By John Semmens
German Government Flummoxed by Muslim New Year’s Eve Assaults
On New Year’s Eve, gangs of Muslims immigrants accosted, groped, assaulted, robbed, and raped women in Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, and Dusseldorf, Germany. Local police were unwilling or unable to come to the aid of victims, complaining that “there were too many offenders for us to contend with. They were throwing rocks and bottles at us. It was just too dangerous for us to get involved.”
Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker saw her city’s police’s inability to intervene as “a blessing in disguise. What we really have here is a clash of cultures. In the Muslim community only prostitutes and immoral women are out in public in the state of undress that we have become accustomed to tolerating in our society. Fondling such women, raping them, and robbing them is permitted or possibly even commanded by the Quran and other Islamic scriptures.”
“Rather than try to coerce these immigrants into abiding by our values it seems more prudent that we take the steps necessary to avoid these kinds of incidents in the future,” Reker advised. “At a minimum, German women could do a better job of covering themselves when out in public. Better still, women should never venture out without being accompanied by a male protector—a husband, father, or brother. If we simply take these few sensible precautions we can learn to live in peace with our new neighbors.”
Ralf Jaeger, German interior minister for North Rhine-Westphalia, decried German anger over the assaults as “incendiary rhetoric that can only magnify the cultural differences between ethnic Germans and recent immigrants.” Jaeger called on the media “to suppress the kind of hate speech that targets the beliefs and behaviors that are out-of-step with traditional German norms. As uncomfortable as it may be, we must learn to live in a world of diversity. Embracing and celebrating this diversity is the more progressive stance.”
In related news, the Ottawa, Canada Children’s Choir welcomed refugees by singing Islamic prayer Tala’ al-Badru ‘Alayna during a holiday concert. The song praises the slaughter of Jewish and Christian men and the raping of Jewish and Christian women by Muslims as “the path to paradise for true believers.” Choir director Robert Filion urged that “we look beyond the specific words, bad as they might be, and accept the choir’s performance as an effort to foster diversity and cultural inclusion.”
Obama Rejects Idea that Women Should Arm Themselves
When a rape victim queried President Obama at his recent town hall meeting to promote his latest set of executive actions impeding acquisition of firearms by law-abiding citizens he rejected her notion that having a gun for her own protection was her best option.
“I’m sorry you were raped,” the President told Kimberly Corban, “but fortunately you weren’t killed. Most rape victims are not killed. If we allow you to have a weapon, though, the risk of someone getting killed jumps up to an unacceptable level. You acknowledge that your assailant was unarmed. You both came away from the encounter alive and without life-threatening injuries. I call that a ‘win-win’ outcome compared to what might have happened if you had pulled a gun to try to prevent the rape.”
Corban, who has struggled with depression, PTSD and stress-related seizures since she was raped was neither persuaded nor mollified by the President’s response or his reasoning. “The restrictions President Obama is adding make it harder for me to own or carry a gun is actually just making my kids and I less safe,” she asserted. “His fear that I might accidentally shoot myself or, as he put it, ‘unjustly impose a death penalty on my attacker’ conveys a total lack of sympathy or understanding.”
In related news, MSNBC decided not to do an interview with Juanita Broaddrick, a woman who says Bill Clinton raped her in 1978, “because, as it turns out it’s just old news. The alleged rape took place nearly 40 years ago. The statute of limitations expired long ago,” said network spokesman Moe Lester. “Even though it is candidate Hillary Clinton’s position that ‘every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported,’ we do not believe the current campaign should be diverted from more pressing issues by listening to an aged rape victim’s accusations.”
Swedish Authorities Unsure of How to Deal with Refugee Violence
After a contingent of ten police officers were scared off from rescuing a ten-year-old rape victim from a refugee center, authorities professed themselves to be at a loss for what to do next.
“The ardor with which the Muslim mob attacked the police seeking to remove the boy from the center has caused us to reexamine our premises,” National Police Commissioner Dan Eliasson admitted. “To us, the idea of grown men sexually abusing this young boy is repugnant. But are we guilty of projecting our own values onto another culture?”
“I am told that keeping such boys on hand for the pleasure of Muslim men is a time worn tradition in Arab countries where polygamy has left many adult men without hope of finding a female mate,” Eliasson said. “The young age of the victim apparently fits through a ‘loophole’ in Islam’s proscription against homosexuality.”
The Commissioner also wondered “whether our tolerance of this practice among the immigrant community might offer a safety valve against these men raping Swedish women. Is the repeated raping of a handful of Muslim youths an acceptable price for us to pay in order to protect our women?”
In related news, a 17-year-old Danish girl who fought off a Muslim attacker using pepper spray is being charged with unlawful possession of the spray by local authorities. Police spokesman Knud Kirsten defended her arrest saying that “the law clearly states that pepper spray is illegal. Even though she was the victim of an unprovoked attack that doesn’t justify the breaking of this law. Two wrongs don’t make a right. As a victim she had the high moral ground. As a retaliator, though, she has sacrificed that high ground and made herself a criminal.”
DC to Pay Criminals to Refrain from Crime
Washington, DC Councilman Kenyan McDuffie proposed and the City Council unanimously adopted a measure that will pay criminals to refrain from committing crimes. Under the plan, residents with a sufficiently impressive rap-sheet will be paid up to $9,000 in cash per year for each year they aren’t convicted of a crime.
“This is not some lame-brained scheme that any smart aleck can game,” McDuffie boasted. “Only those who can document their criminal behavior will be eligible for the stipend. By paying the ‘worst-of-the-worst’ members of our community to cool it we will have a greater impact than if we put more cops on the street.”
The move met with an enthusiastic reception on the streets. A local community leader known only by his street moniker: “The Big Banger,” averred that “we are always looking for ways to expand our cash flow. I think most of my guys have the reps to qualify for the payouts. Those few that don’t could still crack a few heads or boost some merchandise if that’s what it takes to get in on this.”
Apprised of “Banger’s” comments, McDuffie said he was encouraged. “I’m confident that if we partner with the people who really control the streets we can transform the social structure of our City. We’ve already got feelers out to both the Clinton and Sanders’ campaigns to see if either will commit to this new way of restoring order to our society. It would be great to have a broader impact than just in DC.”
In related news, some DC welfare moms are unhappy with the free accommodations the City is providing. Due to a shortage of public housing 730 families are being housed in area hotels. The amenities include prepared meals, cable TV, internet WiFi access, and maid service. Tiera Williams complains that the two-room suite they gave her is “too small, there aren’t enough choices of food, the TV is only basic cable, and the maid wakes me up too early. The paying customers at the hotel get room service with a bigger menu and pay-per-view TV. Giving us less is discrimination. I thought Obama was supposed to transform America. Or do I have to wait for Sanders before everything is free for all.”
Mosque Weapon Seizure Called Discriminatory
Raids by French authorities have resulted in the confiscation of hundreds of war-grade weapons from numerous mosques throughout the country. The raids were inspired by the November 13th Islamic terrorist attack that killed 130 people in Paris.
The raids were denounced as discriminatory by Imam Aliki Kilyu. “We would never see the government raiding churches and confiscating crucifixes,” he complained. “By singling out the holy places of Muslims for their intrusions these kafirs have disrespected the beliefs of Islam.”
Kilyu rebuffed contentions that crucifixes and weapons cannot be compared. “Christians are the ones who believe in turning the other cheek. The crucifix is a symbol of their god sacrificing himself for this tenet of faith. Muslims are commanded by Allah to fight for Islam. Weapons are the instruments by which Muslims carry out this religious obligation. Government confiscation tramples on Muslims’ freedom to freely practice their faith.”
The Imam cited the revelation of seized recordings of chants glorifying martyrs who give their lives to slay unbelievers as “proof that the authorities knowingly violated one of the most sacred tenets of our faith. The West likes to hold itself up as a regime of tolerance for diversity, but when it comes to Islam their hypocrisy is on display for all to see.”
As if to reassure non-Muslims, Kilyu promised that “the path to peace is clearly spelled out in the Quran. Once the world is conquered for the faith of Allah everyone can live in peace under the laws laid down by the Prophet. Refusal of the infidels to submit compels we Muslim faithful to continue the fight. The blood is on their hands.”
In related news, Imam Oussama El-Saadi declared Denmark’s efforts to prevent Muslim men from acquiring child brides “an intolerable invasion of religious freedom. Older men choosing young girls to be their wives is part of our culture. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) was wed to his favorite wife when she was only six years old. That Muslim men would seek to emulate the behavior of the perfect man should not be impeded by sacrilegious infidel interference. What the West doesn’t understand is that it is better for a girl to be owned by one man than to be available for rape by many men, as is also the custom in our culture.”
Clinton Says She Tries to Tell the Truth
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was cornered in an interview on CBS this week when she was asked by Scott Pelley whether she could make a Jimmy Carter-like promise to never lie to the American people.
For her part, Hillary professed to be “working hard to try to tell the truth,” but admitted that “it hasn’t always been easy. There are times when the greater good requires that the truth be suppressed or that a fiction be concocted. Should we slavishly adhere to the truth at the cost of allowing political enemies to tear us down like Reagan did to President Carter? Wouldn’t the nation have been better off if Carter had been more flexible regarding the truth? If he had been, perhaps the nightmare years of the Reagan era could’ve been averted.”
“I think American voters are sophisticated enough to understand and appreciate the reasons why their president may need to lie to them for their own benefit,” she added. “They need a leader who will do whatever it takes to govern. If this means the president must cross ethical boundaries that would be considered sins or crimes in other circumstances we must hope that the person we elect is up to the task. Of those currently running I believe that I best embody the character and strength to undertake any dirty deeds that might be necessary.”
Clinton Contrasts Immigration Stance with Rivals
Eyeing the Latino vote, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sought to distinguish herself from both fellow Democratic candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders and GOP front-runner Donald Trump by taking a pro-illegal immigrant stance.
“To those swayed by Trump’s plan to build a wall to keep Mexicans from coming to America I would like to know ‘who will clean our homes and mow our lawns?’” she asked. “These are the jobs that Trump and Sanders want to reserve for Americans. But do Americans really want these jobs, even at $15 an hour?”
Clinton professed to “understand the GOP’s racist desire to block these future Democratic voters, but what can Sanders be thinking? Is the short-run preservation of menial jobs for Americans who don’t want them worth delaying the day when Democrats, bolstered by the votes of millions more Latinos, can monopolize political power at the local, state, and national levels? Those of us who believe in progressive values need to take the long view, as President Obama has, and do everything we can to ensure the Party’s permanent ascendancy”
“As president, not only will I bar the construction of any more walls, but until those that exist are torn down I will build ladders and ship them to Mexico so migrants can more easily and safely enter the United States,” she announced. “This will enable us to complete the transformation of America that President Obama has initiated.”
In related news, Sanders brushed aside fears that socialism in America could lead down the same destructive path it has in Venezuela, where shortages of toilet paper now plague that nation. “Look, for most of human history people have gotten along without toilet paper, clean clothes, and adequate food,” he pointed out. “We are tough enough to survive without luxuries like toilet paper. Its absence from the sewage system will clear the pipes and lessen the burden on the environment. I’d call shortages of such unneeded luxuries more of a feature, than a flaw, of socialism.”
State Dept to Wait Until After Election to Evaluate Hillary’s Emails
The US State Department announced that it will be deferring further analysis of the security implications of former Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized and illegal transfer of classified documents onto her private, unsecured computer until after this November’s elections.
Department of State spokesman John Kirby explained that “the upcoming elections are contentious and confusing enough already. Adding additional complicated material at this time will overtax voters’ attention spans and divert them away from the themes candidates are trying to communicate. This could affect the outcome in ways that might be very detrimental to the greater good.”
Kirby also added an efficiency argument to the case for delay. “Conducting such an analysis would be a tedious undertaking,” he alleged. “It’s quite possible that the election outcome would render the effort unnecessary. I mean, if voters decide to put Mrs. Clinton in the White House we’re pretty confident that the analysis wouldn’t be wanted. So rather than spending taxpayer money on an investigation that could well be canceled, we feel it is more fiscally prudent to avoid a possibly unneeded expenditure.”
Dem Candidates Agree on Abortion
The two Democratic contenders for the Party’s 2016 presidential nomination fended off the possibility that states should have any leeway in limiting abortions carried out within their borders.
In a statement eerily similar to the Supreme Court’s 1857 Dred Scott decision, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued that “fetuses are creatures of an inferior order. They are not persons under the law or Constitution. Consequently, the imputation of their imaginary so-called right to life cannot displace the very real right of the mother to the liberty to not be encumbered with the burdens of pregnancy and child care that anti-choice fanatics would seek to impose on her.”
“The right established by the Court in its historic Roe vs. Wade decision would be meaningless if state legislatures are allowed to chip away at them,” Clinton added. “Mandatory ultrasounds, 72-hour waiting periods, and prohibition of late term abortions are all infringements on a woman’s fundamental right against being forced to bear a child.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) concurred with Clinton’s stance and lamented that “the resurrection of the discredited claim that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the states would be used for such a disgraceful objective. Minority women are disproportionate beneficiaries of the right to an abortion. How are attempts to limit these rights not seen as racist?”
Sanders vowed to “appoint Supreme Court Justices that will protect and broaden the rights granted by Roe vs. Wade beyond the artificial birth threshold. Merely surviving the journey down the birth canal is no great accomplishment. It must not be used as an argument for bestowing a whole roster of rights and privileges to the entity that emerges if the mother opposes the continued existence of this entity.”
In related news, Governor Earl Ray Tomblin (D-WV) vetoed a bill banning dismemberment abortions. “The Supreme Court has determined that every woman has a Constitutional right to an abortion,” Tomblin declared. “Opposition to a procedure that fulfills this right is an attempt to impose a restriction. The contention that the pain of being torn limb from limb somehow validates such a restriction usurps this fundamental right.”
Dem Denounces GOP as “Anti-Government”
Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky) held a press conference this week to denounce GOP opposition to increased government spending. “They want to starve the beast,” said the angry and incredulous congressman.
Yarmuth cited the “tragic” shooting of 17-year-old burglar Trevon Johnson in Miami by homeowner Gwendolyn Jenrette this week to bolster his argument that “if the government weren’t slacking off in its duty to provide for the needs of our people this wouldn’t have to happen. As Trevon’s family so aptly put it, ‘how he gonna get his money for school clothes if people can just shoot him for breaking into their homes?’”
“I can’t imagine a more conclusive demonstration of the neglect and inadequacy of government programs than a young man being driven to crime in order to pursue his education,” Yarmuth contended. “Every time we fail to expand government to the magnitude necessary to fulfill everyone’s needs we will be setting more such tragedies in motion. The extermination of our best-and-brightest by gun-toting racist reactionaries is a price too high to pay.”
The congressman held out hope that “this year’s elections will crush anti-social elements and empower a Democratic president and congress to liberate our people from the burdens of existence. We will truly ensure that the best things in life, like education and health care, are free. We will end the struggle to obtain the necessities and free young people like the late Trevon Johnson to pursue their higher callings.”
Obama Minimizes Differences Between Communism & Capitalism
In a speech to Argentinian youths, President Obama characterized the long-running battle between capitalism and communism as “an interesting intellectual argument that should have no bearing on public policy. Rather than get hung up on the supposed moral differences between these rival ideas we should focus on what works.”
“Whether an unequally shared abundance is superior to a universally shared poverty is not a settled issue,” the President asserted. “The United States has historically opted for free enterprise and individual rights, but can we really say that it has made its people happy? I just visited Cuba, which chose a different path. The people there seemed pretty happy to me. I did not see the kind of anger and dissatisfaction that has given rise to the type of clamor for a change in government that is currently dominating the US 2016 presidential campaign.”
“Under Communism, the Cuban people have been spared the constant pressure of trying to get ahead,” Obama continued. “Just knowing that there is no ‘getting ahead’ has liberated people to relax and enjoy simpler lives—watching baseball games and tinkering on their cool 1950s cars. If I could push a button and exchange America’s greedy self-centered way of life for Cuba’s public-spirited collectivism I’d be sorely tempted to do it.”
The President acknowledged that “Cuba’s treatment of dissenters seems a bit harsh, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that only a tiny minority of the population has been negatively affected. Heck, we have more people in our prisons than they do in Cuba. So, maybe our system is more oppressive than theirs.”
In related news, the two lovely floral dresses worn by First Lady Michelle Obama on the First Family’s recent visit to Cuba cost 23 times the average annual salary for Cuban workers. The First Lady professed herself “unbothered by this statistic since no Cuban worker would be required to buy such expensive attire. Those of us who must bear the burdens of governing must also look the part. I’m confident that the Cuban people understand this. Their president lives in a palace while many workers live in shacks. Each member of society has a role to play and receives the perks to which he or she is entitled.”
DHS Secretary Says Illegal Aliens Are “in Effect” US Citizens
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson dismissed the possibility of deporting those entering the country illegally as “impractical. For all intents and purposes the 11 million already residing here are, in effect, US citizens.”
Johnson also expressed his distaste at deporting alien criminals on the grounds that “it would be both cruel and unusual. The home countries to which they would be deported are already suffering under crime rates far higher than we have here in the United States. Even if letting them stay here raises our crime rates it seems to me that this would provide for a more fairly balanced distribution of criminal elements around the globe.”
“Further, it would be highly unusual for us to unilaterally deport these people,” Johnson continued. “European governments aren’t deporting terrorists back to their Middle Eastern homelands. Just this week, Belgian officials acknowledged that terrorist cells are too big for the government to take action against. If Europeans can learn to live with foreign terrorists in their midst, surely we can learn to live with the lesser danger of abiding a few hundred foreign-born murderers living among us.”
As Johnson sees it, “the whole issue may be moot anyway. As these resident aliens register to vote they will be helping select the people who run the government. If respecting the will of the people is to have any meaning in our democracy we need to respect these new voices and try to integrate them into our society.”
In related news, Muslims living in the Detroit metro area lodged a protest against the Cherry Hill Presbyterian Church’s annual Easter egg hunt, calling it “an offense to our religious beliefs.” Parent Majed Moughni claimed his “children were discomfited by this intrusion. The invitation for all children, regardless of religious affiliation, to participate in this event exhibited an unconstitutional insensitivity to our religious beliefs.”
Bill Clinton Clashes with “Black Lives Matter”
After being mercilessly heckled by agitators from the group “Black Lives Matter,” former President Bill Clinton accused them of “defending murderers and drug dealers.” The BLM protesters objected to the former president’s support for 1994’s Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which they contend disproportionately penalizes minorities.
Clinton’s argument that “this law puts blacks who prey upon other blacks, who kill other blacks behind bars and saves the lives of countless would-be black victims. Those attacking this law can’t really pose as advocates for black lives. They are advocates for criminals.”
Concerned that the former president has “drifted off message,” the Hillary for President campaign sought to distance itself from his remarks. “Bill signed that law more than 20 years ago,” campaign manager Robby Mook reminded. “It’s understandable that he feels some need to defend it. But that is not Hillary’s current position.”
Mook sought to establish that “it is Hillary’s position that the bigger problem is white cops killing blacks. This is the same position as that of the BLM movement. Blacks killing blacks results from imposing unfair white values on the black subculture. Blacks violently fighting over turf stems directly from our drug laws. It is Hillary’s position that the government ought to award designated areas to minority-run drug vendors, much like government has awarded gambling territories to Indian tribes. If this were done, black gangs could take turf interlopers to court rather than trying to enforce their rights through extra-legal means.”
In related news, the Obama Administration’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) threatened action against landlords who refuse to rent to convicted felons, calling it “racist. Blacks are three times as likely to have criminal convictions as whites. Barring lawbreakers from rentals illegally imposes standards favorable to whites on racial minorities.”
Study Shows Government Less Cyber Secure
A study released by Security Scorecard found that all levels of government had a worse record of cyber security than major business firms. In measures of vulnerability to malware and security breaches, federal, state, and local governments ranked at the bottom. Education, telecommunications and pharmaceutical industries were almost as bad. Information services, construction, food and technology were the best.
Of the 600 government entities tracked, NASA performed the worst. Other low-performing government organizations included the U.S. Department of State. This latter revelation was jumped on by the Hillary Clinton for President campaign as “a total vindication of Secretary Clinton’s decision to flout State Department rules and conduct her business on a private computer system housed in a bathroom closet in Colorado.”
“Rather than being hounded for going outside of the federal government’s procedures, Secretary Clinton should be hailed for heroically taking extralegal action to divert her communications to what research now shows was likely a more secure option,” said campaign manager Robbie Mook. “The question is, do voters want a president who will slavishly follow the law? Or do they want someone who is willing to go above and beyond the law when circumstances warrant it?”
Trump Foreign Policy Speech Alarms Allies
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s emphasis that the guiding principle for foreign policy under his administration will be “America first” has made some of our European allies nervous.
Germany’s foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier characterized Trump’s stance as “arrogant and selfish. To put America first is offensive to my ears. He is denying our equality and our right to participate in determining what America must do to protect all of our mutual interests. If this kind of self-centered viewpoint had prevailed in an earlier era my country and perhaps all of western Europe would today be run by fascists or communists.”
Carl Bildt, a former Swedish prime minister and foreign minister concurred. “Trump is disrespecting democratic processes and democratic values,” Bildt charged. “He makes no provision for our vote. Becoming America’s president won’t make him king. He would not have the prerogative to shrug off the obligations the United States has assumed and on which the rest of the free world has depended for three-quarters of a century without our acquiescence.”
British Prime Minister David Cameron said “Trump’s demand that we be required to fund a minimum share of the cost of our defense is unprecedented. This is not how things have been done for more than seven decades. We haven’t budgeted for the kind of outlays this would entail. We can’t afford it.”
German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel suggested that “our only viable option might be to call a President Trump’s bluff. If we look like we’ll be overrun by communists, fascists, or Islamists the United States would have to come to our rescue. Otherwise they’d be left alone to face an entire world hostile to their own survival.”
In related news, President Obama praised Germany’s “open door” policy on refugees from the Middle East, saying “it has set an example that others should follow. If the various different ethnic and religious peoples were more uniformly dispersed around the globe the incentives for nations to fight one another would be diminished.”
Medical Errors Third Leading Cause of Death in US
A study published in the prominent medical journal BMJ concluded that errors by doctors and hospitals kill more than 250,000 people a year in the US. Martin Makary, professor of surgery at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, led the research team and said “It boils down to people dying from the care that they receive rather than the disease for which they are seeking care.”
“In recent years a lot has been made of the issue of people living without health insurance and how the government must take heroic efforts to compel everyone to obtain insurance,” Makary observed. “The concern is that those without insurance won’t be able to afford treatment. This study indicates that not being treated isn’t always bad. Sometimes entering the medical world exposes patients to dangers worse than the ailments they had going in.”
“It’s one thing for people to be insured against catastrophic health emergencies like accidents or serious diseases,” he continued. “There the risk/reward profile for being treated is more balanced. But when comprehensive coverage entices a person to make entering the realm of medical treatment their first option they may be increasing their risk of falling victim to medical error without sufficient reason.”
“The human body has developed many self-healing abilities over millions of years of evolution,” Makary said. “In many instances relying on that may be a better bet than relying on the much newer and less evolved art of medicine. At the very least, the data don’t support a policy of forcing everyone into a government mandated health protocol like the Affordable Care Act seeks to do.”
In related news, hospitals in the United Kingdom are posting “do not resuscitate” orders—without the patients’ or families’ consent—for tens of thousands of National Health Care patients as a cost-saving measure. NHS spokesman Dr. Malcolm Kildare called the step “a necessary conservation of social resources. A patient of little value to society and his or her family is not the best judge of how our limited resources should be used. Rationalizing the system to ensure resources are available for higher value patients is essential.”
Judge Blocks Restitution to Innocent Man
Guillermo Espinoza’s efforts to retrieve $19,894 seized by Arkansas State Police were brought to an abrupt halt by Judge Chris Williams. State prosecutors asked that the money be returned to Espinoza since no criminal charges were being pursued against him. Williams rejected this request on the grounds that Espinoza had missed the 10-day deadline for filing the papers to initiate restitution.
As Williams sees it, “the rules on civil forfeiture are clearly spelled out in statute. Whether or not Mr. Espinoza was or wasn’t engaged in any illegal activity is irrelevant. Arkansas law gives the government the right to seize assets it deems may have a connection to a crime. Even if that connection turns out to be illusory, the procedure for reclaiming the seized assets is specified. Mr. Espinoza failed to adhere to that procedure. Thus, the State cannot return the money to him.”
“The civil forfeiture statute is not inextricably tied to the fate of any criminal investigation or prosecution,” Williams pointed out. “Over the history of this statute it has transferred over $80 million into the state treasury. Acquiring revenues is also a legitimate function of government. For me to deviate from the civil forfeiture statute in pursuit of some notion of judicial fairness would abrogate this important revenue-raising function of the law. That is beyond my powers as a judge.”
As an aside, the Judge speculated that “it is by no means certain that the public good would be better served by according Mr. Espinoza a just resolution of his case. The private uses to which he might put the money might easily be eclipsed by the public good that can be done by having the State spend that money on purposes of broader social benefit to all Arkansans.”
ACLU Bemoans Court’s Pro-Choice Decision
This week Nevada District Judge Eric Johnson dismissed the ACLU’s case against the state’s school choice law. A change to Nevada statutes creating an education savings account (ESA) program that permits students and their parents to choose how to be educated was the source of the ACLU’s ire.
Author of the legislation, State Sen. Scott Hammond (R-Las Vegas) said his aim was “to enable families to completely customize their child’s educational experience, and ensure students can match education options and providers to their unique learning needs.” These accounts can be used to pay for private school tuition, online learning, special education services and therapies, textbooks, curricula, private tutors, and any other education-related service, product, or provider.
“Under this ill-conceived law state funds for education can be used in any manner seen fit by parents or their children,” complained ACLU spokesman Bertram Petty. “The legislature has heedlessly granted freedom to the uninformed. Neither parents nor students are qualified to decide such matters. Only the public school system has the expertise needed to guide each student toward the proper educational outcome.”
While the ACLU’s case was dismissed by one judge, another—Judge James Wilson of the First Judicial District Court of Nevada (Carson City)–issued an injunction preventing the funding of the more than 4,000 ESA’s requested and awarded under the statute. Petty praised Wilson’s action, calling it “a crucial bulwark against diverting state resources into unregulated private hands. The State has gone through an arduous process of extracting these funds from the private sector. We must not allow this money to be frittered away via the ignorant choices of parents and students.”
President Suggests Hillary’s Email “a Matter for Voters to Decide”
Irritated that the media would dare to pose a question about the legality of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unsecured email communications, President Obama refused to comment, suggesting that “whether she did anything that was really wrong is a matter for voters to decide. And from what I’ve seen so far, she’s on her way to securing the Democratic nomination for president. I think that says the majority of Americans are okay with how she’s handled it.”
The media’s unwelcome inquiry was spurred by an 83-page State Department Inspector General’s report calling Clinton’s email operation an “inexcusable and willful disregard of the rules. Contrary to the Secretary’s public statements, her use of a private server was not ‘allowed’ as she has alleged. It was in direct violation of State Department regulations that the Secretary had previously cited in issuing punishments to lower-ranking violators. There is no record of her receiving a valid exemption from these regulations from any higher-ranking authority.”
A key piece of evidence in the IG’s report cited Secretary Clinton’s warning to all State Department personnel that “personal email accounts could be compromised and officials should avoid conducting official Department business from personal e-mail accounts.”
Among the classified information showing up in the Secretary’s unsecured email was long-time Clinton family confidant Sid Blumenthal’s message urging Hillary “to expedite the overthrow of Libya’s Mohamar Qadaffi before his scheme of establishing a 7-billion dollar fund of gold-backed dinars undercuts the US government’s ability to control the oil industry.” The overthrow was expedited. Qadaffi was murdered and the country thrown into a chaos that later resulted in the assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens in 2012.
Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook denounced the IG report, calling it “as gross an invasion of privacy that any public figure has had to endure. The staff that were under Secretary Clinton’s direction were instructed to never speak to anyone, ever, on the topic of her private email account. That some of these staffers have talked to the Inspector General is a betrayal of the first magnitude. Those undertaking the tasks of governing this country need to know that their orders are heeded and obeyed. Sad to say, the Secretary’s orders on this matter were neither heeded nor obeyed. We’re confident that voters will correct this injustice by electing Hillary president in November.”
Ninth Circuit Court Repeals Second Amendment
This week the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that government has a right to decide who will and won’t be permitted to carry a concealed firearm. The ruling came in the case of Edward Peruta v. County of San Diego. The County denied Peruta and his fellow plaintiffs concealed carry permits on the grounds that they did not prove a need for them.
Writing for the majority, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain asserted that “under California law, police authorities are empowered to determine who shall be allowed to bear arms and for what reasons. The plaintiffs’ contention that personal self-defense was a sufficient reason for them to be armed was rejected by county law enforcement officials. Their argument that police cannot provide adequate protection emanates from an elevation of selfish individual concerns over the society’s welfare. The collective body of California citizens has seen fit to elect a government that made the decision to grant authority to local governments to allow or deny firearm privileges as they see fit.”
“The very fact that these plaintiffs contested local authorities lends support to the decision not to issue permits,” O’Scannlain continued. “One of the main duties of government is to protect itself from those who it construes as potentially dangerous to this objective. The plaintiffs’ assertion that police cannot be relied upon to provide sufficient protection raises a measure of doubt as to whether these individuals are reliable citizens.”
Dissenting Judge Barry Silverman contended that “the California law clearly violates the Constitution’s Second Amendment which affirms that ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ Having to ask permission of a government functionary to exercise this right eviscerates it. A state where the government has absolute control over who may or may not be armed is the very tyranny the Second Amendment was devised to prevent.”
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton hailed the Court’s decision as “an encouraging step toward the attainment of a ‘gun-free’ society. We can make allowances for those who want to hunt to check guns out of a government armory much like a person can check out a book from a public library. There is no need for anyone to own his own gun. Once I’m president we’re going to make that happen.”
Democrat Wants Taxpayers to Pass Drug Test to Qualify for Deductions
Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis) has introduced legislation that would require taxpayers to pass a drug test before being allowed to itemize deductions on their 1040 tax forms. The bill is in retaliation for state laws that require welfare recipients to pass drug tests in order to receive benefits.
“I am sick and tired of Republicans forcing poor people to jump through hoops to receive the money they are entitled to under the law,” Moore complained. “We enacted these programs to help the unfortunate. Few members of society are as unfortunate as drug addicts. They are slaves to chemicals that their bodies crave. Compelling them to choose between a welfare check and their substance abuse is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.”
“If the GOP is going to cut the money going to this deprived set of society’s victims then we should also cut the money going to taxpayers via the deductions allowed on their income taxes,” the Congresswoman asserted. “As the President has pointed out on numerous occasions, people with incomes, businesses, and jobs didn’t earn it. Somebody else made that happen. Letting them keep this money is a privilege that the government can revoke. Let’s see how they like it when government cuts the money they get to keep because they can’t pass a drug test.”
Wisconsin is one of 15 states that require welfare recipients to submit to drug testing in order to receive benefits. Gov. Scott Walker defended the requirement calling it “an additional incentive designed to help people escape a cycle of dependency. Consuming illegal drugs is an incapacitating behavior. Not only does it sap an individual’s motivation for becoming self-reliant it also undermines competency. Either of these effects will deter an employer from hiring the substance abuser.”
“Rep. Moore’s notion that income earned by working is the equivalent of income received from the government for not working is as wrong as it can be,” Walker added. “Getting oneself off the sofa and into the workforce makes a positive contribution to society. It is contributions like this that make it possible to provide benefits for those truly unable to support themselves. If we make it a practice to reward those who disable themselves from the possibility of working to continue to be supported by the government the resources to aid those who really need it will be needlessly depleted.”
Senators Demand to Know Where Companies Keep Their Cash
Concerned that some of the nation’s resources may be out of their reach, Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn) and Chris Coons (D-Del) are demanding that “all businesses fully disclose where all their money is.”
“As President Obama said when he was nominated for his second term, government is the only entity we all belong to,” Franken recalled. “It is every business’ and every individual’s duty to do the utmost to ensure the survival of this single unifying entity. At a minimum, this means making all of their financial resources known to the government so they may be appropriated if the need to do so arises.”
Franken professed to understand the need for privacy, but maintained that “it is one thing to insist on privacy from the prying eyes of business rivals. It is quite another to keep secrets from the government. Should we sit by and allow the government to default when we could save it by seizing the money businesses and individuals are hoarding? How could we justify letting the selfish interests of the private sector impede the collective obligation of all of us to support the government?”
Obama, Gingrich Grapple with Islamic Terror Issue
The Bastille Day attack that killed 80 and injured 200 in Nice, France sparked a passionate plea from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich for better security against Islamic terrorism.
Gingrich said he has “no problems with Muslims who respect the rights of others becoming American citizens and moving in next door, but followers of sharia who believe they have a right or duty to wage war on unbelievers have no place in our country. They ought to be deported.”
He also called for “greater scrutiny of what’s going on in Mosques in America. Many of them seem to serve as recruiting centers for would-be terrorists. Hateful doctrines are preached to incite attacks on innocent civilians like we have seen in France and in this country in Orlando and San Bernardino. On top of this, caches of weapons are frequently concealed on their premises.”
President Obama characterized Gingrich’s comments as “repugnant. There is no place in our country for such hostility toward the religious beliefs of others. No Muslim should have to fear that his beliefs will expose him to any greater scrutiny than any other religion. The right to practice one’s religion free from interference by government is guaranteed by the First Amendment.”
Gingrich remained uncowed by the President’s criticism. “I’ll tell you what’s repugnant,” he replied, “the President’s repeated refusal to defend the people of this nation from attacks carried out by fanatical Islamists. Despite the evidence from their own mouths, Obama professes himself mystified as to the motives of these killers. This is willful blindness or worse.”
“No one in this country, not me, not Donald Trump, not the Republican Party, is making a case for preventing Muslims from praying or promulgating their beliefs in a peaceful manner,” Gingrich pointed out. “The President’s efforts to stigmatize opposition to murder as anti-Muslim prejudice is reprehensible. The right of every American to believe or not believe any religion is trampled by the violence carried out by Islamic terrorists. That is the First Amendment right that the government and the President have an obligation to defend. Thus far, Obama has fallen far short of fulfilling this duty.”
LA Times Op Ed Says Hillary Win Only Way to Avert Coup
Fear that Trump might be elected president prompted hysteria from leftist loon James Kirchick in an op ed he wrote in this week’s LA Times. “If voters don’t put Hillary in the White House our only option may be a military coup against a President Trump,” Kirchick warns.
Kirchick contends that such a first ever violent overthrow of an election outcome in this country “would be defensive in nature. Trump is outside the mainstream of the governing coalition that has run this country for the last 25 years. Even if he wins a majority of votes his ascension to office could be construed as a coup itself. Undoing his coup would restore the country to normalcy.”
“The foresight of President Obama in purging the military of disloyal elements over the last seven years has laid the groundwork for this fail-safe option should voters make the disastrous decision to hand power over to a madman like Trump,” Kirchick gloated. “Polls may show that the majority of the rank-and-file troops lean toward Trump, but the men who command them have been thoroughly vetted and can be counted on to rise to the occasion if events warrant it.”
“Naturally, such an overt deviation from precedent would have to be a last resort,” Kirchick wrote. “Barring a sufficient number of legitimate votes to ensure her election, a more discreet covert manipulation of the ballots would be preferred. Nevertheless, the outcome is too crucial for us to shy away from any remedy.”
Obama Hails Economic Progress During His Administration
In his speech at the Democratic Convention President Obama contended that “by so many measures, our country is stronger and more prosperous than it was when we started.” Unfortunately, a number of key statistics seem to contradict that assessment. There are 3 million more people in poverty. Household incomes for those in the bottom 20% declined. Nearly 9 million more individuals are receiving food stamps. And 14 million have left the workforce.
Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisted that “these statistics need to be properly interpreted. Before we leap to a hasty conclusion that the President’s policies have been ineffective let’s consider what has really taken place. A mere increase in the number of persons below the poverty line is not a clear indication that they suffering. In our country, people below the poverty line are provided with amenities—like air-conditioned apartments, cable TV, and cell phones—that even the so-called middle class in other countries lack.”
“Why should we worry about earned incomes declining when the benefits offered by government are so generous?” Earnest asked. “Isn’t the fact that people get to consume more important than whether they can afford to pay for it? Isn’t the fact that more Americans are overweight than ever a sign that the increase in food stamps is a success? And don’t get me started on the millions who have left the workforce. Surely being able to live without having a job is a step forward in human civilization. The gains in leisure have got to far outstrip any assumed loss of dignity from becoming dependent on others.”
Pope’s Contention that Islam Is Peaceful Takes Hit
Pope Francis’ belief that Islam is a religion of peace was expressly contradicted by Boko Haram leader Abu Masab Al-Barnawi this week in an interview published in Al-Naba Newspaper. The Islamic terrorist vowed “to kill every Christian and blow up every church until all are for Islam in Nigeria and the world.”
Al-Barnawi cited Christian charities as “the aggressors in this battle for men’s souls. They prey upon the victims of calamities, seducing them with food, shelter, and medical supplies. They insidiously tempt them with kindness and mercy to turn them away from Allah’s command to submit to Islam and fight against unbelievers.”
The ISIS magazine Dabiq also chimed in against the portrayal of its attacks as “senseless violence,” calling it a “smear by the enemies of Islam. We are not randomly killing people. We are targeting the unbelievers as the Quran bids us to do. The Pope can have his peace, but only after all Christians have submitted to Islam.”
One of the historical grievances gnawing at Dabiq’s editors was “the Christians’ efforts against slavery. The profit from selling slaves is one of the boons granted to Muslims by Allah. The West’s interference by suppressing this commerce unjustly deprived Muslims of rewards to which they are entitled.”
The Pope professed himself as “unmoved by the threats of violent Muslims. I remain confident that the vast majority of Muslims will not lift a hand against Christians. Even the minority that do only send our martyrs to heaven a little bit earlier than they might have otherwise arrived. Is that really such a bad thing? What are a few more years on Earth compared to an eternity with the Lord? By granting Christians the opportunity to suffer and die for their faith might not these terrorists actually be helping them follow the example Jesus set for all of us?”
McCain Assails Trump’s Crediting Obama & Clinton for Rise of ISIS
Arizona Senator John McCain (R) took issue with GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s statement that President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were co-founders of ISIS.
“President Obama may have given the final decision to back these guys based on Secretary Clinton’s recommendation, but I was the one on the ground in Syria who met with them before they were big,” McCain pointed out. “Were it not for my preliminary work the later steps taken by Obama and Clinton wouldn’t have been possible. So, I think it’s only fair that I receive some recognition for the historic rise of this group.”
To further bolster his claim McCain boasted of his continued links to the terrorist group. “We still talk frequently by phone,” he said. “Sure there’s a lot of ‘death to America’ rhetoric coming from them, but there also is some constructive two-way dialog. I think I’m gaining their trust and can serve as a bridge to a mutually satisfactory accommodation of our differing interests.”
Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest contested McCain’s claims. “Senator McCain’s schmoozing with the forerunners of ISIL played no role in the President’s decision to arm this group to fight against Syrian dictator Assad,” Earnest contended. “Neither did it influence the plan jointly conceived by Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Stevens to ship them weapons through Libya.”
Earnest asserted that “emails from the cache of Secretary Clinton’s deleted files confirm that the major actors who convinced the President on this matter were Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samantha Power. This is not to say that Senator McCain wasn’t trying to play a role, only that his role did not affect the President’s decision to take action. The bottom line is that the Senator is not as important as he imagines.”
Meanwhile, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ken) called for Hillary Clinton to be indicted for lying to Congress about secret arms shipments to Islamic terrorists. “In 2013 Secretary Clinton gave sworn testimony denying any knowledge of arms shipments to Al Qaeda rebels opposing the Assad regime in Syria,” Paul remembered. “Now we see that she was privy to emails detailing this very transaction. Lying under oath is perjury. Her claimed ‘brain short-circuit’ is not exculpatory.”
In related news, one of Hillary’s unsecured emails exposed the identity of an Iranian nuclear scientist, Shahram Amiri, who had been covertly assisting US intelligence to gather information about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Hillary’s emails were cited by the Iranian government in their case against him. Amiri was executed last week. Clinton campaign manager maintained that “in the grand scheme of things this is not a big deal. The fact of the matter is that Amiri was a traitor to his country. Traitors ought to be executed. Whether Secretary Clinton’s emails played a role in this outcome or not justice was still served.”
Hillary Hammers Trump’s Pitch to Black Voters
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s bid to woo black votes by persuading them that Democratic policies have ruined their lives was denounced by rival candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a major policy speech she gave in Reno, Nevada this week.
“Democrats and blacks have been together for a long time,” Clinton told a crowd that easily surpassed double digits. “It’s kind of like we have a ‘common law marriage.’ It’s outrageous for an outsider like Trump to try to alienate our mutual affections. Sure there have been some rough patches. Every marriage has rough patches. Bill and I have had some rough patches, but we’ve always stuck together. Each of us has been there to aid and abet the other’s dreams and aspirations. Blacks and Democrats need to stick together for the same reason.”
“Trump promises to put black people to work,” Hillary pointed out. “But whites putting black people to work sounds like slavery to me. The Democratic Party has freed black people from the burdens of work. Democrats have enacted laws to ensure that if your man walks out on you the government will put a roof over your head and food on the table. Thanks to legislation championed by the Democratic Party no one has to do hard labor to survive.”
“Trump promises to make the streets safe by locking up criminals,” Hillary observed. “But this is a thinly veiled declaration of war against the black man. As we have seen, ‘law and order’ leads to a racially imbalanced prison population. Democrats are against laws and enforcement that fall disproportionately on racial minorities. The prison population should mirror the free population. I will work toward achieving this goal.”
“I caution blacks not to buy into Trump’s idea that acting white is the way to a better life,” Hillary warned. “From our nation’s earliest days it has been the Democratic Party that has taken care of blacks. Republicans have been the ones ready to cast them out into the world to fend for themselves. Voters should remember this on election day.”
In related news, Will Quigg, a grand dragon of the California Ku Klux Klan chapter, endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. “History has shown that Democrats have been the Party with the guts to keep the blacks in their place, they even fought a war to preserve white rights,” Quigg reminded. “LBJ’s Great Society plan to concentrate the blacks in public housing compounds and fatten them up on food stamps keeps them from taking the jobs that belong to whites.”
FBI Admits Suspected Brain Damage Was Factor in “No Indictment” Decision
It was revealed this week that suspected brain damage was a key factor in FBI Director James Comey’s decision to recommend against indicting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her serial lawbreaking and security breaches regarding her emails.
“In the interview with our agents the former Secretary came across as a person of seriously diminished mental capacity,” FBI spokesman William Dodge explained. “She couldn’t recall ever having been briefed on security matters—despite being shown her signature on a document affirming she had. She professed not to know that the letter ‘C’ on emails meant ‘confidential. She couldn’t remember who she asked to set up her private off site server. She ‘misplaced’ a dozen mobile devices that had classified communications on them. She couldn’t even remember the name of the ambassador killed in Benghazi. It was clear to us that Secretary Clinton would likely plead ‘not guilty by reason of diminished mental capacity.’”
“When you add in testimony from her chief aides describing her as ‘often confused’ and ‘frequently disoriented’ it appeared that taking the matter to trial would have been a highly risky undertaking,” Dodge said. “Win or lose, a trial would have shown that from 2009 to 2013 the US State Department was being headed by a person who was either cavalierly indifferent to the law or too impaired to have been entrusted with such a demanding position of responsibility. When we include the rather substantial indications that Secretary Clinton may have inappropriately used her government position to solicit monetary rewards it was clear that the Administration’s reputation could have sustained significant negative impact. Rather than invite this trauma, Director Comey opted for saving the nation from it, much in the same way that former President Ford did by pardoning Nixon.”
In related news, attorneys for Hillary Clinton are said to be preparing a lawsuit challenging a potential loss at the polls, citing the Americans with Disabilities Act as the basis. “Based on the resumes of the candidates, Secretary Clinton is clearly the most qualified of the job applicants,” claimed lead attorney Susan Moore. “If voters pass over her to put a less qualified person in the White House it would be a clear violation of the law barring employers from discriminating against the disabled. We hope it won’t have to come to this. Voters could spare the nation the disruption and substantial monetary penalties they would be liable for by simply electing her president on November 8th.”
Mentioning Hacked DNC Emails Called “Unfair”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) called GOP mention of the content of the Democratic National Committee’s emails hacked and published by Wikileaks “unfair. It’s like a football team purloining a copy of the other team’s playbook and using that to win a game. It’s cheating. It’s dishonest.”
Pelosi brushed aside email content revealing that the DNC cheated by rigging their primaries against Hillary Clinton’s main rival for the nomination Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt), saying “since when do two wrongs make a right? We are calling on the GOP to turn aside from a tit-for-tat. Attempting to get even by mimicking disreputable tactics escalates the conflict. This is a chance for the GOP to take the high road.”
The former House Speaker’s plea addressed to the current House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc) urged that “Democrats and Republicans must present a united front in the face of the threat posed by Donald Trump. This outsider does not understand the unwritten rules and long standing traditional ways the two Parties interact. He will mercilessly batter us with evidence that was never meant for anyone to see.”
Ryan responded that “I have no authority to issue the cease-and-desist order that Rep. Pelosi is requesting. For one, the RNC is an independent body outside the span of the Speaker’s reach. For two, I can’t see that there could be any justification for suspending freedom of speech on the grounds that it makes Democrats uncomfortable.”
Pelosi characterized Ryan’s response as “misogynistic and callous. Here we have the first woman with a realistic chance to become president and all he can do is prattle on about freedom of speech. Where are his priorities. When we add in the toll the stress of the campaign is taking on Hillary’s heath it’s like he’s kicking her when she’s down. Is there no chivalrous bone in his body?”
In related news, Clinton ended her long press conference drought this week as she was mercilessly grilled for 89 seconds by media hounds demanding to know “how was your Labor Day weekend?” and “are you ready to be president?”
Hillary Campaign Caught Stealing from Donors
Some supporters of Hillary Clinton are coming to rue giving out their credit card data to the campaign. It seems that individuals who thought they were agreeing to one-time charges are discovering repeated levies on their accounts in their monthly statements. Upon inspecting her recent Visa Card statements, Carol Mahre found multiple charges amounting to $94. “On the phone they asked me to give $25, which I said was okay,” Mahre recounted. “But when I looked at my bill there were three deductions of $25 and one for $19.”
Campaign manager Robby Mook attributed the unauthorized charges to “simple human error. As everyone knows the campaign has been hit hard by pneumonia. Hillary hasn’t been the only one afflicted with memory loss and neurological seizures. It’s easy to see how this could’ve happened. Thankfully, the overcharges were all of relatively small amounts, the loss of which should not result in any major hardship for the victims. At worst it’s a case of petty theft, not even a felony. And it pales in comparison with the much bigger stakes of this election.”
Keeping the cumulative overcharges under $100 may be a key to the scheme avoiding scrutiny. Roger Mahre, Carol’s lawyer son, speculated that “a lot of people don’t look carefully at small charges on the credit card bill. So, it wouldn’t surprise me that this scam goes largely unnoticed.”
Whether the overcharges are just random mistakes or a conscious strategy is a good question. The New York Times reported that Hillary Clinton’s first campaign for president in 2008 was forced to reimburse $2.8 million in unauthorized credit card charges. Obama’s campaign was forced to reimburse $900,000. And this was just in response to donors who questioned the charges. There’s no telling how many donors might have been unaware of the thefts.
MSNBC talking head Chris Matthews wondered whether “we are making too much of this whole business. Most of the money these people are spending is wasted on nonessential junk. Is the redirection of some of these squandered resources toward the important objective of aiding the election of a person who will advance the progressive agenda really a bad thing? I would have to say that on balance that it is not.”
Obama Says Americans Have to Give Up Freedoms
In his speech at the United Nations President Obama said that “in order to realize the promise of the UN, the US must give up freedoms. As we work toward the dream of a world government we have to realize that compromise is necessary. Much of the world is less free than America. We could stubbornly refuse to budge and try to hold onto our special status. Or we could be more adult and recognize we have to meet the unfree segment halfway.”
“For example, freedom of speech and religion are not as common elsewhere,” Obama pointed out. “We can’t expect to cram our values down the throats of the rest of the world. Likewise, Americans are far wealthier than they have the right to be. The world and its resources are the common inheritance of all humanity. We cannot justify our having more when others have less. A more equitable redistribution is the price we must pay for a unified world.”
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton echoed Obama’s sentiment, but counseled that “getting there from here won’t be easy. There will be a lot of resistance by Americans grown fat by hogging a disproportionate share of the world’s resources. That’s why I have proposed a universal right to emigrate from anywhere to anywhere. This is something that can be accomplished by executive action once I am president. As the population around the world becomes more homogenized in its values political institutions will be reformed to speed the implementation of social justice everywhere. We will abolish distinctions between rich and poor and empower common people everywhere to attain the equality that our progressive agenda has promised.”
Dead People Submit New Voter Registrations in Virginia
A number of new applications for voter registrations recently submitted in Harrisonburg, Virginia were discovered to carry the names of persons recently deceased. The “anomaly” came to light when an employee in the registrar’s office noticed that one of the new registrations was for Richard Claybrook Sr., the late father of a well-known local judge. Ultimately, 19 of the applications submitted by Andrew Spieles, a member of the Young Democrats club at James Madison University, on behalf of the community activist group “Harrisonburg VOTES” were deemed suspicious.
Republicans are incensed. Virginia House Speaker William Howell (R-Stafford) asked “how often do we hear our Democrat colleagues suggest that voter fraud doesn’t exist or is a myth? Well, this is just one piece of evidence that continuing efforts to defraud the election process are real.”
Del. Marcus Simon (D-Fairfax) pooh-poohed GOP concerns and called the recent flap “small potatoes” and the perpetrator “inept. Registering ineligible voters doesn’t mean illegal votes will be cast in their names. Votes would still have to be cast either in person by elderly impostors or through absentee ballots. There are additional steps that would have to be taken before the scheme would be successful. Besides, 20 bogus votes aren’t likely to sway an election. Republicans are getting all worked up over nothing.”
In related news, it was discovered that Arcan Cetin, a resident alien from Turkey who shot five people to death at a mall in Burlington, Washington, illegally voted in three elections since 2014. A study done by professors from Old Dominion University and George Mason University estimated that about 6% of non-citizens illegally cast ballots in the 2008 election. Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman told a Seattle TV station that “the State is barred by the feds from verifying citizenship status. They claim that verification is a federal responsibility. Yet, the Obama Administration steadfastly refuses to share the data they have with the states. We are left with no choice except to take the applicants’ word for whether they are citizens.”
Will the US Go to War with Russia over Syria?
Tensions surrounding the war-torn nation of Syria ratcheted up this week with Secretary of State John Kerry charging Russia with war crimes, Russia threatening to shoot down US planes that attack its Syrian government ally, and US Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley boasting to the Russians that “we will beat you harder than you have ever been beaten before.”
On one side we have the Russians and the murderous Assad regime. On the other side we have the bumbling Obama Administration and its confusing alliance with anti-Assad jihadis. The unanswered question is whether the issue of which side wins is worthy of a war with Russia. Secretary Kerry seems to think it is.
“I’ve argued for the use of force in Syria,” Kerry said. “The war crimes being committed by Russia and Syria are reminiscent of those committed by the Nazis and Japs in World War II. We didn’t back away from the challenge then even though the cost in lives and money were substantial. Humanity demands that we not back away now.”
Kerry went on to argue that “the possibility that Donald Trump might win the upcoming election makes it more imperative that action be initiated before he gains the power to block it. From his public remarks about NATO, Putin, and the Cold War it is clear that he is outside the consensus of decades worth of thinking on these matters. The notion that the United States might live on friendly terms with Russia or even become allies with them against an imagined Islamic threat is the opposite of what the Obama Administration stands for. It mustn’t be allowed to happen.”
In related news, the US Department of Justice decided to drop its case against Marc Turi for illegally trafficking in weapons when it discovered that Turi’s sale of armaments to jihadi terrorists in Libya was part of a scheme originated by the State Department during the tenure of Secretary Hillary Clinton. Attorney General Loretta Lynch apologized for persecuting Turi and wasting everyone’s time, saying that “if we had known that Mr. Turi had documentary evidence backing up his claim to have been working on behalf of the State Department we’d have never moved against him. We are closing the books on this case and regret any embarrassment it may have caused any of those involved.”
Clinton Campaign Calls Wikileaks “Violation of Constitutional Rights”
The flood of emails obtained from Clinton confidants detailing repeated instances of illegal, dishonest, and despicable behavior has provoked a howl of protest from the Clinton for President campaign.
“Lest anyone forget, let me remind them that these emails were purloined surreptitiously and illegally,” campaign manager Robby Mook complained. “By invading the privacy of people actively supporting Secretary Clinton’s election they have been forced to unwillingly testify against themselves. This compelled testimony is as flagrant a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee against self-incrimination as we have ever seen in a political campaign in our nation’s history.”
Among the revelations contained in the Wikileaks’ document release were emails disclosing that Hillary herself was the one who deleted the missing 33,000 work-related emails, that Phillipe Reines, then Senior Adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested ways of obstructing the handing over the emails that had been subpoenaed, and that Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon was receiving illegal inside information on the Department of Justice investigation of Hillary’s email security breaches.
Mook likened the Wikileaks operation to “the illegal wiretaps that police sometimes tried to use against suspected members of organized crime. The courts have always tossed this kind of evidence and we are fully confident that they will toss any emails obtained without the writers’ freely given consent if this matter ever goes to trial, which is something I doubt President Obama would allow.”
In the meantime, Mook expressed gratitude that “the nation’s major media outlets have pretty effectively tossed the Wikileaks garbage out of the ‘court of public opinion.’ They realize that there is no need to get voters stirred up over events that should have no bearing on the upcoming election. What’s done is done. The bigger issue is whether this country will permit a person as unfit as Donald Trump to become president.”
Interestingly, a significant number of the emails exposed by Wikileaks revealed a close coordination between the Clinton campaign and the supposedly “objective” media. Nevertheless, Mook brushed this aside as “irrelevant,” claiming that “it should be no mystery that those who believe in truth and justice would share a common interest in determining who should run the government.”
In related news, another email exposed by Wikileaks showed former Clinton administration official Bill Ivey advising Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta to “conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry,” but warned that “the unawareness remains strong, but compliance is fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious thinking and demographically-inspired messaging.”
DNC Chair Assails Videos of Democrat Election Fraud
The Democratic National Committee Chairperson Donna Brazile assailed videos from Project Veritas declaring that “these stolen tapes should not be permitted to be viewed by voters prior to the election. Posing as a Democratic Party intern for the purpose of secretly gathering inside information is just a lowdown dirty trick.”
In a testy exchange with Fox News’ Meagan Kelly, the DNC replacement for the previously disgraced Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who was forced to resign after leaked emails revealed that she was leading an effort to rig the Democratic nomination process to benefit Hillary Clinton, Brazile attempted to divert attention from the content of the video expose´ by asserting that the manner in which the evidence was obtained “renders it inadmissible” and predicted that “no prosecutor will ever bring charges against the Democratic Party.”
In the videos, Democratic “black ops” officials Scott Foval and Bob Creamer boasted of “paying mentally ill ‘street crazies’” to instigate violence at Trump campaign rallies and carting around bogus voters to cast multiple ballots “in states with weak voter ID laws.” Brazile contended that “the deception and betrayal of trust by Veritas‘ phony volunteers goes beyond anything that we have previously seen. Campaign practices that have enjoyed 50 years of success are now threatened with neutralization by O’Keefe’s criminal trespass.”
Brazile also argued that “the emails stolen and published by Wikileaks are, as Secretary Clinton pointed out in the debate, a conspiracy by the Russians and Trump to undermine the November election. These emails were confidential communications. Their misappropriation by a foreign government is evidence of the threat to our democracy that Trump and his co-conspirators represent. No reputable news outlet will participate in repeating these lies to the American public.” She went on to forecast that “after she’s elected, President Clinton will most likely instruct her Attorney General to root out these enemies and put them out of commission.”
Ironically, in one of the leaked emails Brazile lamented “the despair of many Americans over the state of the economy. There are new jobs, but they are low-wage and part-time jobs. The economic stagnation that has hit this country puts President Obama, his policies, and his supporters in the Democratic Party in an extremely unflattering light that does not bode well for how voters may react when casting their ballots.”
In related news, the 69-year-old Sharon Teeter who claimed that Trump supporter 73-year-old Richard Campbell punched her in the face at a rally earlier this year now “remembers” that “he might have brushed me accidentally.” It seems that her memory was enhanced by her identification as a Democratic Party operative on the Veritas video of Foval calling her “one of our trained political activists.”
German Court Overturns Rape Conviction
The Iraqi immigrant who raped a ten-year old boy in the changing area of a swimming pool in the Austrian capital of Vienna had his conviction overturned by the German Supreme Court this past week.
The assailant, Amir A, had previously offered a “sexual emergency” argument in justification of the rape. “It had been more than four months since I had seen my wife and I had to receive sexual release for the sake of my health,” he claimed. The health of his victim was negatively impacted by the encounter. The child suffered severe anal injuries and is still plagued by serious post-traumatic stress disorder.
The trial court rejected the “sexual emergency” plea and Amir A was convicted of sexual assault and rape. On appeal, Supreme Court President Thomas Philipp overturned the rape conviction on the grounds that “the fact that the defendant did not have a fluidity with the German language supports an argument that he did not understand that the his struggling victim was objecting to the sexual encounter. The notion that the boy’s age or physical resistance would be adequate evidence of lack of consent unfairly imposes Western standards on a person from a non-western culture. It is my understanding that where Amir comes from violently subduing a child for the purposes of sexual gratification is an accepted practice.” Consequently, Philipp vacated Amir’s conviction “lest we make him a victim of rules he neither understands nor consents to.”
In related news, a Syrian refugee with four wives and 23 children has been receiving nearly $400,000 a year in welfare benefits. The migrant, whose name was withheld by the German government “to protect him from the wrath of outraged taxpayers,” maintains that the benefits are his due since “it is the obligation of unbelievers to pay the jizya to Muslims as commanded in the Quran if they don’t want to be killed.”
Obama Warns Voters “Trump Is Not One of Us”
In his last push on behalf of electing Hillary Clinton our next president, President Obama sought to paint her GOP opponent Donald Trump as “other.”
“Donald Trump is not a regular guy,” Obama said. “He doesn’t drink the same beer you do. He doesn’t drink any kind of beer or other alcoholic beverage. He may have been a TV star, but all your favorite TV and movie stars hate him. I’m the one they like and I’m telling you to vote for Hillary.”
Obama also contrasted “Trump’s money-grubbing career as a billion-dollar real estate tycoon” with “Hillary’s life of public service. He piled up a fortune by forcing people to pay to stay in his hotels. Hillary left the White House dead broke and would have died penniless if grateful people from all parts of the world hadn’t given her millions to continue her public service as a senator and secretary of state.”
“The choice is clear,” Obama said. “Do you want to risk taking a chance on an unproven and inexperienced outsider like Trump? Or do you want to ensure that we stay the course I have led the country on for these past eight years? The future of America and the world depends on how you vote on November 8th.”
Contrary to the Democrats’ efforts to portray Trump and his supporters as “deplorables,” a study just released by the Pew Research Center found that “Donald Trump’s supporters are more tolerant, open-minded, respectful and understanding than are Hillary Clinton’s supporters.”
“It’s not at all what I would’ve expected,” remarked MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. “Clinton’s backers are the ones with liberal arts degrees. The meme is that college education makes you more tolerant. The only explanation that makes sense is that the Trump supporters are justifiably tolerant of their social betters and the Clinton supporters are justifiably intolerant of their social inferiors who make up the bulk of Trump’s supporters.”
However, another possible explanation is that while Trump has narrowly focused his attacks on a “crooked” Hillary, she, in turn, has broadly demeaned Trump supporters as “dark, divisive, and dangerous.” It is possible that Trump’s supporters are more tolerant of Hillary’s supporters because they see them as fellow victims of her crimes and deserving of some sympathy. Perhaps Clinton’s scurrilous denigration of Trump’s supporters is a factor in her supporters instigating violence at Trump rallies.
In related news, music producer and singer Pharrell Williams urged women to vote for Hillary because “she’s no more dishonest than you are. Sure she’s lied, but who hasn’t? Men have f***ed this country up since the beginning. It’s time a woman is given a chance.”
Democrats Seeking Scapegoat for Loss
Reeling from the shock of an unanticipated election defeat, Clinton Campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails detailing rampant cheating and corruption by the Democratic National Committee and its chosen candidate were exposed by Wikileaks, blamed media bias in favor of Trump as “the main reason we lost. Their refusal to give adequate coverage to Trump’s obvious unfitness combined with their unfair and relentless scrutiny of every little misstep made by Secretary Clinton poisoned her reputation and was a stab in the back by people we thought we could trust.”
As an example of media bias, Podesta cited “the superficial attention given to Trump’s taxes and his connections to Russia. Despite our repeated efforts to help them focus on the message we wanted to convey on these issues they got side-tracked by the Wikileaks invasion of my private communications. My emails were obtained illegally and would not have been admissible in a court of law. In a just world the content of these emails would have been suppressed.”
Podesta also named the Obama Administration “an accessory in this miscarriage of justice. At the very least, the Department of Justice should have issued a ‘gag order’ barring newspapers, TV networks, and radio stations from mentioning any of the contents in any of these emails. Instead, FBI Director James Comey was allowed to enumerate a list of infractions that gave the impression that Clinton was guilty of some sort of crime for operating a non-secure email system, destroying public documents, and lying about it. This was a betrayal of the first magnitude.”
Long-time Clinton crony Sidney Blumenthal offered some sympathy for Comey, calling him “the victim of a conspiracy of right-wing FBI agents who staged a coup d’etat against the rightful rulers of this country. Comey tried to protect Hillary from these traitors, but was thwarted by pressure from them ridiculously insisting that she be treated the same as any other person under the law.”
President Obama blamed Facebook. “By essentially allowing anyone to post whatever they wanted to on Facebook, Mr. Zuckerberg neglected his responsibility to police the forum and block the publication of erroneous ideas,” Obama complained. “I know he contends that his algorithms were designed to divert attention away from these erroneous ideas, but clearly that wasn’t adequate. Millions of people were still able, through persistence, to find these posts and be influenced by them to cast incorrect ballots. This is something that has to be fixed before the next election.”
Micro-Aggression Terror at Starbucks
Customers and staff at a Portland, Oregon Starbuck’s coffee shop endured a moment of pure terror when another customer asked for the name “Trump” to be written on his order.
“This used to be a safe space,” said a weepy barista while whipping up a Latte Venti for a cowering customer in an “I’m with her” t-shirt. “That our grief over the election results could be so disrespected, so soon, reaffirms our fears that a new dark age is upon us.”
Customer, Marcus Child admitted to “trembling in horror at the insensitivity of some people. The greatest woman in human history has just seen her dreams shattered by a wave of bigotry from the deplorable voters who backed a fascist takeover of this country.”
Weeping and trembling weren’t the only activities underway during this terrifying incident. One of the victims covertly called the police on the 911 line. Ten minutes later police arrived to confront the man who inspired the widespread angst. He seemed oddly calm and unaware as he drank his coffee and fiddled with his cell phone.
As it turned out, the man’s name is John Trump. He, like most of his fellow Portlandians, voted for Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless, he was apologetic for his inadvertent aggression. “I’m disappointed too, but its just an election,” he said. “There’ll be another one in a few years. I guess in hindsight I should’ve used my first name. It’s just that ‘John’ is so common. I was afraid my order might get mixed up with another customer’s.”
Police advised John Trump to consider bearing the risk of order mix-ups for a while, “at least until the terror stemming from Donald Trump’s being elected president subsides a bit.”
In related news, anti-Trump protesters outside the Trump Hotel in Washington, DC called for Donald’s wife Melania to be raped. How this fits with the the protesters’ contention that Trump is the advocate of hate remains a mystery.
Voter ID Laws Rigged Election for Trump
The League of Women Voters called for the election of Donald Trump to be voided on the grounds that the election was rigged. Chris Carson, president of the League of Women Voters maintains that “state laws requiring voters to show IDs before they are allowed to cast a ballot unduly restrict the franchise.”
“The whole point of democracy is to allow the people to govern themselves,” Carson said. “Limiting the franchise to only those who can prove who they are narrows the base and excludes those who can’t or won’t agree to identify themselves. This conflicts with the principle of the secret ballot.”
Nineteen states and Washington, D.C. have no ID mandate. According to Carson, “this is the model the rest of the country should be compelled to adopt. Look at how many came to the polls in California where no ID has to be shown. Look at how big of a margin it was for Hillary Clinton in this state. Clearly, the mandate of the people is that she should be president. That she’s not is a badge of shame tainting our democracy.”
Whether a “no ID” system would validate or destroy the democratic process is a matter for debate. Critics of Carson’s perspective estimate that in California alone at least two million non-citizens were allowed to cast ballots. That the participation of ineligible voters might dilute the effectiveness of citizens’ preferences is a perspective shared by the 80% of Americans who support ID requirements. To Carson, though, “citizenship is an arbitrary demarcation. As President Obama has pointed out, non-citizens living in the country have a material interest in the outcome and they have a moral right to defend the time and effort they invested in infiltrating our borders from being negated by the xenophobic contingent who, by accident of birth, are citizens through no virtue of their own.”
Obama to Admit Refugees Barred from Entering Australia
The Obama Administration has agreed to admit nearly 2500 refugees that the Australian government has refused to allow into their country for “security reasons.” The refugees are from terrorism “hot spots” and have been excluded for failing to clear the country’s vetting process.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va) have complained about the lack of transparency in the President’s actions. “In a matter having obvious security implications the President is obliged to consult Congress before agreeing to bring potentially dangerous individuals into the United States,” Grassley contended. “The fact that these men were not deemed a good risk by Australia raises a red flag we ought to heed.”
“What Senator Grassley and Congressman Goodlatte are overlooking is that, almost to a man, these refugees are Muslim,” President Obama observed. “For us not to admit them would essentially be a decision wrought with implications of religious discrimination. Their rejection by Australia makes it even more imperative that we offer them the refuge promised on our Statue of Liberty. The chance that a few of these men may go on to wage jihad against our citizens is the price we have to pay as a free nation.”
President-Elect Donald Trump challenged Obama’s contention and insisted “these are the type of people who must not be allowed into our country. The pledge on the Statue of Liberty is meant to allow people who believe in freedom to come to America. Islamic terrorists are enemies of freedom who kill and destroy for the purpose of replacing freedom with religious tyranny.”
Obama brushed aside the President-Elect’s objections, saying that “by the time he is in a position to influence immigration policy these men will be secretly distributed to undisclosed locations inside the country. He won’t be able to find them, much less have any hope of getting them out of America.”
In related news, the government was forced to suspend citizenship naturalization ceremonies after it became public that the FBI background check system hasn’t been working for an undisclosed period of time. Governor Jerry Brown (D-Calif) invited those seeking naturalization to “come to California. We will give you documents that will enable you to exercise all of the privileges of citizenship, including voting, in our state.”
France Censors Pro-Life Advocates
The award-winning “Dear Future Mom” video featuring children with Down Syndrome making the case for the value of their lives was banned from TV by France’s Conseil d’État (State Council). According to the Council, the video was deemed “too insensitive” since it was “likely to trouble the consciences of women who had made different personal life choices” (i.e., had aborted babies predicted to have Down Syndrome).
Council spokesman Henri Abattage defended the ban, maintaining that “our decision is in keeping with public perceptions of what is right. There’s a reason why 90% of the pregnancies afflicted with this syndrome end in abortion. Why should the minority who object to this medical intervention be permitted to discomfit the vast majority who approve of it? Television is a medium that ought to confirm widely held values, not disrupt them with contrary opinions, especially those that may cause psychological distress.”
Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, former president of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference, said he was “saddened but not surprised” by the ban. “First of all, a diagnosis establishes only a probability, not a certainty, that the child will have the syndrome. Many completely normal babies are killed by a hasty resort to abortion. Second, as the video clearly demonstrates, many of the afflicted are adorable and loving individuals whose right to live ought not to be callously dismissed. I encourage all members of every society to view this video.”
“Bishops can encourage all they want, but the Council will not neglect is duty to insulate the general public from offensive presentations of idiosyncratic perspectives,” Abattage promised. “There are boundaries that must not be crossed. This is one of them.”
TV isn’t the only avenue being closed off for communicating ideas out-of-sync with the culture of abortion. The French Parliament also enacted a ban on web site publication of messages that “discourage recourse to abortion.” Member of Parliament Rene Escargot explained that “the days when anti-social notions can intrude on people’s consciousness are over. Anyone attempting to dissuade a woman from exercising her inalienable right to obtain an abortion can and will be suppressed. It is the will of the majority.”
RNC Averts Hack that Duped DNC
Amid all the caterwauling from Democrats about Russians supposedly hacking the Democratic National Committee’s computer system comes a report from the Republican National Committee that a similar attempt on their computer system was rebuffed.
RNC chairman Reince Priebus explained “naturally, we were alert to the possibility that hostile entities might try to break into our system. To avert this threat we instructed all of our personnel to ignore and delete any emails from persons claiming to have millions of dollars intended for deposit to our account from a deceased African government official. The strategy was simple and easily executed. There were attempts to hack us, but none succeeded.”
Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta characterized the RNC’s approach as “essentially racist in nature. Democrats would never slough off communications from Africans, especially messages offering money. We were running the most expensive presidential campaign in American history. The fact that the Russian hackers exploited our openness and financial need shows that they would stoop to the lowest and most devious level in their quest to steal the election for Trump.”
Podesta dismissed the embarrassing content of the DNC emails published by Wikileaks following the hack as “an inherently unfair intrusion that ought not to have been allowed to affect the election. Voters had no right to see these emails much less act upon them. That they did is a travesty that greatly damaged our democracy.”
“In a court of law, illegally obtained evidence would be barred from being considered by the jury,” Podesta continued. “Likewise, the illegally purloined emails ought to have been barred from being considered by the voters. That they weren’t barred is a flaw in our electoral process.”
Remedies suggested by Podesta included “near term actions to rectify the injustice done to Secretary Clinton by either persuading the electoral college members to cast their ballots for the winner of the popular vote or by having President Obama issue an executive order calling for a new election. If this latter option is chosen we should also implement protections against the publication of illegitimate information in this re-vote and in all future elections by requiring all campaign-related news to be cleared for accuracy prior to publication. In this regard, the measures being taken by Snopes, ABC News, Politifact and FactCheck.org to prohibit fake news are a good first step. Ultimately, we will need to establish a cabinet level Department of Truth to regulate what can be published on the Internet and elsewhere.”
40% of Young Adults Living with Parents/Grandparents
The number of millennials who have not moved out of their parents or grandparents homes has climbed to a 75-year high of 40%. The high-water mark for young people “failing to launch” was set during the Great Depression. Its duplication after eight years of Obama Administration policies is seen by some as a poor legacy for the outgoing chief executive.
One who doesn’t see it that way is President Obama. “The Republicans do a lot of talking about family values, but it has been my policies that have brought succeeding generations under the same roof,” he boasted. “The whole notion that children should go out on their own is an American deviation from our species’ early roots. In the less developed parts of the world it is common for multiple generations to live in the same one-room dwelling. This seems more natural to me and is a goal we need to work toward, both for the sake of the family and the ecosystem.”
“A key contributor to this salutary development has been our conversion of the workforce from 40-hour-a-week wage-slavery to part-time temporary ‘gig’ style jobs,” Obama added. “Nearly 95% of the new jobs created over the last eight years have fit this new model. It’s been a mutually reinforcing transformation. The income from a part-time job is usually insufficient to support an independent lifestyle. The lower demands on these employees’ time allows them to engage in more leisure activities if they can live with their parents. It’s a win-win scenario.”
The President expressed hope that his last-minute binge of regulatory actions imposing more costs on businesses would “thwart Trump from imposing his workaholic vision on America. In my view, the new generation of Americans doesn’t want or need full-time jobs in order to live in harmony with the Earth. If Trump succeeds in forcing more people to live independently by giving up the leisure I’ve built into the system I believe voters will turn against him and return Democrats to power in the next election.”
Meanwhile, the First Family is in Hawaii enjoying what will likely be their last jaunt on the taxpayers’ dime. The current 16-day trip is estimated to cost more than four million dollars. This brings their eight-year total to a record-setting $85 million. Of course, millennials forced to live with their parents because they can only get part-time jobs are spared the ecologically harmful i