Trump DEFIES Ruling From Activist Judge Who CENSORED His Twitter
Please Subscribe: https://goo.gl/DodZjS
source: https://goo.gl/GMJPCT
Activist judges are it again, and this one is a doozy.
It involves censoring President Trump’s Twitter account by telling him who he can and cannot block on the social media platform.
A federal court judge ruled last week that President Trump could NOT block trolls who harass him, claiming it was “unconstitutional” and violates the First Amendment.
Ironically, this is on Twitter, a platform that routinely suspends Trump supporters who are deemed “trolls” simply because they do not subscribe to the liberal agenda.
President Trump is going about his Twitter business and ignoring the goofy ruling, which experts say will never stand up under appeal.
A federal district court judge ruled last week that President Trump cannot block people on Twitter, citing the First Amendment. This decision will be reversed because Twitter is a private company (merely publicly traded), not a public forum. Trump hasn’t bothered obeying the order and unblocking the people, no doubt because he knows it’s bad law.
Obama Freaks As Dan Bongino Reveals Why Liberals Refuse To Use The Word “Spy”
Please Subscribe: https://goo.gl/DodZjS
source: https://goo.gl/yAHdj6
Former President Barack Obama has a new reason to freak out after former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino revealed why liberals refuse to use the word “spy” as the Spygate scandal grows. You don’t want to miss this.
In recent weeks, the Spygate scandal has filled the headlines of nearly every major news outlet after it was discovered that the FBI planted at least one spy in or around President Donald Trump’s campaign during the 2016 election. The debate over Barack Obama’s connection to the FBI’s decision to spy on the Trump campaign is raging on, and Bongino is calling out liberals who won’t label the person planted by the FBI as a spy.
Bongino appeared on Fox News‘ Fox & Friends on Monday, May 28, 2018, where he laid it all out for viewers after host Griff Jenkins asked him one glaring question about former President Barack Obama and his presence during the Spygate scandal. “Where was President Obama? What do you say?” he asked Bongino.
This question was a big juicy fastball right up the middle for Bongino who was ready to hit it out of the park. “You know, I’ve been itching to get this out there. Let me explain to you from an insider’s perspective, from someone who’s worked in law enforcement. I’ve had interactions with intelligence often and these types of things,” Bongino began.
Next, Bongino slammed liberals with the real reason they won’t use the word “spy.” It turns out, it’s all really just a favor of sorts to keep Obama from looking like the criminal that he truly is. “The reason they are dancing around this ‘spy’ versus ‘informant’ narrative is precisely because of what you just asked Griff: the role of Obama. Let me explain this to you quickly. ‘Spy’ would mean it was someone from the outside inserted or designed to interact with the campaign to get information, meaning someone told them to do it,” Bongino continued, according to Daily Caller.
Bongino went on to explain that if a liberal in the mainstream media were to use the word “spy,” it would mean they are actually helping to implicate their beloved Obama in a crime. Although it’s very likely Obama had a direct role in the Spygate scandal, a liberal would never want to admit it. “An informant would have been someone inside the operation that saw something negative and wanted to come out and speak about it. That’s why they are not using the word ‘spy.’ Precisely because it implicates Obama who put him from the outside into the Trump campaign,” Bongino declared.
Notably, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper recently said that Obama had “no knowledge” of the FBI’s spy planted to gather intelligence on the Trump campaign. Not surprisingly, Clapper made the remarks during an interview on CNN.
“I am sure President Obama had no knowledge whatsoever of an informant,” Clapper said, adding that the FBI has many informants who play various roles within the department “who provide very valuable information and do so in a legitimate way,” Clapper claimed.
Months ago on Twitter, President Donald Trump included Clapper on a shortlist of D.C.’s biggest liars and leakers. “Little Adam Schiff, who is desperate to run for higher office, is one of the biggest liars and leakers in Washington, right up there with Comey, Warner, Brennan, and Clapper! Adam leaves closed committee hearings to illegally leak confidential information. Must be stopped!” Trump wrote.
Clapper also drew a mountain of criticism for recently claiming that, if the FBI did plant an informant in Trump’s campaign, that it was a “good thing.” The reality here is that Clapper and his liberal Kool-Aid drinkers want to downplay the tremendous criminal activity which took place under the Obama administration.
Barack Obama and his henchmen have been caught with their pants down, and it’s time for them to pay the price. In my opinion, liberals can refuse to use the word “spy” all the way up until Obama administration officials, including former FBI Director James Comey, are handcuffed and led away. It makes no difference. As the saying goes, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” but in this case, a spy by any other name would be just as criminal.
BREAKING: THE NFL IS DEAD!!! Look What They’re Doing!
Please Subscribe: https://goo.gl/DodZjS
source: https://goo.gl/GuA4YQ
Activist and Intercept columnist Shaun King, claims that he’s spoken to “several NFL stars” who have told him that they’re “considering sitting out the season until the de facto ban on Eric Reid and Colin Kaepernick is removed,” Breitbart reports.
Shaun King also claims that the unnamed “star” players hope to get 25 percent of all players to sit out with them.
If they’re truly considering staying away from training camp and/or the regular season, it will get very expensive. Teams can fine players up to $40,000 per day for skipping camp, according to Pro Football Talk. Not to mention what the players might lose in endorsement money while protesting a policy that has a 53% approval rating.
In addition to any forfeited game checks, players will be susceptible to an attack on any unearned amounts of signing bonuses they previously have received.
And while teams often will look the other way when holdouts arising from contract disputes end, it’s safe to say that owners wouldn’t react well to walkouts based on the status of Kaepernick and Reid.
NBC Reports- The fact that there’s been no chatter about players choosing not to show up on Tuesday for the next round of OTAs, either due to the new anthem rule or to the ongoing unemployment of Kaepernick and Reid, makes it hard to believe that any star players (or any non-star players) would give up money — and potentially give plenty of money back — all in the name of helping Kaepernick and Reid.
It is also noteworthy that Shaun King has become questionable in some of what he writes and releases to the public.
What we do know as facts is that the NFL “changed” their policy, when in reality no they did not, all they did was push the policy onto individual teams.
A few players have come out against the national anthem policy since the “change”.
These few players have commented on continuing protests and their desire to get their fellow players to join them.
RWT Reported on the NFL Lies in an article earlier this month, you can read the whole article by clicking here.
This is nothing more than the NFL Office attempting, in appearance, to show the fans that they are now patriotic and embrace our national anthem, military, law enforcement and our President. When in fact, by their own actions, they do not and never will.
Chris “Badger” Thomas is a Veteran who served our country as an Army Combat Medic.
As Cocky Obama Goes Into Showbiz With Netflix, Roseanne Easily Humiliates Him
Please Subscribe: https://goo.gl/DodZjS
Liberals have another reason to freak out after Roseanne Barr dropped a nasty truth bomb on former President Barack Obama’s shady Netflix deal. You won’t want to miss this as Obama is left humiliated by a much more successful celebrity than he’ll ever be.
Actress and comedian Roseanne Barr from the hit TV show “Roseanne” has already pissed off the liberal world a few times with her unapologetic support for President Donald Trump. Now, she’s taking it up a notch and slamming Obama after his recent shady Netflix deal was announced. For anyone who wonders if the Obama family belongs in showbiz, Roseanne tells it like it is.
According to Daily Caller, Roseanne didn’t pull any punches in a tweet on Sunday, May 27, 2018, when she let the world know that Obama doesn’t belong in show business, and for good reason. This is likely one of the most brutally honest things that the comedian has expressed in regard to our corrupt former president.
“I don’t think any President should go from WH to producing big media 4 public consumption. It’s an unholy alliance. Leave show biz 2 professionals-altho I do think going from show biz 2 WH is Ok-I might do it one day, then retire from both,” Roseanne wrote on Twitter.
Roseanne is absolutely right. The Obamas aren’t going into showbiz for entertainment purposes. They are simply dragging their horrific political ideology into the “big media” production world to continue peddling their progressive agenda.
Interestingly, Roseanne has run for president twice, and I wouldn’t rule out another attempt after seeing her tweet on Sunday. Unlike many others in her industry, Roseanne isn’t afraid of the mainstream media and would likely have a very popular campaign message if she ran again.
The actress’ brutal and honest tweet comes on the heels of a recent announcement from Netflix that it is going to partner with the Obamas to create original content for the streaming service. The deal was reportedly brokered by a former Obama presidential campaign fundraiser who also worked in his administration.
According to Breitbart, Ted Sarandos and his wife gathered up nearly $600,000 from various liberals and sent the large contribution to Obama during his presidential campaign. Sarandos is reportedly the man who is responsible for securing the $50 million deal with Netflix. Not surprisingly, Sarandos served as the U.S. ambassador to the Bahamas between 2009 and 2011 for the Obama administration.
This whole thing wreaks of Obama-style corruption, and Roseanne was right to call him out on it. “Unholy alliance” is the perfect way to describe the deal, but in the end, I have no doubt that a free market will snuff out the attempt by Obama and Netflix to create content that fuels the liberal agenda. The reality here is that many Americans realize how much damage Obama did to our country, and with the emergence of Spygate involving Obama’s FBI, things are likely to get very interesting in the near future for the former president.
As for Roseanne, this isn’t the first time she’s upset the left. Notably, Roseanne pissed off Obama-loving liberals during an interview on NBC’s The Tonight Show with host Jimmy Fallon, where she commented on the grief people give her for being a Trump supporter.
Speaking about her success with the relaunch of the show “Roseanne,” Fallon took the opportunity to address the elephant in the room, “But, then, also with a big hit come people that aren’t so happy as well — if you say that you are a supporter of Donald Trump,” Fallon said.
Roseanne caught Fallon off guard with her answer as she acknowledged, “Oh, yeah, people are mad about that.” But, she had a brutal response that consisted of five harsh words for Trump-haters. “But, you know, I don’t give a f*ck,” Roseanne exclaimed with a shrug, according to Daily Caller. And, the look on her face probably left Jimmy Fallon peeing his pants.
Few Hollywood personalities have tread on the political ground that Roseanne considers her usual domain. Her unapologetic approach is a breath of fresh air considering the toxic filth and progressive craziness that has crippled much of what used to be the entertainment industry.
Soros And Clinton Caught In Massive Money Funnel Together Against America – Make Them Cell Mates
source: https://goo.gl/qxbaA7
This was uncovered last year and still needs to be dug into more extensively. Although I have to say The Daily Caller did great work here. Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain in 2012 turned over nearly $9 million in unspent funds from his failed 2008 presidential campaign to a new foundation bearing his name, the McCain Institute for International Leadership. At the time that happened, it caught my attention. It sounded suspiciously like money laundering. But it gets even more suspicious when you see that it is connected to Soros and Clinton.
The institute is intended to serve as a “legacy” for McCain and “is dedicated to advancing human rights, dignity, democracy and freedom.” It is a tax-exempt non-profit foundation with assets valued at $8.1 million and associated with Arizona State University. The institution, despite its noble claims, is a conflict of interest for McCain. Even though McCain will not return to the Senate and is on the verge of passing away from terminal brain c****r, he is still the chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. Whether McCain is alive or not, the institute will continue and will be a factor in politics for the foreseeable future.
McCain’s institute bears a striking resemblance to the Clinton Global Initiative with its wealthy donors and McCain’s leadership. The CGI annually co-mingled special interests and powerful political players in alleged pay-to-play schemes. It is feared that this institute may do some of the same. It has accepted as much as $100,000 in donations from billionaire liberal activist-funder George Soros and from Teneo, a for-profit company co-founded by Doug Band, former President Bill Clinton’s “bag man.” Teneo is the driving force that helped enrich Clinton through lucrative speaking and business deals.
It gets even murkier. Bloomberg reported in 2016 that there was a $1 million Saudi Arabian donation to the institute, a contribution the McCain group has refused to explain publicly. They have also accepted at least $100,000 from a Moroccan state-run company tied to repeated charges of worker abuse and exploitation. The McCain Institute has also received at least $100,000 from the Pivotal Foundation, which was created by Francis Najafi, who owns the Pivotal Group, a private equity and real estate firm. The Pivotal Foundation has over the last several years given at least $205,000 to the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), which has been a vocal advocate for the Iranian nuclear deal the Obama administration negotiated.
“The NIAC website claims the group “is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to strengthening the voice of Iranian Americans and promoting greater understanding between the American and Iranian people.””
“But NIAC President Trita Parsi has long been an advocate for Iran, including demanding in May 2017 that President Donald Trump and officials in his administration “cease questioning the integrity of a (nuclear) deal.””
“The NIAC is “Iran’s lobbyists in Washington,” charged Aresh Salih, the Washington representative of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan. “People inside of Iran know them as their lobbyists in Washington, D.C.,” Salih told TheDCNF.”
“The NIAC does not file as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, nor does it register as a lobbyist with Congress.”
“Yet in May 2013, Parsi spoke to a packed Capitol Hill meeting sponsored by Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison to argue in favor of the nuclear deal. Ellison was the first Muslim elected to Congress and is also deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee.”
The pattern is very similar to the Clinton Foundation where foreign governments and foreign interests were throwing a lot of money in the hopes of trying to buy influence. And yet, no one is questioning McCain about all of these donations. It’s just like people haven’t looked anywhere deep enough into the dealings of both George Soros and Hillary Clinton over donations.
Lawrence Noble, general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, said that accepting contributions in the name of a sitting senator like McCain raises troubling issues. “In terms of the ethics of it, it does raise a broad question of people trying to get goodwill with the elected official,” he said. “From a personal standpoint, I’d rather not see these entities exist.” Remember, McCain supports many progressive causes.