Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic

The Border & Illegal Aliens, And What We Are Doing About It.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said.

“We are not going to let this country be invaded!

We will not be stampeded!

We will not capitulate to lawlessness!

This is NOT business as usual.

This is the Trump era!," the Attorney General said.

3 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of We The People USA to add comments!

Join We The People USA

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 9:10pm: Leading Dem Reveals" Party's Radical Agenda" If They Take Back Congress.
07/23/18 by: AAN Staff
Should they reclaim their former congressional majorities, Democrats will immediately push to abolish ICE, Senator kirsten gillibrand (D-N.Y.) admitted on camera Sunday.
Peter Hasson, of The Daily Caller, explains:
“So when we flip the House and flip the Senate, I think the first thing we should do is deal with the children who have been separated from their families at the border. I think we should get rid of ICE,” Gillibrand said at the New York City festival OZY Fest, where she shared a stage with left-wing actress Chelsea Handler.
“We should separate out two missions, the anti-terrorism mission, the national security mission, and then on the other side make sure you do, making sure you’re looking at immigration as a humanitarian issue,” Gillibrand added.
The senator also said that Democrats should also move on “all” of the gun control issues within the first month of taking back Congress.
“I think we should pass the gun reform issues within the first month, all of them. Universal background checks, anti-trafficking, making sure people can’t buy bump stocks, large magazine clips, all that work,” she said.
Will somebody please get her a bigger microphone?!

Read more at http://americanactionnews.com/articles/leading-dem-reveals-party-s-...

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 9:03pm: Mad maxine waters Claims Providence Brought Her to Earth to Stop Trump.
7/25/18 by: AAN Staff
Mexifornia Rep. mad maxine waters went on a bizarre rant during a speech at a Los Angeles church, saying that God delivered her from heaven to stop President Trump. (The Daily Caller)
In a video first reported on by The American Mirror, Waters said, “You’ve gotta know that I’m here to do the work that I was sent to do, and as pastor said to me when I came in this morning, ‘When God sends you to do something, you just do it!' So, I have a message. I’m going back to Washington tomorrow morning. I’m going to tell them Pastor told me to come here and just do it!”
Waters also reportedly said, “I don’t know intimidation. I don’t know fear.”
The longtime Democratic representative – dubbed by a left-wing watchdog one of the "Most Corrupt Members of Congress" only a few years ago – made headlines in June for calling for the public harassment of Trump cabinet members.
COMMENTS:
1. God warned us of false prophets like mad m. waters: "Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves. You will be able to tell them by their fruits. Can people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? In the same way, a sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit. A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit. Any tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown on the fire. I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15-20). Mad Maxine water's fruits consist of hate and lies.
2. The nut job has it wrong. God sent us Trump to help us true Americans and not any foreigners/illegal aliens. Trump 2020!!
3. The woman is stark RAVING MAD!! She needs some serious mental help!!!
4. Of course maxine wants the USA to be a Democracy, she is a Dimwitorat. However, the USA is a Republic, which is what Republicans support, and what the Pledge of Alliegence says it is:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. President Trump is MAKING A.G.A.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 8:35pm: Soccer ball Putin gave Trump contains transmitter chip, "but for Adidas", report
7/25/18 By Jacqueline Thomsen
The Adidas soccer ball Russian President Vladimir Putin gave to President Trump at their summit in Finland appears to contain a chip that can transmit information to nearby cellphones, Bloomberg reported Wednesday.
The publication noted that photos of the ball show a logo for a near-field communication (NFC) tag, a chip that is included in the Adidas 2018 FIFA World Cup ball. Russia hosted this year's World Cup.
Adidas AG soccer balls, similar to the one Putin presented to Trump during a joint press conference last week, contain a small chip that can send content to mobile devices. Users can hold their phones close to the ball to access videos and competitions, according to Bloomberg.
Adidas declined to comment to Bloomberg on whether the device could be used in a Russian cyberattack. The brand’s website states that the chip can’t be modified.
The publication reported that such a chip has been used at least once to breach a phone, though a cybersecurity expert told Bloomberg that it’s unlikely that a cyberattack could be launched using the device.
The soccer ball underwent a security screening as part of the routine procedure for all gifts given to the president, the U.S. Secret Service said last week.
Sen. Lindsey Graham
(R-S.C.) had said on Twitter that the ball should be inspected for "listening devices" and that he would "never allow it in the White House."
It’s unknown if the chip — if it was in the ball at all — was removed before or after it was given to Trump.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 8:19pm: Trump Issues This Warning About Russia.
7/24/18 by: TTN Staff
With the media focusing on how the Russians helped President Trump win the election, President Trump decided to issue his own warning about Russia.
"They want the Democrats to win this November! I’m very concerned that Russia will be fighting very hard to have an impact on the upcoming Election. Based on the fact that no President has been tougher on Russia than me, they will be pushing very hard for the Democrats. They definitely don’t want Trump!"
According to The Daily Mail:
Donald Trump said Tuesday that he believes Russia will work overtime to oppose Republicans in November's midterm congressional elections, despite Vladimir Putin's admisson last week that he wanted Trump to win in 2016.
'I’m very concerned that Russia will be fighting very hard to have an impact on the upcoming Election,' Trump tweeted.
'Based on the fact that no President has been tougher on Russia than me, they will be pushing very hard for the Democrats. They definitely don’t want Trump!'
Trump was soft on Putin in regards to election meddling when they met earlier this month. At least outwardly, this tweet leads one to believe that he was much tougher behind closed doors.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 2:01pm: Stupid Thug Enters Gun Owner's Home, Threatens Everyone – Huge Mistake!
7/11/18 by: AAN Staff
After a dramatic high-speed chase with police, one Mexifornia driver initially evaded law enforcement, entering a home armed with a broken beer bottle.
It would be his last mistake! TheBlaze, courtesty of KOLO-TV, reports:
Police said the driver arrived at a home, armed himself with a beer bottle, entered the attached garage through the open roll-up garage door, and entered the house, the station said.
The driver then confronted the residents and — holding the beer bottle over his head — threatened to kill the family if car keys weren’t given to him, KOLO reported.
A woman in the home retrieved car keys from another room, the station said — along with another item: a handgun.
The resident pursued the intruder, who was behind the wheel of the truck and soon accelerated and drove toward the resident, KOLO reported.
The law-abiding gun owner fired one round at the suspect, killing him!
Officers arrived shortly afterward to find his lifeless body in the cab of the truck.
*** BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, RIGHTIOUS KILL. ***

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 1:55pm: **** DO YOU TRUST YOUR DOCTOR? - ME EITHER! ****
America's Largest Association of Physicians Calls for Mass Gun Confiscation!
6/15/18 by: AAN Staff
America's largest physicians' association, the American Medical Association, has approved an exhaustive list of demands for gun control measures.
The lengthy list undermines the Second Amendment in numerous ways!! (Townhall)
On Wednesday, the American Medical Association approved an expansive list of “common-sense” demands for new gun control measures, including proposals to ban the sale and possession of “all assault-type weapons, bump stocks and related devices, high-capacity magazines, and armor piercing bullets.”
These gun control guidelines were approved by the AMA’s House of Delegates, a forum of the medical organization’s member physicians that meets twice a year to vote on medical and political policy recommendations.
Additionally, the AMA’s list of gun control proposals contains several measures that are reportedly intended to combat domestic violence, including a proposition to create a new legal procedure by which “family members, intimate partners, household members and law enforcement personnel” can petition courts to confiscate firearms from people “when there is a high or imminent risk for violence.”
Based on the AMA’s official blog post about their gun control proposals, "this gun confiscation procedure does not involve typical due process of legal rights" where the gun owner in question can defend himself or herself in court, nor is there any explicit definition for how “risk for violence” would be determined by a judge, leaving open the possibility that people without criminal convictions could be subject to having their guns taken away.
This problem with definitions also extends to the AMA’s core proposals, especially for confiscating “high-capacity magazines” and “armor piercing bullets.”
Although high-capacity magazines are typically thought of as those that can hold more than ten rounds, the NY SAFE Act, which was passed in 2013 after the Sandy Hook school shooting, defined high capacity magazines as those that can hold more than seven rounds and banned their sale.
More worryingly, because there is no definition of what qualifies as an “armor piercing bullet,” the AMA’s proposals can be reasonably interpreted as a call for banning practically every type of rifle ammunition in existence given that (with the exception of extremely small calibers like .22 LR) almost all rifle rounds can pierce Kevlar-based body armor, the standard type of ballistic protection used by law enforcement agencies worldwide.
Thus, if Congress or any other legislative body actually followed through on the AMA’s vague proposal, everything from smaller rifle calibers like .223 and .243 Winchester all the way through other common hunting rifle rounds like .270 Win.,Savage 300, .30-06, .308 Win., or .444 Marlin could be banned and confiscated en-masse by the government.
According to the AMA's oblivious gun-grabbing representatives, these draconian measures will effectively combat the epidemic of gun violence in the United States.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 1:16pm: F.Y.I.--> Mars at Opposition Friday!
Mars at Opposition 2018. -- The Red Planet’s Close Approach.
We’re about to see one of the truly great sky events of 2018!
Friday night, July 27th, is the date of the long-awaited "Mars opposition" of 2018. It’s the most celebrated planet coming unusually close to Earth.
And finding it requires no sky knowledge.
It’s extremely bright and very red in the night sky—even now!

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 1:12pm: **** Fellow Patriots, thought you'd like to know; ****
Jake the dog that searched for September 11th and Hurricane Katrina victims, died on this day in 2007.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 10:14am: **** 'BLEEDING HEARTS' JUMP TO THE RESCUE! ****
Surprise: Another 'Bigots Left Me No Tip!' Restaurant Anecdote Exposed as Hoax
7/24/18 by: Guy Benson
Racism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry unquestionably still exist in this country -- ugly vestiges of eras that ought to be bygone, and disturbing reminders of the darker side of human nature. It's nevertheless wrong to pretend that significant progress has not been made regarding social and legal protections for minority groups. Attitudes have improved, even if flare-ups, controversies, and highly-publicized incidents or hate groups sometimes make it seem like we're still a long way off from a 'more perfect union.' What certainly does not help matters is the fabrication of hateful incidents or hate crimes, wherein a fake "victim" seeks to exploit society's revulsion at bigotry for his or her own personal gain, or simply to remind people of larger "truths," through damaging lies. Here's the latest example of the latter, twisted phenomenon (via @redsteeze and Ed Morrissey). Shot:
A Facebook post documenting racial abuse that a Saltgrass Steak House server was subjected to over the weekend drew thousands of responses condemning comments of unidentified patrons who called the Odessan a “terrorist” as they refused to tip him. Khalil Cavil, a 20-year-old Odessan working at the restaurant as he prepares to attend college in Dallas later this year, posted an image of a dinner receipt on Sunday along with a response to the abuse the night before.
The diners he had served circled his name, which means “friend” in Arabic, and wrote “We don’t Tip Terrorist.” They left no tip on the more than $108 bill. "At the moment I didn’t know what to think nor what to say, I was sick to my stomach,” wrote Cavil, who is black. "I share this because I want people to understand that this racism, and this hatred still exists. Although, this is nothing new, it is still something that will test your faith. All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus died for these people too. I have decided to let this encourage me, and fuel me to change the world the only way I know how…”
His post drew more than 1,600 comments and more than 1,100 shares by Monday afternoon.
People even offered to pay the tip amid a resounding condemnation of the abuse.
The outpouring of outrage resulted in the restaurant issuing a statement backing up their employee and banning the customer in question from their business, and upset strangers sent roughly $1,000 to Cavil to help right the apparent wrong.
---And then came the chaser:--
Saltgrass originally said it had banned the customer blamed for the message. But now, the restaurant's corporate office says it has learned the story was a hoax.
"After further investigation, we have learned that our employee fabricated the entire story," Terry Turney, COO of Saltgrass Steak House, told the Odessa American in a statement.
"The customer has been contacted and invited back to our restaurant to dine on us.
Racism of any form is intolerable, and we will always act swiftly should it occur in any of our establishments. "Falsely accusing someone of racism is equaling disturbing," Turney said.
Cavil also admitted to newspaper that he wrote the "we don't tip terrorist" note himself. "I did write it," Cavil told the Odessa American. "I don't have an explanation. I made a mistake. There is no excuse for what I did."
After sharing his post on Facebook, Cavil had received monetary donations, which he told the newspaper is now being returned.
A few quick thoughts on this incident:
If your goal is to increase awareness or "wokeness" on racial, religious, or identity discrimination, inventing an example of it and passing it off as real is just about the worst thing you can do. Once you're caught, which is a near certainty in our social media era, you are forever discredited on the issue -- and many people who see your hoax are more likely to be skeptical of the next incident, even if it's authentic. It's the veritable definition of counter-productive behavior.
Speaking personally, I vividly recall a hate crime accusation that was later exposed as fake during my freshman year of college; the campus rallied against racism, then the supposed target of that racism was forced to admit he'd scrawled the racist slurs across his own dorm room door.
This behavior is rooted in a weird human impluse that I cannot fully understand, yet hoaxes like the receipt flap in Texas crop up fairly regularly.
I can remember several recent examples off the top of my head, in fact (plus a few more that haven't been conclusively discredited, but seem suspicious).
If you care about defeating bigtory, don't make up bigotry.
Broadly speaking, "fake but accurate" is really just fake.
Racism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry unquestionably still exist in this country.
If I had to hazard a guess, Cavil may have just been peeved that he was stiffed with no tip on a significant check and decided to retaliate in a terrible way. Having worked in restaurants, not tipping the wait staff is really a nasty thing to do to hardworking people who often rely on tips to pay their bills, and is only possibly justified by truly egregious service -- in which case, a conversation with a manager is probably in order. Needless to say, even if this had been Cavil's motivation, it's absolutely not an excuse. What he did is much worse than the infraction of being a thoughtless cheapskate.

(3) Why highlight this incident, in particular? Because hoaxes like this grate at my sense of fairness and justice and enrage me because of the damage they do vis-a-vis the real thing. False or casual accusations of hatred water down the public's reaction to fresh allegations of bigotry. People become jaded and inured by false alarms. When the actual problem rears its ugly head, actions like Cavil's plant seeds out doubt about whether it's real, or just another fantasy from an attention seeker. Also, I chose to underscore this specific story because our site covered it back when the hoax aspect wasn't known. An update to that post was issued, but the extent and impact of the lie merits a separate piece to correct the record, in my view.

Comment by Bullheaded Texan on July 25, 2018 at 9:53am: Whoa: Ninth Circuit Rules We Have A Constitutional Right To Open Carry For Self-Defense.
7/24/18 by: Matt Vespa
The Ninth Circuit is one of the most liberal courts, and the one that gave the Trump White House heartburn over its executive order on immigration.
But even a blind hog finds a acorn sometimes!
"This court recently ruled that we have a constitutional right to open carry in public for self-defense." (via Reuters):
The 9th Circuit’s decision in Young v State of Hawaii can be found here: https://t.co/FVL9Vziq8u
The big takeaway is that states must allow for some form of carrying arms for self-defense for the average citizen or violate the Constitutional rights of their residents. pic.twitter.com/mDC2nDhAbX — Cam Edwards July 24, 2018
{A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protects a right to openly carry a gun in public for self-defense}, rejecting a claim by Hawaii officials that the right only applies to guns kept at home.
The extent of the right to gun ownership protected by the Second Amendment is one of the most hotly contested debates in the United States, where life has been punctuated by a steady stream of mass shootings.
The ruling issued by a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, came a year after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule either way on the carrying of guns in public.
“We do not take lightly the problem of gun violence,” Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain wrote in Tuesday’s ruling.
[ “But, for better or for worse, the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”]
So, does this get bumped up to the Supreme Court? If Judge Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, and it looks like he will be, then the chances improve that the high court could hear arguments to finally decide whether we have the constitutional right to carry loaded firearms in public.
According to SCOTUSblog, the question was thrust before the Court in Drake v. Jerejian four years ago:
1)Whether the Second Amendment secures a right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense; and
(2) whether state officials violate the Second Amendment by requiring that individuals wishing to exercise their right to carry a handgun for self-defense first prove a “justifiable need” for doing so.
The Court declined. In 2013, Woollard v. Gallagheralso asked whether the so-called justifiable need provision for concealed carry permits was constitutional. Again, the court declined. On the question about the constitutionality of state-based assault weapons bans, the Court again decided to take a pass.
So, based on this history, I’m not going to jump for glee just yet.
It shows that the fight for our Second Amendment rights shouldn’t let up, nor should we give up no matter what, even if its in the deepest, bluest, most idiotic Democratic part of the country. Fight on—that’s how we got the Hellerand McDonald decisions.
Besides abortion, anti-gun liberals can probably guess the odds of the Court accepting this case if Kavanaugh is confirmed.
The Supreme Court has been under pressure to accept for gun rights cases. Some have argued that the queer marriage ruling in Obergefell should apply to concealed carry permits.
At the time, the National Rifle Association warned this logic is not worth gambling on until the Court decidedly issued a ruling on this question:
On 6/26/15, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which concerned whether same-sex marriage is a right protected by the U.S. Constitution.
Although the case did not address the right to bear arms, some pro-gun advocates began debating whether the Court’s reasoning and analysis had application to national concealed carry licensing reciprocity.
This is a reasonable question. If states that formerly did not sanction same-sex marriage now have to recognize all marriages from states that do, shouldn’t that also mean restrictive “may issue” concealed carry jurisdictions have to recognize concealed carry licenses from less restrictive “shall-issue” jurisdictions?
Some commentators went even further, insisting that Obergefell has conclusively settled the national reciprocity issue in favor of gun owners.
Unfortunately, the answer is not that simple. In particular, we strongly advise concealed carry license holders not to assume Obergefell provides them with the legal basis they need to carry without an in-state license in strongly anti-gun states such as Maryland, New Jersey, or New York. Doing so at this point would still subject the traveler to arrest and criminal prosecution.
This is so for a number of reasons, chief of which is that the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled squarely on the question of whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a loaded handgun in public, and if it does, whether states must recognize each other’s permits. The landmark cases of Heller and McDonald only concerned the question of handgun possession in the home.
Until the Supreme Court rules on the issue conclusively, certain reliably anti-gun jurisdictions can be counted on to exist in a state of denial and defiance. If states and lower courts can ignore a congressional statute like Firearm Owners’ Protection Act – and they do – they certainly can ignore arguments that the philosophical bases for interstate recognition of same-sex marriage compel interstate recognition of concealed carry permits.
The day that these questions concerning open and concealed carry being answered could be drawing closer, but for now, let’s celebrate this legal win.
UPDATE:
NRA reacts to open carry ruling: “This is a critical issue for law-abiding gun owners who want to exercise their right to self-defense outside the home,” said Chris Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA.
“The Second Amendment clearly protects the right to bear arms in public.” pic.twitter.com/uUV5KkzwxL
— Stephen Gutowski July 24, 2018
UPDATE:
A good thread on the decision, but let’s face it—the Supreme Court is going to have to weigh in at some point, right?
Divided 9th Circuit panel finds that 2nd Amendment "Second Amendment encompasses the right of a responsible law-abiding citizen to carry a firearm openly for self-defense outside of the home" https://t.co/xR5aNbjJ0D - J O'Scannlain & Ikuta in majority. J Clifton in dissent.— Josh Blackman 7/24/18
Here is the crux of the panel's majority opinion: the right to "keep" arms applies in the home, but "bear" arms suggests a separate right outside the home. pic.twitter.com/F0T8gNdSRR — Josh Blackman July 24, 2018
The panel faults the dissent for failing to "engage" with the evidence under strict scrutiny. It is not enough merely to "cite" evidence supporting gun control laws. Courts must do more "than cite-check the government’s brief." pic.twitter.com/dFMRe6nBao - Josh Blackman July 24, 2018
J. O'Scannlain explains that post-Civil War evidence is especially relevant for interpreting the right to bear arms as applied to states. Why? 14th Am, ratified in 1868, provides correct timeframe for what I've called "Originalism at the Right Time." https://t.co/9HvHESPPwS pic.twitter.com/pEkOCVWQkj
— Josh Blackman July 24, 2018
Dissent predicts:
"the Supreme Court will find it appropriate at some point to revisit the reach of the Second Amendment and to speak more precisely to the limits on the authority of state and local governments to impose restrictions on carrying guns in public" SCOTUS pic.twitter.com/rHLb790Peu -Josh Blackman 7/24/18