"Tea Party Surges to Win Wars Waged by Democrat Lies… " www Aileen Milton, President of The Villages Tea Party ________________________
BREAKING – Federal Judge Rules CNN is FAKE NEWS, Now They Will PAY Everyone keeps using the word “conspiracy” regarding Trump and the media, but a judge may have just put an end to that rhetoric with a massive ruling that gives Trump’s claims of fake news a LOT more credibility. Judge Orinda Evans, of the Federal District Court, said, in her 18 page order on the case, “The Court finds these allegations sufficient to establish that CNN was acting recklessly with regard to the accuracy of its report, i.e., with ‘actual malice,’” via Law Newz. David Carbone, formerly the CEO of St. Mary’s Medical Center, located in West Palm Beach, Florida, is behind the lawsuit against CNN. They claimed, allegedly falsely, that the infant mortality rate in one of the hospital’s surgery programs was three times the nation’s average. Obviously, such news would be very concerning to expecting parents who were considering the hospital for their child’s birth. As a result of CNN’s story, the hospital’s pediatric cardiothoracic surgery program was shut down, and Carbone also lost his job. None of this was due to a recommendation by any agency or medical authority but merely because no parents were interested in the services of a program which was, according to the CNN report, very unlikely to save their children’s lives. The hospital has decided to invest in other areas of medicine, but that doesn’t make CNN‘s allegations okay. Carbone argues that CNN intentionally lied about the infant mortality program associated with the hospital. According to Carbone, they also did not give any positive information about the program. L. Lin Wood, Carbone’s attorney, has said that CNN‘s story does fit the description of “fake news.” Wood also added, “False and defamatory accusations against real people have serious consequences. Neither St. Mary’s or Mr. Carbone did anything to deserve being the objects of the heinous accusation that they harmed or put babies and young children at risk for profit.” One of those consequences has hit Carbone hard. Because CNN trashed Carbone’s reputation, it has been difficult for him to find new employment. As the CEO of a hospital, the man has likely sacrificed much for his career and put in decades of hard work. Then, CNN came along and ruined it all. Not to mention, CNN also encouraged parents with children who have very serious conditions to find medical treatment elsewhere. The program was for infants and young children with problems in the organs in their chests, normally the heart or lungs, which is normally a dire situation. If the program really does provide care at or above the national average, CNN could have had parents risking their children’s lives by transferring the children to other hospitals or simply travelling further for the same surgeries. This is what happens when the mainstream media lie… readers believe it, and then innocent people suffer. CNN needs to learn that their slavery to ratings has crossed a line. Our justice system will not put up with their lies anymore. I hope Carbone takes the network to the cleaners and now people take Trump’s claim of fake news a LOT more serious. Click here to get my DAILY Trump email newsletter free!! What do you think about the lawsuit filed against CNN? Please share this story on Facebook and tell us because we want to hear YOUR voice! __________________________
MAN OBAMA FOUGHT TO PARDON…NOW ARRESTED AFTER FLEEING WITH DRUGS IN HIGH-SPEED CAR CHASE Posted by Allison Hillman | Feb 6, 2017 He left with an unforgettable legacy Robert M. Gill, 68, was serving a life sentence for cocaine and heroin distribution conspiracy. He had been in jail since 1990 and was released in 2015. It is still unclear what Gill did to deserve to have his sentence commuted, perhaps nothing. His name made it onto the list though and he was granted early release by Obama in his end of term release party. When the dust settled, Obama had pardoned or commuted the sentences of 1,715 individuals. That number included 568 people, such as Robert Gill, who had been sentenced to life in prison. Advertisement Obama made multiple claims that he was ensuring that justice was served. He stated that the government had been too zealous in many drug cases and that these criminals did not deserve the length of the sentence they were given. It is highly unlikely that Obama went over each and every case, all 1,715 of them, and decided this. It is not unreasonable to think that he randomly picked criminals, had them suggested to him by people close to the cases, or some other pointless method. In the end, he tried to say that he was only commuting non-violent, low level drug offenders. That was a bold faced lie. A brief sampling of some of his commutations reveals these gems;
Michael Anthony Tedesco – Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute in excess of 5 kilograms of cocaine and quantities of marijuana
Tavia Dion Blume – Possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute; use of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking offense
George Bernard Moran – Conspiracy to import a substantial amount of marijuana into the United States; conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute an amount of marijuana over 1,000 pounds
Mary Ann Krauser, fka Mary Ann Iron Shield – Involuntary manslaughter
James Willie McGrady, Jr. – Distribution of cocaine and aiding and abetting; distribution of cocaine in excess of 500 grams and aiding and abetting; possession of a firearm in the commission of a drug trafficking crime
Claire Holbrook Mulford – Using a residence to distribute methamphetamine, carrying a firearm during a drug-trafficking crime
Large amounts of drugs, firearms, manslaughter; these are not exactly teenagers selling marijuana. Advertisement He turned his back on American safety Yet somehow Obama saw his way clear to pardon all of them. Some of them had only served a small portion of a significant sentence. That makes it even more likely that the only one committing injustice was Obama himself. Facing hurdles such as mainstream media bias and lack of tracking methods, it is doubtful we will know what happens with many of those he let go free. However, Robert Gill has made his way back into the headlines. Apparently his 25 years in prison did nothing to deter him from returning to a life of crime. Advertisement Gill, having educated himself while serving his sentence, was working as a paralegal for San Antonio criminal defense law firm LaHood & Calfas. Paralegals must not make enough money or maybe he was just bored, but Gill returned to a life of crime in a spectacular fashion. In a drug bust gone wrong, Gill allegedly crashed his vehicle into another motorist while fleeing from a drug deal last week. He also struck cars of undercover police officers. An example of Obama’s ignorance He is currently being held without bail until a hearing on February 16. Gill is charged with possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine. That is an approximate street value of at least $7,000. Is this what Obama considered a low level distributor? Advertisement Given the sheer number of pardons issued, it is probable that more of Obama’s legacies have returned to their previous enterprises. Since we are already dealing with a rise in crime due to his immigration and refugee policies, this was the last thing America needed. Obama commuted more sentences than the last 11 Presidents combined. His concern was not about the justice or injustice done, this was simply and easy way to pour poison back onto American streets. This is his legacy, one of crime, corruption, and complete lack of concern for citizens. He will not be affected by these criminals, nor will his liberal friends. It is the people who elected him, twice, and those of us that didn’t who are feeling that backlash. After he was released Gill did an interview during which he said, “I believed there were people in government with rational minds who sooner or later would realize that the sentence wasn’t fair. Yes, you have the thought that you’re going to die in prison — that’s a human reaction. But there’s always the possibility that they’ll acknowledge the injustice.” What he actually meant was he got lucky and found a President who didn’t care. Or as Obama put it in a signed notification when he granted Gill’s application “because you have demonstrated the potential to turn your life around. … Now it is up to you to make the most of this opportunity.” Well, Gill certainly went out and made the most of his release. We can only imagine what the other 1,714 people are doing with their new lives.
ALERT – Second Trump Advisor Survives ASSASSINATION Attempt.This is Terrifying. Liberals are delivering on their vile vows to try to thwart the president’s agenda, but Trump will not deviate an inch from his plan to make America great again! Kellyanne Conway is now under the protection of the Secret Service. The top Trump advisor received a suspicious package containing a mysterious white powderat the home where she lives with her children and her husband, the Hill reports. “Because of what the press is doing now to me, I have Secret Service protection,” Kellyanne Conway said during an interview with Sean Hannity at the White House last night. “We have packages delivered to my house with white substances. That is a shame.” President Trump’s trusted top advisor blamed the mainstream media, at least in part, for the death threats being hurled her way. Conway rightly feels the way the liberal pundits cover her boss inflamed the twisted ire of his far left opponents. Conway cited the now infamous Martin Luther King Jr. bust story as a prime example of the biased and false reporting coming from the White House press pool. A pool reporter merely assumed the bust had been removed by President Trump and released a report stating such, without spending even one moment fact-checking. It turns out the MLK bust was right where it had been. The pool reporter’s view had merely been obscured by a Secret Service agent or another person in the crowded room, standing in front of the likeness of the Civil Rights leader. “The darn bust was right there,” Kellyanne added. “I was next to it. It was being hidden by a guard, but why didn’t you ask us? Why didn’t you say, ‘Where’s the bust?'” The pool reporter didn’t ask because attempting to further cast President Donald Trump as racist fit mainstream media liberal narrative. Sure, the pool reporter later admitted he made a mistake, but by then tens of thousands of Americans had already been led to believe the MLK bust had been removed. When asked by the Washington Post about the relationship among President Trump’s top advisors — herself, Reince Priebus, Jared Kushner, and Steve Bannon — Conway said it was good. According to the president’s most visible representative, they function as a “cohesive unit.” “The senior team exhibits many of the characteristics President Trump has always valued: cohesion, collaboration, high energy, and high impact,” Conway continued. The president’s three other top advisors may now have beefed up security details as well in the wake of the threats being issued against Trump’s senior staff. ___________________________
Sept 29th Demand apology from Government Officials who use this description for Concerned American Citizens
Definition of a Tea bagger .. To tea bag is a slang term for the sexual act of a man placing his scrotum in the mouth of a willing sexual partner for pleasure or onto the face or head of another person. The name of the practice, when it is done in a repeated in-and-out motion, is derived from its passing resemblance to the dipping of a tea bag into a cup of hot water as a method of brewingtea. As a form of non-penetrative sex, it can be done for its own enjoyment or as foreplay. _________________________
They’re Finally Going To Do It There are terrorist organizations that everyone in the United States, and possibly the world, has heard of. Groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda are among the most well known terrorist groups in the world, and for good reason. People would love nothing more than to see these groups eliminated. However even though most of the world has heard about those two groups, there are other terrorist organizations that exist that have the same goals, but are not classified as terrorist groups. It’s easy to attack an enemy that you know, but what about an enemy that you don’t know? President Donald Trump is planning to take one step closer to eliminating radical Islamic terrorists off the Earth, and it starts with designating more groups as terrorist organizations. One of these groups is the Muslim Brotherhood. You would think that people would want to see these types of organizations gone, but Democrat supporters continue to amaze us. Advertisement The New York Times released an editorial saying that they believe that President Trump shouldn’t call the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Their reasoning? They believe it could make Trump the enemy of every single Muslim on the planet. The NYT Doesn’t Want Trump To Label The Muslim Brotherhood A Terrorist Group The paper, exceedingly liberal nowadays, published their opinions on Thursday in an article entitled “All of Islam Isn’t the Enemy.” In it, they argue against labeling the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. It came up when CIA Director Mike Pompeo said he supports the move. The Muslim Brotherhood has openly announced their goal, which is to create a state that is ruled by Islamic law. Considering that Islamic law and the United States Constitution do NOT go together, that cannot happen. Advertisement The editors of the paper said, “Is President Trump trying to make enemies of the entire Muslim world? That could well happen if he follows up his primitive ban on refugees and visa holders from seven Muslim nations with an order designating the Muslim Brotherhood – perhaps the most influential Islamist group in he Middle East – as a terrorist organization.” However, there are several nations that have already labeled the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, including Egypt, Russia, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Three of those nations are majority Muslim and they had no problems labeling the group for what it was. The editors didn’t stop there, as they went ahead and claimed that the potential order “appears to be part of a mission by the president and his closest advisers to heighten fears by promoting a dangerously exaggerated vision of an American under siege by what they call radical Islam.” Except that America is under siege by “radical Islam.” How many times do you hear people from ISIS and al-Qaeda yelling and screaming about the death of America? If you ask any rational person, they will say that that is indeed radical. Advertisement Trump Is Protecting Us From Radical Islam! If we weren’t under attack from this everyday, then we wouldn’t hear about terrorist attacks on our college campuses or malls. Hell, we probably wouldn’t hear about terrorist attacks period! Unfortunately the Times have always been against Trump and his approach to fighting and ending radical Islamic terror. Wow how surprising, a liberal newspaper against Trump. In breaking news, water is wet! The editors published and released a column at the end of January and it was there that they expressed their horror at Trump stating his goal of wiping Islamic extremists from existence. They worried that Trump’s approach is “more likely to further inflame anti-American sentiment around the world than to make the United States safer.” How disturbing is it that the editors at The New York Times don’t want to see Trump fight Islamic terror? Seriously this is something that a majority of Americans are worried about on an everyday basis. Oh but according to the Times, we shouldn’t go out and do that. Advertisement Unfortunately that is what you would expect from a liberal paper. They have been consistently negative about Trump and all of his policies. In other words, like a true Democrat, they are just going to be against Trump and not even bother to listen to what he has to say. Considering that they don’t want to end Islamic terrorism, they’re already there. They’re Going To Be Against Trump All The Time This isn’t the first time that the Muslim Brotherhood is facing a new label. GOP Senators introduced new legislature that would call the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group. Trump isn’t the only person that is thinking about labeling the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, as several members of Congress are thinking the exact same thing. To make things worse, the Muslim Brotherhood forced public schools to give them the “right” to preach their sermons to children. They were going to input their radical beliefs into the minds of the next generation, and that is a scary thought to have indeed. Share this article with everyone to show them that The New York Times doesn’t want Trump to continue his war on radical Islam. They preached about Trump labeling another Islamic group as a terrorist group, despite the fact that several other nations have already done so, including Saudi Arabia. So the better question is this: What is the Times hiding? __________________________
New details have emerged regarding the FDR administration during the Holocaust and its failure to respond. By Dr. Rafael Medoff Ahead of this year’s marking of International Holocaust Remembrance Day Jan. 27, new details have been revealed concerning how much the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration knew about the Nazis’ euthanasia policy, and why the U.S. failed to respond. German historian Thorsten Noack, writing in the latest issue of the scholarly journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies, describes how famed journalist William Shirer first publicly exposed the Nazis’ systematic execution of individuals with physical or mental disabilities. In the pages of Life magazine and Reader’s Digest in early 1941, Shirer revealed horrifying details of the program that would serve as a prototype for the mass-murder techniques of the Holocaust. At the time of Shirer’s articles, tens of thousands of Germans with physical disabilities had been executed by the Hitler regime. Altogether, an estimated 200,000 “unfit” individuals were gassed as part of the Aktion T-4 program, as it was called. Building on research undertaken in 1999 by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Noack traced Shirer’s drafts and notes in order to identify, for the first time, the source of the ghastly news that he shared with the American public. Noack concludes it is highly probable that the information was leaked to Shirer by Jacob Beam, who served as third secretary at the U.S. embassy in Berlin. Beam (1908-1993) was one of a handful of American diplomats in Germany who were tipped off by German anti-Nazi dissidents about the euthanasia program. He and his colleagues forwarded at least 10 reports on the topic to the State Department between March 1940 and March 1941. Beam “was the only official who, according to archival sources, is known to have pressed for a State Department reaction to the Nazi euthanasia killings,” Noack writes. The State Department ignored Beam’s pleas to publicly condemn the mass murder. This stance was consistent with President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s pre-war strategy of generally refraining from explicitly criticizing Hitler’s policies, in order to preserve America’s diplomatic and economic relations with Nazi Germany. Roosevelt went to considerable lengths to avoid offending the Nazis during those years. For example, he asked his ambassador in Berlin, William Dodd, to pressure Dodd’s Jewish acquaintances in Chicago to cancel plans, in 1934, for a public mock trial of Hitler. In 1938, FDR made Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes remove references to Hitler and Nazism from a speech Ickes planned to give about the suffering of Jews in Europe. The administration blocked congressional resolutions criticizing the Nazis, and even apologized to the Fuhrer when New York City Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia called him “a fanatic who is threatening the peace of the world.” The Roosevelt administration not only opposed American Jewish groups’ boycott of German products in the 1930s, but went further. It quietly permitted goods to be labeled as having been made in a particular German city or province rather than requiring that they be stamped “Made in Germany,” in the hope of fooling consumers about their origin. It was only after Jewish leaders threatened to sue that the administration halted that subterfuge. Perhaps the most egregious example of the administration’s approach occurred after furious German and Vichy French officials complained to Washington in late 1940 that U.S. journalist Varian Fry was smuggling Jewish refugees out of France. Secretary of State Cordell Hull warned Fry to stop “evading the laws of countries with which the United States maintains friendly relations.” When Fry ignored the warning, the administration refused to renew Fry’s passport, forcing him to leave France and end his rescue mission. One could say that the sabotage of Fry’s rescue work, like the U.S. silence regarding the euthanasia program, in some ways foreshadowed the Roosevelt administration’s response to the Holocaust itself. The author is director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies in Washington, DC. This article was first published in JNS.org.
Blocking The Vulnerable On February 4, roughly 200 anti-Trump protesters, several of whom waved signs attacking President Donald Trump’s proposed”wall,” formed a wall of their own by blocking an ambulance bearing a critically ill patient from entering a hospital. The incident began when anti-Trump protesters assembled on Exit 47 on Interstate-95 in New Haven, Connecticut in violation of the law against blocking highways or roadways. The protesters grew so unruly when multiple units of police arrived to disperse them that the police had to request backup from state troopers. The situation warranted state troopers to arrive in riot gear. But the protesters claimed that they were peacefully demonstrating, and, as expected, blamed the police for the violence.
Brett Davidson, one of the protesters, said, “We took the highway and then the police came up with dogs. They were very intimidating…The police were very eager to make an arrest. The police all of a sudden got very aggressive.” Attorney Patricia Kane, who is representing some of the arrested protesters, seconded this assertion. Kane, who was part of the protest, said it was the police’s fault for the ambulance being blocked since the police didn’t tell the protesters that an emergency vehicle was blocked from the exit to the hospital. But it is difficult to imagine that the protesters did not hear the sirens on the ambulance blaring. Nevertheless, protesters were slow to disperse from the entrance to the hospital, with one continuing to block the ambulance. When the police officers tried to guide the protester away from the blocked ambulance, the male protester grew violent, forcing the officers to wrestle him to the ground.
Shift Commander Lt. Sam Brown said of the incident that when officers were trying to “guide” the protester away from the ambulance, the protester “pushed an officer.” The protester was immediately arrested. Meanwhile, because of the delay, the patient’s condition grew so dire inside the blocked ambulance that paramedics were forced to perform an emergency medical procedure on the patient. Dancing and Blocking Ambulance Unconfirmed reports say that the patient may have been pregnant. The fate of the patient has not been disclosed. Advertisement Police were able to locate the leader of the riot because he was shouting at his fellow protesters through a loudspeaker. The instigator wasn’t a pierced millennial but an obviously aging hippie named Norman Clement. Riot Leader As the police closed in, the sixty-six-year old protester ran, knocking several of his comrades down and was eventually apprehended on a street corner. A protester named John Lugo claimed that Clement was merely trying to avoid the pepper spray and was not resisting arrest. “Norman tried to run. Then he got pushed to the ground” by a group of officers, Lugo, one of the organizers of the protest, said.
But, according to police, Clement “actively resisted” arrest. Police were forced to pepper spray him and then wrestle Clement to the ground. Clement is charged with inciting a riot, disorderly conduct, interfering with an officer and reckless use of a highway by a pedestrian. He made the $5,000 bail and is scheduled to appear at a New Haven Superior Court on February 13. Illegally blocking highways is a staple of anti-Trump protests. Groups who’ve organized against the new president have blocked highways in Minneapolis, Portland, several freeways in Los Angeles, a major highway in Phoenix and I-95 in Miami. Two days after Trump won the presidency anti-Trump protesters blocked traffic on an interstate in Denver for 30 minutes. Nor is the New Haven incident the first time anti-Trump groups have blocked an ambulance. In March, during an attempt to shut down a Trump rally in Chicago, protesters were caught on camera trying to block an ambulance carrying a patient to the hospital. According to an anonymous Facebook post by a “hospital worker,” protesters in November allegedly caused the death of a father of a 4 year old girl by blocking an ambulance’s access to an emergency room. “I have to unfacebook for a few days,” the post read. “I had a patient die during the transfer last night because our ambulance was stopped by protesters and had to drive an extra 45 minutes around the blocked road.” Violence is another feature of the riots. On January 20, protesters attempted to disrupt president-elect Donald Trump’s inaugural ceremony by throwing rocks, flares and “unknown liquids” at the Washington D.C. police. Rioters injured six police officers, and set a limousine on fire. In Oregon, anti-Trump protesters attacked police officers with clubs, while in Seattle, police officers had bricks thrown at them. New Haven Assistant Police Chief Tony Reyes believes even more violent protests are coming to the town after Saturday’s incident. “It’s happening,” he said. “We have to be ready to deal with it and try to do it in a way that balances our commitment to community policing while keeping our officers safe.” Of the incident, Patricia Kane has compared the alleged police brutality inflicted on her and her fellow protesters to the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, in particular the 1965 Selma march led by Martin Luther King to protest voter suppression and police brutality against African-Americans. “The trooper with the dog frightened everybody. The dog jumped on me. Shades of Selma,” said Kane, This is an insult to the Civil Rights movement. No matter how provoked, Martin Luther King Jr. never egged on violence through a loudspeaker. He never advocated throwing bricks through windows or setting fire to cars. Nor would he have allowed his followers to block hospital entrances. Anti-Trump protesters have followed the familiar leftist pattern that because their “hearts are in the right place,” anything is justified. They have asserted they are marching to express “support for the vulnerable,” which they list as “minorities, immigrants, women, and members of the L.G.B.T. community.” But “the vulnerable,” as evidenced by the New Haven incident, doesn’t include critically ill patients. ___________________________
Sanctuary Cities Stand to Lose Billions in Federal Funding January 27, 2017 According to an analysis of federal grants performed by Reuters, the 10 largest cities in America are in danger of losing up to $2.27 billion in funds if they do not comply with President Donald Trump’s policies on illegal immigration.The president signed an executive order this week directing the Department of Homeland Security to look at the money flowing to the nation’s sanctuary cities and report on any funding streams that could be cut off in the event of non-compliance. “The American people are no longer going to have to be forced to subsidize this disregard for our laws,” said White House press secretary Sean Spicer. From Reuters: Reuters analyzed federal grant records to tally the estimated federal funding at risk among the 10 largest cities which totaled an estimated $2.27 billion. The total amount remains unclear, as federal money can be filtered through state governments or granted directly to social-service organizations or other groups. The numbers do not include federal money for law enforcement, which was excluded in the executive order, and programs like Medicaid, which are administered by state governments. Though details remain vague, the order could jeopardize billions of dollars in housing, health, education and other types of federal aid. Several cities in the top 10 – Boston and Los Angeles among them – have not officially proclaimed themselves “sanctuaries” for illegal immigrants. Even so, they have policies that prevent local officials from fully cooperating with federal immigration authorities. Boston, for instance, has a directive in place that forbids police from detaining people based on their citizenship status without a criminal warrant. Depending on how forcefully the Trump administration pushes the issue, the city could be in danger of losing more than $65 million in federal funds. Most cities with sanctuary policies are about as blue as America gets, and they are predisposed to opposing the Trump administration. City officials in New York, San Francisco, Chicago, and elsewhere have already vowed to stand by their resident aliens and fight Trump in court if he strips their cities of federal grant money. Some analysts say that, legally, Trump can only cut off funds if the original statute providing the funds came with a compliance clause. In other words, unless the funds are already tied to an agreement like, “You get this money only if you comply with ICE agents,” Trump is out of luck. Whether this is true or not, we may soon find out. Even if it is, though, Trump has a number of other tools at his disposal, including what it perhaps his most powerful weapon: The presidential bully pulpit. The administration has already suggested publishing an ongoing list of crimes committed by illegal immigrants along with the cities that protect them. Once public opinion in these cities turns, Trump may not even have to threaten funding to gain compliance. __________________________
Exclusive: Led by Republican Study Committee, 50 House GOPers tell Trump to fire IRS chief By PHILIP WEGMANN•1/26/17 5:01 PM Washington Examiner A faction of conservatives is circumventing leadership brass and calling directly on President Trump to tell IRS Chief John Koskinen, "You're fired." Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., will make the ask. The chairman of the Republican Study Committee has quietly but urgently been circulating a letter inside the GOP conference to build support. He's now got 50 congressmen signed onto the letter. While Trump has fleshed out his cabinet, so far, he's stayed hush about the fate of the IRS chief. And conservatives really want Koskinen's head. "You have the authority to remove Commissioner Koskinen," Walker writes to Trump, adding that "we encourage you to dismiss him in the most expedient manner practicable." House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, first drew up impeachment articles against the taxman in October 2015. Since then, conservatives have accused Koskinen of interfering with a congressional investigation and abetting the of the continued targeting of conservative non-profits. Walker's letter reintroduces that issue in the new 115th Congress, slamming the IRS for "improperly targeting conservative groups" and failing to "demonstrate that officials have definitively ceased targeting conservative groups." And he's building on last year's failed impeachment effort launched by the House Freedom Caucus. "The consideration of the impeachment of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in the House in late 2016 was a clear indication that Congress and the American people have no confidence in Commissioner Koskinen or his ability to discharge his duties," Walker writes. But that episode is a distant memory now. Back then while the nation focused on the presidential election, the Freedom Caucus tried to force Ryan's hand. Struggling to keep his majority together, the speaker passed on the impeachment effort and pleaded with conservatives to wait on personnel changes at the tax bureau until after the election. They didn't listen. On Dec. 5, Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, introduced a privileged resolution on the House floor that would've forced an impeachment vote. Without leadership's support, it failed. Ryan spokeswoman AshLee Strong explained the opposition was born from a scheduling conflict. "It would have triggered automatic consideration lasting into next year," she said in a statement at the time, "filling up weeks of floor time and crippling our ability to hit the ground running on Trump administration confirmations and Obamacare repeal."
Also from the Washington ExaminerTrump's lobbying ban coming 'soon'By Joel Gehrke • 01/28/17 2:01 PMA month into 2017 and Republicans haven't repealed Obamacare and Koskinen still has his job. Walker's RSC is trying to convince Trump to change that. If he fails though, then Koskinen could stay at the IRS until Nov. 12, 2017. Philip Wegmann is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. __________________________
House Says No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Jan 25, 2017 WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a 238-183 vote yesterday, the House passed H.R. 7, known as the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act, which permanently prohibits taxpayer dollars from being used to pay for abortions in Obamacare health plans starting the next plan year. Previously the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal money from being used to fund abortions through Medicaid, has been subject to annual renewal. Originally passed in 1976, three years after the Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade, the Hyde Amendment did not take effect until 1980 when it was affirmed by the Supreme Court. During those years between Roe and the implementation of the Hyde Amendment, federal tax dollars funded approximately 25 percent, or 300,000, of all U.S. abortions annually. H.R. 7 makes the Hyde Amendment permanent and also protects Americans of conscience by requiring the full disclosure of abortion coverage in Obamacare plans so they can make informed decisions about their healthcare plans. Sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith, H.R. 7 “prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion or health plans that cover abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger. H.R. 7 prohibits abortions at facilities owned or operated by the federal government and prevents federal employees from performing abortions within the scope of their employment. H.R. 7 does not prohibit the use of federal funds to treat complications that arise from or are exacerbated by an abortion, regardless of whether the abortion was performed legally.” “We commend the House for passing the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The concept that taxpayer dollars are funding human genocide is unconscionable. I pray that President Trump will sign this bill into law very soon as we continue the fight to make the womb a safe place again,” said Staver. Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.
Share on Facebook and Twitter ____________________________