The White House announced on Tuesday that U.S. troops stationed along the United States-Mexico border have just been authorized to come to the aid of U.S. Border Patrol Agents if they should come under attack by illegal migrants attempting to force their way through the fortified border.
The President’s decree came only days after the President witnessed a mob of Hondurans and other Central American migrants attempting to overpower Mexican police dressed in riot gear trying to hold the line in the border town of Tijuana over the weekend.
In that incident, Tijuana residents aided the police in holding the line, driving back the rock throwing migrants.
The order for the military to engage runs counter to the previous request to only defend themselves and not intervene if a border agent is attacked or overran by a surging mob.
Although the Department of Homeland Security did not confirm or deny the President’s decree, they stressed the importance of safety for those individuals tasked with manning and protecting the homeland from a hostile foreign assault.
Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Kate Waldman told ABC News, “As Secretary Nielsen has said, we will not allow our frontline personnel to be in harm’s way.”
Adding, “We will do everything we can to protect those who defend our nation’s sovereignty and secure our border. We appreciate the Department of Defense stepping in to assist the Department of Homeland Security as needed.”
Defense Secretary James Mattis at first rejected the new directive by the President after Customs and Border Protection (CBP) asked for assistance by the military in crowd control – and if needed riot control. Both functions are considered by the Pentagon to be law enforcement applications. Moreover, active duty troops are prohibited by federal law from performing law enforcement activities unless specially ordered by Congress or the president.
The brief video clip on Sunday highlighting Tijuana residents congregated around a monument in an affluent section of the city protesting the marauding horde of Central American migrants converging on their capital seems to have awakened many within the Mexican community regarding a nation’s sovereignty.
“Hundreds of Tijuana residents gathered today to protest the thousands of Central American migrants who have arrived via caravan hoping to seek asylum in the U.S.”
— ABC News (@ABC) November 19, 2018
Another post on social media described how the migrants overran the tiny border town:
“They accused the migrants of being messy, ungrateful and a danger to Tijuana. They also complained about how the caravan forced its way into Mexico, calling it an ‘invasion.’ And they voiced worries that their taxes might be spent to care for the group.”
— Cameron Gray (@Cameron_Gray) November 19, 2018
Perhaps the most important post came from the Commander-in-Chief himself, monitoring the situation.
“The Mayor of Tijuana, Mexico, just stated that “the City is ill-prepared to handle these many migrants, the backlog could last 6 months.” Likewise, the U.S. is ill-prepared for this invasion, and will not stand for it. They are causing crime and big problems in Mexico. Go home!”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 18, 2018
The massive outbreak of raging wildfires in California drew a series of eye-opening tweets from President Trump criticizing state officials about their environmental regulations and water management policies.
Experts have now gone on record declaring that the California wildfires currently raging across the state are the worst ever recorded in California.
The President’s criticism of California’s progressive policies began long before this series of wildfires, back several months ago, with several tweets warning state officials to take aggressive actions in combating fires.
“California wildfires are being magnified & made so much worse by the bad environmental laws which aren’t allowing massive amounts of readily available water to be properly utilized. It is being diverted into the Pacific Ocean. Must also tree clear to stop fire spreading!”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 5, 2018
The next day, the President once again took to social media and again warned the governor:
“Governor Jerry Brown must allow the Free Flow of the vast amounts of water coming from the North and foolishly being diverted into the Pacific Ocean. Can be used for fires, farming and everything else. Think of California with plenty of Water – Nice! Fast Federal govt. approvals.”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 6, 2018
No doubt the left will argue that climate change is to blame for the epidemic rise in fires across California. While the science is being debated, it’s worth reminding all that during the 1930’s an extended period of severe droughts and poor farming techniques created an environmental disaster dubbed the “Dust Bowl.” The ecological crisis lasted a decade – destroying the agriculture industry.
The fundamental differences between the natural devastation of the 1930’s and the decade-long wildfires gripping California today can best be summed up in one word: “politics.”
A recent Reason Foundation study noted that wildfires were considerably better controlled in the early part of the 20th century when the U.S. Forest Service was exclusively tasked with the responsibility of maintaining successful fire prevention methods that were arbitrarily abandoned when politically motivated environmental activists began challenging those methods.
Randal O’Toole, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, noted that the Forest Service became more costly and less effective as it increasingly “rewarded forest managers for losing money on environmentally questionable practices.”
During a congressional hearing held in May of 2018, Republican Congressman Tom McClintock addressed the growing crisis: “Forty-five years ago, we began imposing laws that have made the management of our forests all but impossible.”
The congressmen went on to explain how federal authorities have failed in reducing the number of deadly fires annually.
“Time and again, we see vivid boundaries between the young, healthy, growing forests managed by state, local, and private landholders, and the choked, dying, or burned federal forests,” McClintock said. “The laws of the past 45 years have not only failed to protect the forest environment, but they have also done immeasurable harm to our forests.”
McClintock went on to address the reason for the devastating increase in wildfires, pinning the blame of poor forest management and bad 1970s laws, like the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.
Since the beginning of the year, 47,700 wildfires have burned 8 million acres across the country, with the majority of the devastation in California and Montana.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke addressed what the Trump Administration is planning to do.
“This Administration will take a serious turn from the past and will proactively work to prevent forest fires through aggressive and scientific fuels reduction management to save lives, homes, and wildlife habitat. It is well settled that the steady accumulation and thickening of vegetation in areas that have historically burned at frequent intervals exacerbates fuel conditions and often leads to larger and higher-intensity fires.”
Zinke continued, “These fires are more damaging, more costly, and threaten the safety and security of both the public and firefighters. In recent fire reviews, I have heard this described as ‘a new normal.’ It is unacceptable that we should be satisfied with the status quo. We must be innovative, and where new authorities are needed, we will work with our colleagues in Congress to craft management solutions that will benefit our public lands for generations to come.”
Despite a drop off in automobile manufacturing, total US manufacturing output rose for a 5th straight month in October. According to The Federal Reserve, manufacturing production rose 0.3 percent last month. According to Reuters, economists had predicted a rise of 0.2 percent for October.
The figures were beyond expectations for October and suggest an underlying strength in US factory output, despite dips in auto production.
Manufacturing Gains Offset Other Losses
October’s rise in manufacturing production offset decreases in mining and utility output, leading to a 0.1 percent gain in industrial production last month. Industrial output rose 0.2 percent in September.
Manufacturing accounts for about 12 percent of the economy. The upward trend in manufacturing output has been spurred along by a strong domestic economy. But will the growth continue? There are signs that the momentum cannot be sustained due to growing capacity constraints amid labor shortages and more expensive raw materials.
Also, the growth in US manufacturing output is primarily based on the strengthening domestic economy, but a strong dollar, cooling global growth, and fear of retaliation for Trump tariffs, are restraining exports. Many believe that growth in the manufacturing sector cannot be sustained by domestic sales alone. In fact, according to a report recently issued by Supply Management earlier this month, what it refers to as the “export-orders gauge” fell for the third time in four months, while new orders decelerated for the fourth month in five.
This report echoes the concerns of many economists that President Trump’s trade war with China is starting to inflict more pain on manufacturing, even as the gross output numbers, as mentioned above, indicate that the manufacturing sector continues to expand.
Exports and the “Trade War” with China
The Supply Management data comes on the heels of other reports that came out mid- November, that also indicates that manufacturing in some of Asia’s most export-driven economies softened in October, highlighting spillovers from the trade spat. However, US stocks rallied recently, after President Trump said he had a productive conversation with Chinese President Xi Jinping on trade.
This all means that, as with any economic indicator, the better than expected manufacturing numbers posted in October, cannot be looked at in a vacuum. While it is true that any number that indicates growth is a good thing, one must also look at the overall picture. True, the Trump economy is strong, but analysts are also monitoring factory reports to assess whether the tax-cut-driven boost to business investment may be fading. Figures last week showed corporate spending on large ticket items such as equipment, cooled in the third quarter to the slowest pace of gains since 2016.
However, on the plus side of things, the job market remains stable, and the October jobs report showed that along with an increase in total output, manufacturing payrolls climbed.
Recently, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell expressed confidence in U.S. economic strength, and despite his admission that in “the global economy”, there has been “a gradual chipping away” at growth, the US economy “is in such a good place right now” and he credited the Fed’s monetary policy for mostly encouraging that growth.
A report conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates the cost of providing government benefits to illegal immigrants costs the American taxpayer $100 to $135 billion annually.
The report released in September of 2017 also estimates the number of illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. at around 12.5 million people, plus another 4.2 million children of those illegal immigrants. The Federal Government pays approximately $50 billion, while both state and local governments pay the additional $89 billion annually.
Those numbers were cited during a recent Trump rally in Cleveland, Ohio by the President.
“Illegal immigration costs our country more than $100 billion every single year,” he said.
The President, referencing the FAIR Report on November 5th ahead of the midterm election, noted that the majority of this expense comes in the form of medical care and public schooling expenditures.
FAIR also concluded that illegal immigrants generate about $19 billion in taxes each year, bringing the net cost down to $116 billion annually.
While the FAIR report is one of the few studies to attempt to examine the overall financial costs of housing illegal immigrants, the actual numbers of illegal immigrants are hard to come by – no doubt because of political considerations.
In 2013, a study by the Heritage Foundation estimated that illegal immigration costs the government about $54.5 billion per year, less than half of the FAIR estimate.
The discrepancies lie in the actual number of Illegal immigrants in the United States. Most estimate the amount to be around 12.5 million, and that’s the number the FAIR report is based on.
However, the Pew Research Center estimated in 2016 that there were approximately 11.3 million Illegal immigrants within the United States, while the Center for Migration Studies put the number at around 10.8 million.
Another recent study, this one by Yale University, had the number of Illegal immigrants at almost double the FAIR report at well over 22 million Illegal immigrants.
Remarkably, the last review by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was released in 1995, over 21 years ago.
At that time the net cost of illegal immigration ranged between $2 and $19 billion a year. The report was published at a time when the Census Bureau estimated that approximately 3.5 to 4 million illegal immigrants resided within the United States.
Robert Rector was one of the senior research analysts in 2013 for the Heritage Foundation. He explained why the cost of housing illegal immigrants has skyrocketed within just the last decade.
“The reality is, as almost anyone would acknowledge, even outside the context of immigration, is that a person that only has a high school degree is very likely to receive more in government benefits and services than they pay in taxes. And of course, half of the illegals don’t have a high school degree.”
The Women’s March was anti-Semetic. In a great touch of irony – and another example of liberals destroying one another – the organizers of the identity politics charade for more government control have lost out on the esteemed ” Human Rights Award,” given out by the Freidrich Ebert Foundation.
The group had been poised to win the award last evening, but then came the surprise announcement: Rather than winning the award, the foundation publicly rebuked the progressive feminist organization and their leader Linda Sarsour.
One of the foundation’s umbrella organizations, Critique of Anti-Semitism and Jewish Studies, sent a letter to the foundation categorizing the Women’s March as anti-Semitic – dripping with anti-Israel rhetoric and the vile anti-Semitic language by Louis Farrakhan.
“We believe that the Women’s March USA does not meet the criteria of this award, as its organizers have repeatedly attracted attention through anti-Semitic statements, the trivialization of anti-Semitism and the exclusion of Zionists and Jews since Women’s March USA establishment in 2017. Women’s March USA does not constitute an inclusive alliance,” read the letter.
The letter continued: “An organization that may support feminism, but discriminates against Jews and Zionists and denies Israel’s right to exist should not be honored by a democratic foundation that advocates diversity and speaks out against discrimination.”
The letter also openly condemned other’s within the leadership of the Woman’s March organization stating: “Sarsour, Carmen Perez (another board member of Women’s March USA), and Tamika D. Mallory (co-chairwoman of Women’s March USA who is to receive the FES Human Rights Award) have attracted attention due to their long-standing support of the notorious anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan, who, among other things, called Adolf Hitler a ‘very great man’ while recently comparing Jews to termites.”
Linda Sarsour has a long public history of anti-Semitism, dating back almost a decade. It’s no secret she supports radical extremist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and has also gone on record in support of Sharia Law – which remarkably is opposed to what the Woman’s March actually advocates.
She also openly supports Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam, tweeting out in 2012, “When we write the history of Islam in America, the Nation of #Islam is an integral part of that history.”
Farrakhan is the same individual back in 1984 who said, “Hitler was a very great man,” and then in 1985 reminded Jews, “And don’t you forget, when it’s God who puts you in the ovens, its forever!”
It appears the fascists are starting to show their true colors.
Selective outrage has once again gripped the progressive establishment by the long expected and anticipated firing, resignation, departure and exit of Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
The historical facts of Watergate are so far removed from the manufactured and concocted hoax regarding Russian collusion against the Trump Administration that it’s just not worth rehashing its absurdity.
However what is worth noting is how quickly the far-left moved when the expected news of Sessions’ departure hit the airwaves. Within a matter of minutes, House Democrats raced to media outlets declaring that the President’s request for resignation was somehow a “Constitutional Crisis” regardless of the fact Sessions was a cabinet appointee, and served at the “PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.”
What’s apparently freaking out both the mainstream media and crazed Democrats is how the President cleverly circumvented Sessions’ Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein from becoming “acting Attorney General,” and instead temporarily promoted Sessions’ chief of staff, Matt Whitaker.
The unconventional promotion fueled a firestorm of theories from the political pundits.
MSNBC on Thursday quickly dragged out a Harvard Law professor named Laurence Tribe, who lambasted the President for his choice in appointing Whitaker as acting attorney general, and predicting the President’s action was a “slow-motion constitutional crisis.”
The good professor then went into his legal “dog and pony” show, reciting Article 2 of the Constitution, and why the Presidents action is unconstitutional.
Like most critical thinking individuals who follow the ebb and flow of politics, there’s always another side to the legal coin, and it’s for that very reason we have both an Appellate Court and a Supreme Court.
Professor Jonathan Turley, a renowned constitutional scholar, happens to be on the flip side of that coin, and has just completed an op-ed articles titled; “Yes, Matt Whitaker Qualifies As Acting Attorney General Under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.”
Professor Tribe’s lays out in detail Professor Turley’s legal opinion regarding the legality of Whitaker’s appointment – and for that reason President Trump’s appointment of Whitaker as temporary attorney general is a brilliant strategic move.
That simple question is still ignored by the mainstream media – and those that are now freaking out.
The brilliant move by the President to dump Sessions immediately after the midterms and the appointment of Whitaker to oversee Mueller’s anticipated written report to the Justice Department before the end of the year assures the President he has a trusted confidant within the leadership of the DOJ – and not a self-serving, conflict-of-interest double-dealing Rosenstein.
An ominous warning came by way of the U.S. Border Patrol this week directed at Texas landowners along the U.S.-Mexico border that “armed civilians” might appear on their property to confront the horde of illegal migrants pushing towards the U.S.
The Associated Press reported that armed militias are intending to support the National Guard and Border Patrol to prevent illegal migrants from crossing into the U.S.
This of course could set up a potentially serious confrontation between “armed civilians” and those tasked with legally securing the border, namely the National Guard and Border Patrol.
The AP is reporting that at least 3-armed militia groups are heading to the U.S.-Mexico border to confront and stop the 4,000 plus migrant caravan, before they attempt to enter the U.S.
One of the groups took to social media posting that it’s “imperative we have boots on the ground.” While another bluntly wrote; “WAR! SECURE THE BORDER NOW!”
Shannon McGauley, president of the Texas Minuteman militia, acknowledged to the AP that his group is already stationed at 3-points of entry along the border, with another 25 to 100 more armed individuals expected to arrive and supplement the force already in-place.
Most Americans are probably unaware that the militia and other volunteer groups have been regularly patrolling the border for decades.
The partnership between civilians and the Border Patrol in controlling the influx of illegal migrants and drug gangs along the border is vital. Once they spot a trespasser, the civilians usually contact the Border Patrol to apprehend them. They cannot interfere with the process, since the Border Patrol is the law enforcement branch of U.S. Customs and Border Protection – part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
With the recent news that America is being invaded by thousands upon thousands of migrants from Honduras, Guatemala, and other Central American countries, the militia is turning militant, which is no doubt an extremely dangerous and volatile situation.
The President, perhaps realizing the potential confrontation, tweeted out on Tuesday; “Many Gang Members and some very bad people are mixed into the Caravan heading to our Southern Border. Please go back, you will not be admitted into the United States unless you go through the legal process. This is an invasion of our Country and our Military is waiting for you!”
Thus far the President has mobilized over 5,200 regular active troops (with another 1,500 in reserve), in what the Commander of U.S. Northern Command described as an effort to “harden the southern border” by stiffening defenses at and near legal entry points.
Appearing on Fox’s Laura Ingraham show, the President explained how the troop augmentation would work; “When they are captured, we don’t let them out,” We’re not letting them out … We’re not catching, we’re not releasing … We’re not letting them into this country.”
The strategy by the administration is to build “tent cities” near the border to house any asylum-seekers who have joined the caravan.
He added, “We’re going to put tents up all over the place,” We’re not going to build structures and spend … hundreds of millions of dollars. We’re going to have tents, they’re going to be very nice and they’re going to wait and if they don’t get asylum, they get out.”
No doubt the ACLU along with the 9TH Circuit will of course challenge the President’s directive. However, the “wild-card” in this unfolding political chess-game are those “armed civilians” we call the militia – those the founders regarded as our last line of defense. “The Congress shall have Power To …provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” Article I, Section 8, Clause 15.
When President Trump told the skeptical and hostile media that criminals, drug dealers, and human smugglers were embedded within the approaching caravan, few believe him.
However, reports from the embattled Mexican authorities are finally coming to light. Within just the last few days, two serious and separate incidents took place in Mexico. The first involved two Hondurans who allegedly opened fire at Mexican police, escorting the migrant caravan in the southern region of Chiapas.
The police were escorting the caravan as part of their assistance operation dubbed “Operativo Caminante” or “Operation Walker” when they were suddenly attacked by the two migrant Hondurans, identified only as 22-year-old “Jerson” and 17-year-old “Carlos.”
The duo spotted the police escorting the caravan and suddenly began firing at them. Luckily the pistol jammed, allowing police officers to rush the two and arrest them without anyone being injured. Police seized a .380 caliber Glock with 9-rounds still in the magazine.
The unprovoked attack follows on the heels of another serious incident of a Molotov cocktail attack involving the more violent prone second caravan near the border of Guatemala.
The report has confirmed that criminal migrants still in Guatemala are preparing Molotov cocktails and arming themselves for a potential assault against Mexican police, with the sole purpose of breaking through the Mexican border.
This past weekend saw an escalating and bloody confrontation between the Mexican police and rock-throwing migrants attempting to break through border security forces.
A second incident took place as a group of migrants facing deportation from Mexico back to their home country went on a rampage – setting fire to an immigration facility, hoping to overwhelm authorities in an apparent attempt to escape.
The fire began at a facility which serves a duel-purpose, first as a checkpoint and then as a temporary detention center for Mexico’s National Migration Institute (INM) in Pijijiapan, Chiapas.
According to Jaime Marroquin, a local public safety director, a group of migrants housed temporarily within the facility set fire to their mattresses. The 21 men and 5-woman and 3-children, were all in the process of being deported back to their home country when the migrants set fire to their mattresses hoping to escape within the initial confusion. Fortunately, their attempt failed.
Firefighters rushed to the scene, while Mexican police rounded up the suspects before they could flee, moving them to a more secure and larger immigration facility in Tapachula, Chiapas.
The violence followed Mexico’s generous offer last week of providing migrants within the caravan jobs, healthcare and education, instead of continuing their journey to the United States.
The migrants quickly rejected the offer of asylum, jobs, and benefits, and instead opted to continue their journey.
According to the Mexican government, the program called “Estas En Tu Casa” translated “You Are in Your Home” is designed to help migrants claiming asylum. The program provides the migrants with temporary employment, access to government-funded health care, and education for their children.
Also, to be eligible for the program migrants and their families must be in the country legally and reach out to immigration authorities who will sign them up.
Currently, only the southern Mexican states of Chiapas and Oaxaca are making this government program available. However, those migrants who entered Mexico “illegally” within the caravan will have the opportunity to begin the immigration process and must also follow Mexico’s immigration law.
The government will also make available their version of social security called CURP (Clave Unica de Registro Publico), by giving each migrant a government number that will allow them to open bank accounts and carry out other government required identification processes.
Not surprisingly, the vast majority of migrants have turned down the offer and instead are still heading for the United States.
Homeland Security is monitoring the caravans and has disclosed through their intelligence sources that at least 300 individuals traveling within the thousands of displaced migrants have criminal records – some for attempted murder.
Mexican government officials were the first to clash with some of the criminal element within the caravan, and are sharing their INTEL with Homeland Security describing some as “very violent.”
In addition, surveillance drones along with government officials are acknowledging that over 50% of the caravans are made up by single adult males ranging in age from 18 to about 40 years of age. Another ploy being used by the overwhelmingly male caravan is to place woman and children in front of the caravan so that the media gets the impression that the majority of asylum seekers are mothers with children.
History is full of once great societies eventually destroying themselves from within. This latest fiasco once again illustrates what happens when lawmakers elected to honorably fulfill their oath-of-office, “to protect and defend,” instead play politics with our nation’s sovereignty.
Moreover these lawmakers endanger our citizens by refusing to remedy the potential hazards of criminal aliens, the possible spread of contagious diseases – and the likelihood of sleeper terrorist-cells infiltrating our border.
This latest assault to our Republic is simply another example of extremist lawmakers and lawyers willfully ignoring our broken immigration laws, by allowing a dozen “illegal migrants” almost a thousand miles from our border to actually file a lawsuit against our President claiming that his policy attempting to secure our border somehow violates “their constitutional rights.”
The migrants traveling by foot from Honduras to the U.S. claiming asylum actually filed a class-action lawsuit against President Trump, the Department of Homeland Security and others – claiming a violation of their due process under the Fifth Amendment.
The lawsuit, no doubt instigated by the ACLU points to a 1993 case ruling by the Supreme Court, in which Justice Scalia at the time, ruled that “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in a deportation proceeding.”
Twelve Honduran nationals, including six children, are listed as plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. The suit contends that Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are “undergoing a well-documented human rights crisis.”
The lawsuit also claims that the plaintiffs’ right to the Administrative Procedures Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act were being infringed upon.
The migrants also maintain within their suit that the President’s attempt to stop the caravan from entering the U.S, by those claiming to be asylum-seekers is unlawful when they have a fair claim of asylum.
Furthermore criticizing the President for deploying troops at the border claiming that Trump is stocking “fear and hysteria” by suggesting that criminals and gang members are within the caravan.
There’s little doubt that this absurdity has been concocted by the ACLU, progressive Democrats along with radical leftist professors looking to turn America into a third-world country by flooding America with poor, illiterate and desperate people looking for a better life.
However this flood of illegal migrants, followed by another caravan and then another, would eventually overwhelm our infrastructure, and in a short time if left unchecked would destroy our society, ironically using the trappings of our own benevolent laws against us.
Progressive Professor Cristina Rodriguez, at Yale Law School, echoed the drum-beat of the lawsuit, by affirming that the U.S. Constitution does apply to undocumented immigrants.
“Yes, without question. Most of the provisions of the Constitution apply on the basis of personhood and jurisdiction in the United States.”
Rodriguez continued; “Many parts of the Constitution use the term ‘people’ or ‘person’ rather than ‘citizen’ those laws apply to everyone physically on U.S. soil, whether or not they are a citizen.”
However the illegal migrants who’ve filed the “class-action” suit aren’t on U.S. soil, therefore it would stand-to-reason that the lawsuit is invalid.
The President appearing on Fox’s Laura Ingraham show addressed the caravan issue and laid out his comprehensive strategy, which would include the building of a “tent city” to house the thousands of migrants. However there may be an issue under the Flores Agreement of 1997, a provision that protects asylum-seekers’ rights and limits how long minors can be held.
I began this piece by referencing how great societies eventually destroy themselves from within; America like other past societies is at the precibus of its own creation.
Sounding more and more like a proud patriotic American, superstar rap artist Kanye West is shocking the music establishment down to its very foundation.
The MAGA wearing, Trump supporting, Grammy award-winning entertainer and business mogul has come out of the “Kool-Aid” progressive closet with a vengeance – in full support of President Trump’s economic agenda.
Kanye tweeted out Sunday, “We will no longer outsource to other countries. We build factories here in America and create jobs. We will provide jobs for all who are free from prisons as we abolish the 13th amendment. Message sent with love.”
The Sunday tweets followed the 41-year-old musician’s appearance the night before on SNL’s 44th season premiere. Wearing a red MAGA cap, Kanye doubled-down on his support for the president at the conclusion of the show. This apparently caught the show’s producers “off guard” as they attempted to cut Kanye off in mid-air, in the middle of his impassioned speech.
“The blacks weren’t always Democrats. You know it’s like the plan they did, to take the fathers out the home and put them on welfare. Does anybody know about that? That’s a Democratic plan,” Kanye orated before an enthralled audience.
Kanye continued to stress America’s need for a serious “dialogue, not a diatribe.” A portion of the speech was captured by comedian Chris Rock and went viral on social media.
Kanye referenced the news coverage of President Trump, stating that “ninety percent of news are liberal.”
“Ninety percent of TV … LA, New York, writers, rappers, musicians; so it’s easy to make it seem like it’s so, so, so, one-sided. I feel kind of free. I thought this country said that I could be me.”
That’s when SNL momentarily went black, cutting off the mega rapper mid-sentence, expounding on “freedom of speech.”
Deranged progressive and CNN co-host Alisyn Camerota went after Kanye on her most recent show, stating: “I am wondering if it’s time to start worrying about Kanye because he does go on sometimes nonsensical rants. I haven’t heard this whole one, so I don’t know if it’s nonsensical. And look, he has taken a break, I think, for some sort of stress-related issues, so I am concerned.”
It would appear by her statement, anyone who supports the president must be suffering some type of “stress-related issue”…which begs the question: Has anyone seen the CNN host lately going into hyper-overdrive regarding Russian collusion, the Kavanaugh hearings, or anything remotely related to the administration? The irony is not lost on us.