Masked Fascists Attack Jewish Coffee Shop

By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent NewsA mob of masked criminals attacked the Asher Caffe & Lounge on 945 S. Boyle Ave. in the Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles—throwing feces and screaming at patrons and employees of the Jewish-owned business. The grievances of the attackers included a charge that the owner is a Trump supporter and that he is gentrifying the neighborhood against the wishes of its inhabitants.The group of attackers calls itself “Defend Boyle Heights.” A masked spokesman who refused to give his name defended “our right to decide who can live and do business in our neighborhood. We don't want Trump supporters here. We don't want our neighborhood's character to be polluted by the presence of undesirable outsiders.”The spokesman justified the wearing of masks, saying that “we have the right to a 'secret ballot' without fear of intimidation by cops who enforce the will of the their fascist overlords,” and maintained that “terrorizing customers and throwing shit helps counterbalance the evil influence of those trying to suppress our democratic rights.”In a show of solidarity, the Boyle Heights Chamber of Commerce expelled the coffee shop owner Asher Shalom from its membership rolls. Chamber president Jennifer Lahoda explained that “Mr. Shalom's views are not in line with the values and objectives of the Boyle Heights Chamber of Commerce. Boyle Heights thrives because of our diverse immigrant population. The Chamber will always celebrate and support this fact. Mr. Shalom is not an immigrant. He is a white American citizen. This, in itself, offends the majority of those who live here. We cannot let a member of the neighborhood's minority Jewish population impose its alien values against the wishes of the majority.”Schumer Forbids Second Summit with PutinUS Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) said he won't allow anymore meetings between President Trump and Russian President Putin “until I have seen a full transcript of their one-on-one private talks and am satisfied that Trump has not committed treason.”Even if Schumer's demand were not an egregious overstepping of his limited authority as Senate Minority Leader, its fulfillment is impeded by the fact that the one-on-one talk was not recorded. Nevertheless, Schumer was adamant that “the American people have a right to know what was said. His public statement expressing doubts about our own intelligence community's accuracy regarding Russian interference in the 2016 election displayed a breathtaking disloyalty to the brave men and women who are working diligently to save the country from the disastrous outcome of the 2016 election.”Undaunted by Schumer's demand, Trump has asked national security adviser John Bolton to work on setting up a second summit with Putin in Washington, DC for this Fall. “I look forward to our second meeting so that we can start implementing some of the many things discussed, including stopping terrorism, security for Israel, and nuclear nonproliferation,” Trump said.“The list of items to be discussed and the timing of this planned summit are highly suspicious,” the Schumer claimed. “At best, it would only serve to divert voters attention from the very serious allegations against Trump that have not yet been refuted. One the one hand, we have FBI agent Peter Strzok's text alleging that Trump is an idiot. Should we permit an idiot to deal with such volatile issues like terrorism and nuclear nonproliferation? On the other hand, many in Congress have leveled charges of treason against Trump. Should we permit a person charged with treason to deal with these issues? I think Trump should stand down from all presidential duties until these allegations have been conclusively disproved.”Schumer's perspective was shared by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who called “Trump's willingness to consider allowing Putin to ask questions of former ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul is troubling. For a president to not defend a US envoy is a clear case of gross negligence and dereliction of duty.”Putin wants to ask McFaul about a tax evasion and money laundering scheme that he alleges ended up diverting $400 million to the Clinton presidential campaign. Whether Trump's failure to immediately reject Putin's request is worse than President Obama's and Secretary of State Clinton's failure to attempt a rescue of America's Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens from the terrorists who ultimately murdered him seems dubious, at best.As irrational as some of these leading Democratic politicians' hysteria over the summit may be, others went even further into loony land. CNN host Chris Cuomo characterized the Russian election meddling as “an act of war” and wondered “why aren't we talking about a retaliatory strike? I mean, if Bush could take us to war in Iraq in pursuit of non-existent weapons of mass destruction, why isn't anyone in Congress or the Administration working on a 'shock-and-awe' plan to teach Putin and his goons a stern lesson?” HuffPo’s Mike Signorile, MarketWatch's Rex Nutting, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), DNC chairman Tom Perez, and Hollywood actor-director Rob Reiner expressed similar sentiments, while Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) and CNN analyst Philip Mudd called for a military coup to overthrow President Trump.Rising Star Dem Predicts Demise of CapitalismAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez, upset winner over ten-term Democratic incumbent Joe Crowley in New York's 14th congressional district, touted her progressive democratic-socialism as “the wave of the future. Capitalism is a fleeting phenomenon. Its fundamentally unfair distribution of wealth will be replaced by a democratic reallocation in the not too distant future.”“The notion that individuals should be free to exploit their abilities and efforts for personal enrichment without being required to share the benefits with those less able or willing to work as hard is socially unjust,” she argued. “Marx recognized this. That's why he designed a system calling for a collective aggregation of wealth that would be distributed on the basis of need. The one glitch in his system is that it calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat to decide who will do what work and who will be allocated what compensation. My idea is to replace the dictatorship with a democratic process where the votes of the majority will make these decisions.”“Under democratic-socialism voters will decide who can open a business, who it will employ, and how its profits will be distributed,” the congressional candidate explained. “That's why it's important to erase international borders. There are desperately poor people all over the world. Until we have a world government that can transfer wealth from rich places like the United States to poor places like Latin America we have to allow those who can get here on there own to enter the country without restrictions or harassment by ICE. The upside of open borders is that it will accelerate the transformation to socialism as more immigrants will add their votes to cause of collectivism.”Dems Propose “Catch-and-Release” LawSenate Democrats Kamala Harris (Calif), Jeff Merkley (Oregon), and Catherine Cortez Mastohave (Nevada) have introduced a bill that would mandate a nation-wide “catch-and-release” policy for illegal immigrants. Under the bill's provisions ICE would be required to release all members of families who enter the country illegally on their “own recognizance.” That is, they would be allowed to go free and asked to return for their later court hearing on whether they would be permitted to stay. This policy was the core approach used by the Obama Administration. However, only a tiny percentage of the “catch-and-release” immigrants have ever appeared for their court dates.“The artificial demarcation known as international borders is a crime against humanity,” Harris contended. “Since the very beginnings of the human race people have been free to migrate in search of a better life. Attempts to impede this right for humans puts them below the status of birds, butterflies, and herds of ungulates who are allowed to cross borders without interference. Our bill merely gives people the same rights that these animals possess.”Harris brushed aside the observation that none of the Earth's migrating animals become welfare clients at either end of their travels, calling it “absurd. Wild animals can live off the land. But humans aren't wild animals. They are social creatures who quite naturally seek social welfare among their own kind. Immigration restrictions that interfere with human migration fail to accommodate human nature. The complaint from those who say they don't want to take up the burden of supporting those who need support is anti-social. It is their obligation to the collective. The Democratic Party is determined to see that everyone fulfills this obligation.”High-Tax States Sue Over Trump Tax CutNew York, Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey are suing the federal government claiming that “the tax cut legislation unconstitutionally punishes states who choose to impose high tax rates. By limiting the amount of state and local taxes that can be deducted from income that is taxed at the federal level the legislation impedes our ability to shift some of the tax burden onto other states as has been the custom since federal income tax was implemented in 1916.”While there is nothing in the original Constitution or in any of the Amendments suggesting that federal taxes must allow deductions for state levies, New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood insisted that “the emanations from the penumbras of the Constitution clear imply that a state's right to tax its inhabitants cannot be abridged by any federal legislation. The State of New York's ability to extract the maximum from the incomes of those who reside in the state must remain unconstrained by any external force. The $10,000 per taxpayer per year limit enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 is an unconstitutional constraint.”“The advocates of this new tax law contend that the limit was included in order to protect the bottom 95%--i.e., lower and middle income families—and that only the wealthiest would end up paying more in federal income levies,” Underwood observed. “This evades the basic issue. Wealthy New Yorkers are the State's to exploit. If they cannot deduct all of our taxes from their federal liability they may move to lower tax states, or worse, may vote for assemblymen, senators, or governors who will support lower state taxes. Such a political impact represents an unwarranted and unconstitutional interference in the internal affairs of our state.”