had there been some official, real, serious, consistent pushback to Obama.”

Poll: Millennials Pick Socialism Over Capitalism

Lazlo Balogh/Reuters

by MIKE FLYNN11 Feb 2016366

new survey from YouGov finds that millennials have more favorable views of socialism than of capitalism.

As Santayana said, those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Less than two decades after socialism seemed to have been confined to the dust-heap of history, another generation may have to learn hard lessons.

The survey, taken at the end of January, found that 43 percent of Americans under 30 had a favorable view of socialism. Less than a third of millennials had a favorable view of capitalism. No other age or ethnic demographic preferred socialism over capitalism.

Seniors, unsurprisingly, had the most favorable view of capitalism. Just 23 percent of Americans older than 65 had a positive view of socialism. Sixty-three percent of seniors, though, had a favorable view of capitalism.

Seniors, after all, experienced the long-standing intellectual battle between capitalism and socialism played out in real life. They witnessed a post-war economic euphoria grind down into a socialist malaise, only to be reinvigorated by a global embrace of disruptive technology, deregulation, and global trade.

In the past 20 years, the number of people living in poverty worldwide has fallen by half. In 1990, 43 percent of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty. In 2013, the United Nations estimated that just 22 percent of the world’s population continued to live in extreme poverty.

“Never in history have the living conditions and prospects of so many people changed so dramatically and so fast,” the UN Human Development report said.

Even if millenials aren’t swayed by the dramatic improvement in worldwide living standards, one would hope they would see the benefits of capitalism in the products and services that inhabit their world.

They live, and thrive, in a consumer-driven, on-demand society. They have immediate access, at their fingertips, to more knowledge, art, music, and communication than the wealthiest oligarch just a few decades ago.

Each and every one of the products and services they use every day was developed by someone chasing profit and market-share. It is a cliche to say that capitalism has powered the technological and scientific innovations that have improved all our lives. Apparently, however, it is a cliche that bears repeating.

On a postive note, every other demographic block in America still prefers capitalism over socialism. Well, Democrats, perhaps naturally, are evenly split between the two economic systems. At least Democrats, though, have slightly higher unfavorable ratings of socialism than capitalism.

The danger, of course, is that the demographic in America that does prefer socialism is also the future of the country. Of course, they have the luxury of looking positively on socialism, since any impact on their lives is restricted to dusty history books.

The finding also presents something of an existential dilema for the conservative and libertarian movement. Since the 1980s, the institutional infrastructure of the conservative and libertarian movement has grown exponentially.

Aside from dozens of national think tanks and advocacy organizations devoted to propogating conservative and free market views, there are more than a hundred free-market think tanks in states across the country.

It is safe to say that billions of dollars have been spent over the past two decades promoting and educating the public on the benefits of capitalism and free markets. There are publishing imprints, media companies and new conservative news sites everywhere. Yet, something has gone horribly wrong.

Many in the commentariat have watched the rise of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) with a certain touch of condescending nostalgia. “Oh, look a socialist is running for President, isn’t that cute,” you can almost hear them type.

For many, Bernie’s label as a socialist was something he would have to overcome to make a serious run for the White House. It may now be, however, something he needs to more warmly embrace.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,EconomicssocialismMillennials,capitalismhispanics

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Two Cops Murdered in Maryland ‘Ambush’; Shot Because ‘Wearing Uniform’


AP

by BREITBART NEWS10 Feb 2016334

ABINGDON, Md. (AP) — A gunman fatally shot a sheriff’s deputy inside a crowded restaurant at lunchtime Wednesday and killed another deputy in a shootout nearby, authorities and witnesses said.

The suspect was killed in the shootout not far from the shopping center where the restaurant was situated, Harford County Sheriff Jeffrey Gahler said. Remarkably, no bystanders were hurt.

Police haven’t released a motive for the shooting, but the sheriff said he believed the first deputy who approached the gunman was shot because he was wearing a uniform. The shooter, 67-year-old David Brian Evans, had warrants out for his arrest in Harford County and Orange County, Florida, where he was accused of assaulting a police officer.

The slain officers were described as a 30-year veteran and a 16-year veteran. The sheriff said he had met with both of their families but was withholding their names because more relatives needed to be notified.

“This is a tragic day for the Harford County Sheriff’s Office,” Gahler said, his eyes moist with tears.

“They were two outstanding deputies who served the citizens of this community faithfully.”

Republican Gov. Larry Hogan ordered flags to be flown at half-staff to honor the officers.

The initial shooting took place inside a Panera restaurant in Abingdon, which is about 20 miles northeast of Baltimore.

Sophia Faulkner, 15, said she and her mother were getting lunch and almost sat right next to the gunman. Instead, they chose a booth about 10 feet away because the man appeared “sketchy” and disheveled. He was sitting in the back of the restaurant and hadn’t ordered any food, Faulkner said.

A sheriff’s deputy was called to the restaurant just before noon, presumably because “someone knew who he was,” Gahler said.

The deputy tried to talk to the man, who was apparently known to officers and workers at the restaurant. The deputy sat down, asked how he was doing, and the man shot him in the head.

“I saw him fall back out of his chair, and the blood started coming out,” Faulkner said. “I didn’t know how to process it. My mom said, ‘What’s going on?’ and I said, ‘Get down. Someone just got shot.'”

The shooter fled and “everyone started screaming,” Faulkner said. Children at the restaurant — out of school because of snowfall — were running around.

“I was freaking out so much, and everybody was running to one side of the store. Families were huddling together. I didn’t really know what was going on,” she said. “You see this stuff online and in movies and on TV when it happens, but you never think you’re going to go out to lunch one day with your mom and it’s just going to happen.”

Her mother, Lynn Faulkner, a registered nurse, said that she recognized the man and believed he was mentally ill and in need of social services.

“I’ve seen him there frequently, and I’ve seen him at areas of the library,” she said. “He’s definitely in need of mental health care, and he never should have had a gun.”

“He knew what he was doing, because he shot right for the head,” she continued.

“Apparently, the policeman tried to come up to him, ‘Hi, how are you doing,’ — he’s living in this store — and, ‘Can you try to move on?’ or ‘Why are you here today?’ and that’s when he immediately pulled out the gun and shot him.”

Bartender Mike Davis was working at the Ocean City Brewing Co.’s Taphouse when he saw two women and a child run from Panera to his restaurant’s back door.

“They were hysterical. They said they heard gunshots,” he said. “We locked the door and went to talk to a cop. The cop said not to let anyone in. Then, we heard more gunshots — pop, pop, pop, pop — from down in the shopping center. It was hectic.”

Witnesses gave officers a description of the gunman and told them which way he was headed, the sheriff said. Deputies caught up with him and shots were exchanged, the sheriff said.

One of the deputies was treated at the University of Maryland R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center in Baltimore. Video showed an ambulance and a sheriff’s car escorted by police on motorcycles leaving, apparently taking the body to the nearby state medical examiner’s office. Police lined each side of the street and saluted when the vehicles drove by.

The sheriff said investigators believe Evans acted alone and there is no further threat to the community.

“The restaurant was very full at lunchtime,” Gahler said. “Thankfully, no one else was injured.”

The shopping center is called the Boulevard at Box Hill. It has a mix of shops, restaurants, a grocery store and a bank.

Yellow tape blocked off the Panera and Taphouse restaurants Wednesday afternoon, but people were coming and going freely at other businesses after the shooting.

Panera spokeswoman Amanda Cardosi said the company is heartbroken.

“Our thoughts and actions now are directed towards the victims and their families. This location will remain closed as we work with law enforcement to investigate,” she said.

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentLaw Enforcementpolice death

Trump Thumps Merkel On Migrant Madness: ‘It’s The End Of Europe’


GETTY

by BREITBART LONDON10 Feb 2016878

REUTERS – U.S. Republican presidential contender Donald Trump said German Chancellor Angela Merkel was wrong to let in thousands of migrants into Germany and that the refugee crisis could trigger revolutions and even the end of Europe.

“I think Angela Merkel made a tragic mistake with the migrants,” Trump told French conservative weekly Valeurs Actuelles, which said it was the billionaire’s first in-depth campaign interview with European media.

“If you don’t treat the situation competently and firmly, yes, it’s the end of Europe. You could face real revolutions,” Trump was quoted as saying, according to the French translation.

The 69-year-old property magnate also said Brussels had become a breeding ground for terrorists and some neighbourhoods in Paris and elsewhere in France had become no-go zones.

“Unfortunately, France is not what it used to be, and neither is Paris,” he said. He also said tight French gun laws were partly responsible for the killing of dozens of people at the Bataclan concert hall last November by Islamist militants.

“I always have a gun with me. Had I been at the Bataclan, I can tell you I would have opened fire,” he said.

Trump further said he thought the United States could have very good relations with Russia‘s Vladimir Putin and that nothing could be worse than the current situation where President Barack Obama and Putin scarcely spoke with each other.

“He (Putin) said I was brilliant. That proves a certain smartness,” said Trump.

The French magazine said the interview was conducted at Trump’s office in New York’s Trump Tower a week before the Iowa caucuses, in which he finished second among candidates seeking the Republican nomination for November’s presidential election.

Trump was widely expected to win Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire, which is part of the state-by-state process of picking party nominees for the Nov. 8 election to replace Democratic President Barack Obama.

(Reporting by Michel Rose; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Read More Stories About:

Breitbart LondonDonald Trump,ImmigrationEurope Migrant Crisis,European UnionAngela Merkel

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

It’s Clinton Déjà Vu — New Hampshire Brings Snow and Rumors of Campaign Implosion


A Clinton supporter waving banners on the side of the road in Manchester, N.H.

JONNO RATTMAN

By MARK LEIBOVICH

FEBRUARY 9, 2016

So, I was driving along somewhere in New Hampshire on Monday, the day before the storied primary. It was snowing, just as the clichés of the New Hampshire Primary dictate: It is always snowing in New Hampshire. (Really, though, it actually was snowing).

The email came in from an editor in New York at around 4 p.m. Subject line: “Hillaryworld.” Body content: “What do you make of the supposed looming implosion?”

What supposed looming implosion? Or, to be more precise, which supposed looming implosion? Isn’t Hillaryworld always on the verge of one?

Yes, but they do have a tendency to occur at this precise moment. Periods of intense hand-wringing and recrimination always occur in Clintonworld around the New Hampshire primaries, if history is any guide — and what is Clinton history, if not utterly repetitive?

Slide Show | A Hillary Clinton Rally in Manchester, N.H.Jonno Rattman photographed a Hillary Clinton event ahead of the 2016 New Hampshire primary.

These brawls traditionally follow difficult results in Iowa. In 1992, the native Hawkeye Tom Harkin beat Bill Clinton in the year’s first caucuses. Barack Obama beat Hillary in 2008 (as did John Edwards, who finished second). And last week, Bernie Sanders essentially tied the former secretary of state, setting up the latest Clinton bloodbath-in-waiting. Hillary is down big in the New Hampshire polls. Her nervous staff and extended community of sycophants, hangers-on and self-professed “confidantes” keep unburdening themselves in the press — while being granted anonymity in exchange for their self-aggrandizing candor.

And then Politico writes all about it, as the site’s Glenn Thrush and Annie Karni did yesterday: “Clinton weighs staff shake-up after New Hampshire.

We’ve been here before. This is how it all rolls in the Clinton precincts of Blue America. The situation is so familiar to be its own Democratic Party cliché, like nominating unelectable liberals in the 1980s or engaging in nasty platform fights in the 1990s.

Say this about the Clintons, for better or worse: They are predictable. Thrush and Karni’s New Hampshire pre-autopsy contained all the paint-by-number refrains of Clinton crackups past:

· The term “staff shake-up” would need to appear in the story’s headline (or, at least, the lede).

· Also, somewhere, the phrase “lack of trust” or “mutual suspicion.”

· The story would have to include a nod to the trusted old Clinton hands who were selflessly offering themselves up as potential campaign saviors.

· Embedded in the article would be the clear implication that all of this could have been avoided if only Mark Penn, Clinton’s 2008 strategist, were more involved.

· The story would also inevitably include at least one blind quote from a former Obama campaign aide who knows how to do things better.

· The story would have to offer up for sacrifice at least one scapegoat, whose job was allegedly in peril.

· Bonus points if said scapegoat hails from Obama’s campaigns (watch your back, Joel Benenson).

So, yes, this latest chapter in the Clintons’ book of Supposed Looming Implosions, 2016 edition, contains all the predictable elements. And I have no doubt that everything in the Politico story is 100 percent correct. Again: This is how it all goes in Clintonworld. For whatever reason — for all of their political gifts — Bill and Hillary are addicted to this high-wire act. And the slick roads of New Hampshire seem to be their preferred recurring backdrop, like those repeating cactuses in the background of an old cartoon.

We, the political gallery, become codependents. Ho-hum. (My Clinton Fatigue is acting up again.) And yet here we are, back in New Hampshire, with another Clinton inevitability parade being snowed on by someone — Sanders, in this case — who is, allegedly, unelectable.

This, of course, is when the Clintons are at their best and most dangerous. Their well-honed survival instinct kicks in. The challenger gets cocky. Next thing we know, there the Clintons are again, up on another New Hampshire pedestal, claiming victory. In other words, here we are in the midst of another Supposed Looming Implosion in New Hampshire, and as of noon on Primary Day, I am ruling nothing out.

And of course Joe Biden, who is tanned and tested, is ruling nothing out either.

Mark Leibovich is the chief national correspondent for the magazine.

Donald Trump Vows to Be ‘The Greatest Jobs President God Ever Created’


Joe/Raedle Getty

by ALEX SWOYER9 Feb 2016Manchester, NH226

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — GOP frontrunner Donald Trump entered his New Hampshire Primary Party along with his family, to a welcome from roughly a thousand supporters cheering his victory.

“Oh! Wow, wow, wow! So beautiful!” he said in response to the cheers.

“We are going to Make America Great Again,” Trump told his supporters after winning the New Hampshire GOP primary on Tuesday. The crowd cheered more.

“I want to thank everybody, but I really have to begin by paying homage to my parents,” Trump said.

Trump then thanked his wife Melania for her support, saying “She said right from the beginning, ‘You know, if you run, you know you’re going to win.” Trump went on to thank his children as well.

Following his family, Trump thanked his employees, first naming his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.

“Does Corey have a ground game or what?” Trump said to the crowd. “We learned a lot about ground games in one week,” he added, referencing how he came in second in Iowa.

“We have to thank the candidates – we have some really talented people,” Trump said of the fellow GOP candidates. “A number of them called, and I just wanted to thank them.”

“We have some real talent in the Republican Party,” he added.

“We want to thank the people of New Hampshire,” the real estate mogul told his supporters. “We love you, we’re going to be back a lot.” Trump told them to remember, “You started it!”

The crowd responded chanting, “TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!”

“I heard parts of Bernie’s speech,” Trump said of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) who won the New Hampshire Democrat primary, defeating Hillary Clinton. “He wants to give away our country, folks.”

Trump vowed to make America great again “the old fashioned way” by beating China, Japan, and Mexico on trade deals.

He said he believes the fact that he is “self-funding my campaign” really caught on with voters.

Trump said of the current politicians making deals for America, “They’re making them for their benefit,” but with Trump as president, “We’re going to make the deals for the American people.”

He vowed to be the “greatest jobs president that God ever created.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Donald TrumpNew Hampshire

Donald Trump Vows to Be ‘The Greatest Jobs President God Ever Created’


Joe/Raedle Getty

by ALEX SWOYER9 Feb 2016Manchester, NH226

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — GOP frontrunner Donald Trump entered his New Hampshire Primary Party along with his family, to a welcome from roughly a thousand supporters cheering his victory.

“Oh! Wow, wow, wow! So beautiful!” he said in response to the cheers.

“We are going to Make America Great Again,” Trump told his supporters after winning the New Hampshire GOP primary on Tuesday. The crowd cheered more.

“I want to thank everybody, but I really have to begin by paying homage to my parents,” Trump said.

Trump then thanked his wife Melania for her support, saying “She said right from the beginning, ‘You know, if you run, you know you’re going to win.” Trump went on to thank his children as well.

Following his family, Trump thanked his employees, first naming his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.

“Does Corey have a ground game or what?” Trump said to the crowd. “We learned a lot about ground games in one week,” he added, referencing how he came in second in Iowa.

“We have to thank the candidates – we have some really talented people,” Trump said of the fellow GOP candidates. “A number of them called, and I just wanted to thank them.”

“We have some real talent in the Republican Party,” he added.

“We want to thank the people of New Hampshire,” the real estate mogul told his supporters. “We love you, we’re going to be back a lot.” Trump told them to remember, “You started it!”

The crowd responded chanting, “TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!”

“I heard parts of Bernie’s speech,” Trump said of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) who won the New Hampshire Democrat primary, defeating Hillary Clinton. “He wants to give away our country, folks.”

Trump vowed to make America great again “the old fashioned way” by beating China, Japan, and Mexico on trade deals.

He said he believes the fact that he is “self-funding my campaign” really caught on with voters.

Trump said of the current politicians making deals for America, “They’re making them for their benefit,” but with Trump as president, “We’re going to make the deals for the American people.”

He vowed to be the “greatest jobs president that God ever created.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Donald TrumpNew Hampshire

Meanwhile at Clinton HQ... American Flag on the Floor


by JOHN NOLTE9 Feb 2016194

This photograph was taken by The Washington Post Tuesday.

Via Victory Girls:

Notice something dreadfully wrong? Like the flag is heaped on the floor?

From the U.S. Flag Code:

§8. Respect for flag
No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

And under that:

b. The flag should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise.


 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Hillary Clinton 2016The Washington Post,American Flag

Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Ford Shifting Future Auto Production To Mexico As Obama Signs Pacific Trade Deal

Getty

by WARNER TODD HUSTON8 Feb 20161,231

Just as President Barack Obama’s deputy signed the unpopular Trans Pacific Partnership free-trade deal during an election year, Ford Motor Company has announced it will doubling production capacity at a Mexico factory, instead of enlarging U.S. factories.

The new factory will manufacture hybrid autos with gasoline and electric engines, whose development has been partly funded by U.S. taxpayers via federal research programs.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Ford is planning to build 500,000 vehicles at its new Mexican factory, starting in 2018. That is double Mexico’s 2015 production.

Ford has begun to build a new factory in San Luis Potosí, Mexico, to assemble several models including, a new model meant to rival Toyota’s Prius hybrid vehicle. In turn, U.S.-based plants will focus on light trucks and sport-utility vehicles.

Insiders say Ford will spend $1 billion to build the expansion factory in Mexico. That’s in addition to the $2.5 billion already earmarked for expansion in the neighboring nation.

Ford rival General Motors is planning a $5 billion expansion in Mexico.

But American automakers aren’t alone. New facilities are also being built in Mexico by BMW AG, Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motors.

All these announcements come on the heels of new deals that offer higher wages for today’s workers, represented by the United Auto Workers union.

UAW membership began to fall from its 1979 high of 1.5 million members to only 540,000 in 2006. By 2010 it had fallen to only 390,000 members. Since 2010, membership has been slowing growing, and it grew 3 percent in 2014 . In 2015, The UAW climbed up to 403,000 members, or three-quarters of its 2006 membership.

But the plans to expand in Mexico also come at the same time Obama began pushing his Trans Pacific Partnership trade plan, one of the largest multinational trade agreements in history.

The trade deal, often derided as Obamatrade, has met with fierce criticism from conservatives in Congress many of whom fear the deal means a massive loss of jobs in the U.S. Senator Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), for one, has been afierce critic of the deal saying it does not protect the interests of the American people and our workers. Ohio Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) is facing a tough election, and he’s come out in conditional opposition to the completed deal.

Even as Obama’s representatives signed onto the deal last week, Senator Jeff Sessions said voters should press their candidates on where they stand on TPP.

The Senator urged voters to insist their candidates for president and Congress “explain why we are not seeing politicians expressing support for this gargantuan agreement.”

“Every elected official, every candidate must be crystal clear about where they stand on the TPP. The American people deserve no less,” Sessions declared.

To date every GOP presidential candidate has made a firm announcement on where they stand on TPP except Florida SenatorSen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). While Rubio voted “yes” to fast track the deal, he hasn’t explicitly said how he will vote on the final deal.

Rubio did say that TPP is one of the pillars in his “three-pillar foreign policy strategy,” so even as he hasn’t said if he will vote in favor of the plan. But his actions seem to point to his support for the measure.

GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, though, has been unequivocal on TPP. He is against it. Last week Trump called the plan “a terrible deal” for the United States because it is a jobs killer.

“It’s going to allow countries to continue to take advantage of us and take our jobs, take our trade,” Trump said. “It’s bad for us. It’ll allow China to come in through the back door at a later date and continue to really do a number on us, and it doesn’t take into account money manipulation — manipulation or devaluation of currency, which is the single biggest tool that countries use against us,” he said. “It’s a terrible deal.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter@warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentEconomics

Ivanka Trump: ‘From Day One My Father Set the Agenda for What the Whole Party Is Talking About’


Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images
by MICHELLE MOONS9 Feb 2016543
Ivanka Trump, daughter of 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump, joined Breitbart News Executive Chairman Steven K. Bannon on the Sirius XM Breitbart News Daily radio program to share her unique personal and professional perspective on her father’s qualifications to hold the position of President of the United States of America.



A wife and mother herself, Trump spoke to the character of the man that she grew up with and has spend a decade working with at the Trump organization. “I’ve seen him in the capacity obviously as a father, and a very loving one, and also as an incredible executive who built an amazing company. And he really is remarkable.”
Ultimately I think the testament to any person is their track record and that’s not just their professional track record, of which his is well known, he is enormously accomplished, he’s employed tens of thousands of people, he’s achieved success in multiple industries at the highest level.

She continued, “His professional accomplishments are nothing short of remarkable.”
Trump commented that as a parent herself she now realizes how hard it is to raise up kids with the “right moral compass” especially children that grow up with a lot of privilege.
Bannon reference Trump’s book The Trump Card and that she notes in the book that her parents instilled confidence and perseverance in her.
One of the things he would always say to us is you have to do what it is you are passionate about. If you want to achieve success at that high level you have to be passionate about it because if you’re not you won’t put in the work. And then it comes down to perseverance. So without grit it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter how good your idea is, it doesn’t matter how intelligent you are, you’re just going to get outworked. My whole life he is a worker, he is relentless.

Trump recalled early memories of coming to her father’s office and playing on the floor with their toys while he was in major meetings. “He always included us in his world in that regard.”
“That’s really the story of my father, he’s a hard worker,” Trump remarked.
Bannon asked why a loving family who has accumulated so much wealth and success would put themselves through the “ringer of the politics of personal destruction?”
Trump explained:
A lot of people who run for elected office are looking for a platform you know and it’s the next step in a political career so they don’t have that much to lose in the national awareness, my father had that. He has an amazing life and he’s built an incredible company and really he’s doing this for the reasons he’s articulated,I mean he can’t stand back and watch what’s happening to this country anymore, and he’s been saying this for a long time and he’s been seeing it happen and so what he’s doing is incredibly difficult, it’s incredibly selfless you know it takes a lot to want to enter this arena, and it is definitely a bloodsport as we’re seeing, but ya know win, lose or draw he’s got a family who loves him, who’s incredibly proud of him. The energy and the passion that he’s elicited, you were talking about in the beginning about sort of leadership and his viewpoint on different issues — from day one my father set the agenda for what the whole party is talking about and really politics in general across parties.

Bannon elaborated that Donald Trump has driven the national conversation on issue like immigration and trade that the corporate media interests did not want to talk about.
Ivanka agreed, “A hundred percent and that’s what you want a leader to do. So ya know all the other candidates would sit back silently for around three weeks until they realized that the voters agreed and then they’d come forth with their positions…”
During a Donald Trump rally on Monday night in New Hampshire an audience member used the vulgarity “p****” to describe candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on the issue of waterboarding. Trump eventually repeated it himself for the audience to hear to which they laughed and applauded according to KCCI 8 Des Moines News.
Bannon asked Ivanka Trump for her perspective on her father’s use of that word during the evening rally.
“I balance it knowing who my father is,” Trump responded. “There’s a different spirit in that kind of room than certainly in a board room or a conference room.”
She went on to say that the American people want someone with competance.
“They don’t want somebody who is slick tongued and says all the right things and then gets to Washington and does absolutely nothing.” She emphasized, “My father’s life has been about execution.”
What I have so much conviction in is not only is he an unbelievable person, an unbelievable man, he’s been a great mentor to me both personally and professionally as I was telling you before, but he’s incredibly capable.

Two of Ivanka Trump’s brothers have and are also joining Breitbart News Daily radio Monday and Tuesday.
Follow Michelle Moons on Twitter@MichelleDiana
Read More Stories About:

While Trump and Sanders smell victory, Hillary Clinton contemplates humilation


www.telegraph.co.uk
"What will be a good result for Hillaryin her race against Bernie Sanders?" I asked a Democrat. He replied: "She'll be happy with second place."
Today’s New Hampshire primary will be all about the post-match rationalisations. We expect Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump to win – that’s a foregone conclusion. But the political establishment, the pundits and the media can’t even contemplate the thought of a Sanders v Trump race – so they’ll put a wall around New Hampshire, say that it didn’t really matter, and look ahead to the states to come. Ergo who comes second, and how close to first they come, could dominate media interest. Among the Republicans, Jeb Bush is looking for a comeback. Among the Democrats, Hillary may have to do some soul searching. Her campaign thus far has showcased her greatest weaknesses.
Clinton's politics are the politics of identity, narrowed down to a very specific constituency: she’s selling herself as the hope of everyday rich white women who want to be president
COMMENTS

John Kasich Campaign Under Investigation for Possible Illegal Robocalls in New Hampshire

The Associated Press

by PATRICK HOWLEY8 Feb 2016309

MANCHESTER, N.H. – The John Kasich campaign is under investigation by the New Hampshire Attorney General after complaints that the campaign allegedly sent pre-recorded robocalls to New Hampshire residents who are on the national no-call list, which is illegal under New Hampshire state law.

A Kasich adviser denies any wrongdoing.

Breitbart News has obtained an audio recording of a robocall that the Kasich campaign apparently sent out to at least one person in New Hampshire. The robocall ended up on the answering machine of at least one individual, Amhert’s James Burke, who is on the nationwide “no-call list.”

The Attorney General provided a memo to the Jeb Bush campaign saying that an investigation is underway and that there are no exceptions to the law. The Kasich campaign initially claimed that the robocalls were not illegal because real live people dialed the numbers and only left a recorded message if the person on the other line didn’t pick up. But the attorney general interpreted the statute to mean that even if a human dialed the number, the campaign would still be in violation so long as a recorded message was left.

“The AG’s interpretation of the statute is confusing,” Kasich surrogate and senior adviser Tom Rath, a former New Hampshire attorney general, told Breitbart News. “It was confusing to interpret it that way.”

Pressed for clarification, Rath changed his quote.

“It was sufficiently confusing that he decided to issue a press release clarifying what they felt the law meant,” Rath said.

Rath added that he had nothing more to say on the matter.

Jeb Bush campaign general counsel Megan Sowards recently sent a letter to the state Attorney General’s office thanking it for providing “guidance” on the issue. The Attorney General’s office claimed that there is “no material exclusion” to the ban on sending robocalls to people on the no-call list. Sowards said that the Kasich camp, which includes a pro-Kasich super PAC, has not stopped engaging in the practice, despite the Attorney General’s guidance.

“Dear General Foster:  Thank you for providing written guidance making clear that RSA 664:14-a’s prohibition against prerecorded political messages delivered to New Hampshire voters on the federal do not call list ‘has no material exclusion; it is absolute,'” Sowards wrote, adding:

Despite your office’s very clear guidance last week, today our campaign received evidence that New Day for America, the Super PAC allied with John Kasich’s presidential campaign, has delivered a pre-recorded message to an answering machine of a New Hampshire resident on the federal do not call list. The message has all of the hallmarks of one recorded by a professional actor reading from a script instead of a volunteer leaving an individualized message.


The New Hampshire attorney general’s office provided guidance on the matter in a memo obtained by Breitbart News. According to the memo:

A “prerecorded political message” is defined by RSA 664:14-a, I, as a prerecorded audio message delivered by telephone by: (a) candidate or political committee: or (b) any person when the content of the message expressly or implicitly advocates the success or defeat of any party, measure, or person at any election, or contains information about any candidate or party. As applied to candidates for nomination in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary (“Primary”), it is clear by the definition that the statute applies to prerecorded (1) audio messages, (2) delivered by telephone, and (3) containing information about or advocating the success or defeat of any person competing in the Primary.

The statute restricts the delivery of audio messages meeting the definition of a prerecorded political message in two ways…The second restriction is the one relevant to the present inquiry. It prohibits the delivery of a prerecorded political message to any telephone number on any federal do not call list. RSA 664:14-a, III. The prohibition has no material exclusion; it is absolute. The statute makes no distinction between a prerecorded political message delivered by a live person or an automated dialing machine, nor does the statute distinguish between prerecorded political messages received by a live person or a telephone answering device. If the number called is on a federal do not call list, no prerecorded political message may be delivered. RSA 664:14-a, III.


The Kasich campaign did not provide comment for this report.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential RaceJeb BushJohn Kasich

Donald Trump Returns to Core Populist Nationalism in Last Pitch to New Hampshire Before Primaries in Packed Stadium


Associated Press

by MATTHEW BOYLE8 Feb 2016MANCHESTER, New Hampshire1,734

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire — Before a packed 4,000-strong crowd at Verizon Wireless Arena here Monday evening — hours before the polls open in the first-in-the-nation primary state — Donald J. Trump, billionaire and national GOP presidential frontrunner, made his final case to the set of voters who will decide his future.

“So we have something very, very special going on: We’re going to have a country that’s smart, we’re going to have a country that’s tough, that makes the proper decision, that makes the right deals,” Trump said after taking the stage to The Beatles hit “Revolution.” He continued:

Our trade deals are so bad. I have the greatest dealmakers in the world, the richest men, the richest women who are truly successful. The best people in the world, we have them in this country. We don’t use them. We use political hacks. These are political hacks, to negotiate with China, with Japan, with Russia, with Mexico—Mexico, Mexico is taking business away from us folks like you wouldn’t believe. What are we going to do with Mexico, folks? We’re going to build a wall. We’re going to build a wall. And this is going to be a real wall. This is going to be a wall that is going to stop the heroin and the drugs from coming to New Hampshire completely. This is going to stop.


Trump added that this is “sort of our final love fest” before the primaries tomorrow, and he implored everyone to vote. “You have to get out and you have to vote no matter what,” Trump said.

“I don’t care what happens, no matter what, this has been the most amazing experience — the most amazing experience of my life,” Trump added later. “And you people have made it that way. You people have made it that way.”

Trump, who came in second in last week’s Iowa GOP caucuses to the firebrand conservative Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), has upended the entire political process during his entirely unconventional run for the presidency. Most expect Trump to win here handily, while others like Ohio Gov. John Kasich, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) compete for second place. The question that remains is what margin of victory Trump will face, assuming he wins.

Tomorrow’s vote will determine much of what happens next. A big win by Trump — double digits or more — would send him barreling into the first-in-the-South primary state of South Carolina with incredible momentum. A smaller margin of victory could stunt Trump’s efforts to create an appearance of inevitability heading forward, and a loss, meanwhile, could be difficult to recover from.

Moments later, Trump brought his wife Melania, and shortly thereafter his daughter Ivanka, up on stage.

“We love you, New Hampshire,” Melania Trump said. “Together, we will make America great again!”

When Ivanka — who is expecting a child soon — joined him on stage, Trump said, “If she has the baby tonight in New Hampshire, that guarantees victory tomorrow. Please Ivanka, have the baby tonight!”

“I should be so lucky,” Ivanka Trump said. “New Hampshire, thank you so much. It has been amazing spending the last couple of hours here and obviously over the previous weeks I’ve been here quite a bit. My father has called so many times and said just the energy, the enthusiasm, the spirit of the crowds here are amazing. It really encourages us and keeps the momentum going.”

After thanking the local chief of police, who was in attendance, Trump turned back to the core messages of his campaign.

“A couple weeks ago, a politician — Nikki Haley — said in a speech, a rebuttal speech, referring to me, although my name wasn’t mentioned, although it was ultimately confirmed, that I’m angry, that I’m very angry,” Trump said. “And that the people that are with me are very angry. The people that are with me are really with me.”

He referenced polling that shows how loyal Trump’s supporters are as compared to other candidates’ supporters, before walking through how “We’re not angry people.” Trump said:

We don’t want to be angry. But I said right now, I will agree, me personally and a lot of the people that are with me, we are angry. Because we’re angry at incompetence. We’re angry at the Iran deal, where we give away $150 billion and get nothing. We’re angry at our trade deals, where China is making so much money that we’ve rebuilt their country, and then in the meantime our country and infrastructure of our country is going to hell. We’re angry when we make a Sergeant [Bowe] Bergdahl deal, who’s a dirty rotten traitor, where six people were killed looking for him and trying to bring him back. Six young great people killed looking for Sergeant Bergdahl and we make a swap knowing that he was a traitor. They had a colonel and a general talking to these people, and talking to the people that worked with them. They knew he was a traitor. They knew it and we made a deal.


After attacking Obamacare and the ineffective budget deals that feckless House GOP leaders have negotiated, he turned his fire on Common Core and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

“Bush loves Common Core,” Trump said. “He’s the only one that I know that loves Common Core, but that’s okay. We’re going to be bring education back locally. No more Common Core.”

“He’s also weak on immigration—remember they come as an ‘Act of Love,’?” Trump said, ribbing Bush some more.

Trump then hit Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) for his failure to be original, something New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie exposed as Rubio’s robotic nature. Trump said:

They’re politicians, all talk no action and getting re-elected. But you have some good politicians, but it’s mostly people who think about ‘How do I get re-elected?’ So I’m the only one. I’m self-funding. So when these guys see me — I know many of the guys — I’m looking at the room, I’m standing at the debate, I’m watching Marco sweating like a dog on my right. I’m watching Ted Cruz say, ‘No I would never say that about Donald,’ but he said something bad and they asked him ‘You said something bad, would say it again?’ and he said, ‘No,’ and I liked that he didn’t do that because we would have ended up in a big fight. It’s nice that he didn’t, honestly. Honestly, Marco was having a hard time — and I think he’s a nice guy. He’s a nice guy, but again and again and again after three times — I have a very good memory —so after three times, I said, ‘Wait he said that about three minutes ago.’ Then I said, ‘Wait, wait, wait, he said that two minutes ago.’ So after the fifth time I said, ‘What the hell’s going on?’


Trump hammered the permanent political class for looking out only for themselves and not for the American people. Trump walked through the way the crowd at the most recent debate was stacked with donor class figures, and not college kids, noting that “I know half the people out there” when he looked out upon the crowd.

“Sometimes you think the politicians are doing horrible, horrible deals — and they are horrible — but you think they’re really, really not smart people,” Trump said. “But they are actually smart people, but they’re working for themselves. They’re doing what their lobbyists who put up millions and millions and millions of dollars — I’m just talking about the honest stuff.”

Trump then shifted back to immigration, noting:

We’re accepting people and we’re accepting them in by the thousands, and you look at New Hampshire and the problems you have here with the drugs — people come into this country and you have absolutely no idea who they are, where they come from, are they ISIS? Maybe, maybe not. Somebody said, ‘Well ninety percent of them aren’t.’ Really? If we had 10 percent — look at what those two people did a couple months ago, radicalized people, they killed 14 people [in San Bernardino].


Trump walked through the Paris terrorist attacks and how he would defend the Second Amendment — arguing that an armed populous would have prevented the attacks from being as severe as they were, since gun control in France only allows the bad guys to have guns — then he shifted back to how there are criminal fugitive illegal aliens all throughout America right now.

“Right now, as we speak — it was released last week — we have 179,000 illegal criminal immigrants, illegal criminals, these are people who have been convicted of crimes, some very big crimes,” Trump said. “We have 179,000 people here that have committed crimes and shouldn’t be in the country. That’s bigger — 179,000 people is bigger, a lot bigger — than any city in New Hampshire. That’s a massive amount. So we’re going to do something about it.”

Trump harkened back to former President Dwight Eisenhower, who ran “Operation Wetback” and deported masses of illegal aliens back in the 1950s, saying, “I Like Ike.”

“I don’t want to put them in our jails,” Trump said. “Our jails are costing us a fortune. We’re bringing them back where they came from. And we’re going to be respected by those countries — we’re not respected at all by those countries — we’re bringing them back, and let that country put them in prison for the next 25 years, because we’re not going to do it. And they’re never, ever coming back to our country again. Never.”

The crowd roared.

Trump laid out how the rest of the GOP field has followed him on immigration and how other candidates are now talking about wanting to build a wall on the border. Without naming Cruz, Trump knocked him for copying him on the debate stage the other night, also saying there needs to be a wall on the border.

“My wife came up to me, Melania, and she said, ‘Darling did you hear that? That’s the first time I heard that from anybody else but you,’” Trump said. “We have to build a wall. Walls work. Just ask Israel. Walls work. They work. I don’t mean the little walls. I mean those walls. I mean serious walls. I mean Trump walls.”

He then laid out how the federal government, under President Barack Obama, has ordered Border Patrol not to enforce the law. Trump said:

I’ll tell you something, I met the Border Patrol people — they’re phenomenal — and the reason I met them is they called me. They said, ‘I want to meet you’ so I went to Laredo, Texas, and it was incredible. These people are incredible. They’re told to stand back. They’re told don’t touch anybody. They’re told to let people come in. They don’t want that. These are incredible men and women, there are people walking right in front of them and their incredible equipment, except for one thing: They’re told, ‘Don’t do anything.’ And when they do something, they say, ‘Give them a fine, let them go,’ and they go wherever they want, and that’s the end. You never see them again. We either have a country or we don’t. And just let me ask you one question about the wall: Who the hell is going to pay for the wall?”

“MEXICO!” the crowd shouted back at him.

“What?” Trump egged on the crowd.

“MEXICO!” the crowd yelled louder.

After mocking former Mexican president Felipe Calderon for saying Mexico won’t pay for the wall earlier on Monday, Trump said, “You know the wall’s just going to get bigger with that attitude.”

Trump wrapped his speech with a plea to New Hampshire to show up and vote for him because, “We don’t win anymore.”

“We don’t win on trade, we don’t win on anything,” Trump said. “We can’t beat ISIS with our military. Can you imagine Gen. George Patton, ‘We can’t beat ISIS?’ He would beat them by the time we walked out to the front row. We don’t beat ISIS. We’re going to start winning again. We’re going to win on every single level in our country. We’re going to win every single time we do something. We’re not going to make stupid deals anymore. We’re going to be led by smart people and have our smartest people representing us. Now I leave you with this. It’s so important. It’s so important. Tomorrow is going to be the beginning. I hear we have a lead, it doesn’t matter to me. Who the hell knows what the lead is? We have some snow, it looks like it’s going to stop. It’s so important; we have something so special going on. You have to go out, you have to vote, we have to celebrate tomorrow evening, we have to have a great victory. It’s so important, because we are going to make America great again.”