Mad Maxine Back to Pushing Impeachment?

by Daveda Gruber:

Mad Maxine is on the prowl again. The Democrat from California, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, is talking about impeaching President Trump yet again.

On Tuesday Waters told the Woman’s National Democratic Club dinner, “Some people say, ‘How dare her (sic) come out and say, ‘Impeach him? She doesn’t know enough about him to talk about impeaching him.’ But now the American people, whether they say it or not, they know that this man is dangerous.”

She went on to say, “That certainly, he conspired with the Kremlin and with the oligarchs of Russia.”

Well, we all know that Mad Maxine has nothing good to say about Trump but now she’s out to attack Attorney General William Barr.

Waters said, according to the Washington Examiner, “I know that you are all worried about the special counsel and the fact that we have a report that has been described to us in a letter by the attorney general. We don’t know what’s in the report yet, and we’re going to demand it,”

Waters then stated, “Let me leave you with this: Despite the fact that we haven’t gotten the report yet, and we’re going after it, and it may be subpoenaed, that it is being worked on. I’m still saying impeach 45.”

In reference to the Mueller report and the conclusions reached by Barr, Waters was on a different train of thought when she said, “I think we do nothing now but concentrate on getting the information, getting that report.”

According to Politico, Waters also said, “[Impeachment has] never been discussed as a strategy for this caucus. It’s only a few of us.”

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi had a different approach. Pelosi told the Washington Post Magazine, “I’m not for impeachment. Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.”

She wasn’t done and added, “And he’s just not worth it.”

The insults always follow anything that could have been misconstrued as a positive comment about Trump.

Is Trump’s Push for More Defense Spending Working?

by Daveda Gruber:

On Wednesday NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg gave an encouraging speech to Congress. He had some good news for Congress. He said that President Trump’s push for NATO allies to pay more for defense spending has “had an impact” and has made the alliance stronger.

Stoltenberg is a two-time prime minister of Norway and the first NATO chief to address a joint meeting of Congress. He spoke a day after having met with Trump and both officials were happy about the increase in alliance spending.

Stoltenberg said, “Allies must spend more on defense. This has been the clear message from President Trump. And this message is having a real impact.”

Even though NATO does not have defense budget, members do commit to spending a minimum of 2 percent of their Gross Domestic Products on defense. Trump has put pressure on members that do not meet that commitment.

Check this out:

The United States spends 3.5 percent of its GDP on defense Stoltenberg said that NATO is stronger as a result of the U.S. pressure.

Stoltenberg said, “After years of reducing defense budgets, all allies have stopped the cuts and all allies have increased their defense spending. Before they were cutting billions, now they are adding billions.”

Stoltenberg told lawmakers in Congress that European allies and Canada have spent an additional $41 billion in the last two years. By the end of 2020, that figure should escalate to $100 billion.
Stoltenberg went on to say, “That money will allow us to invest in new capabilities our armed forces need, including advanced fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, missile defense and surveillance drones. This is good for Europe and it is good for America.”

On Tuesday Trump tweeted:

On Tuesday, Trump said that the relationship with NATO “has been very good” and he welcomed “tremendous progress” on the question of defense spending.

Trump brought up that Germany, in particular, was not, according to him, “paying what they should be paying.”

He said, “Germany is not paying their fair share.”

Hopefully, that will change soon.

Dead Men Tell No Tales

by Daveda Gruber:

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a man from Missouri can be executed. The highest court in the land decided that Russell Bucklew, a man who was convicted of a brutal rape and murder, can be executed by lethal injection.

In a ruling of 5 to 4, the SCOTUS decided that Bucklew is not guaranteed “painless death” even though he attempted to avoid the needle because of his rare medical condition.

Missouri now has the right to proceed with execution protocol in carrying out the sentence.

Bucklew was sentenced to death for the 1996 murder of Michael Sanders. Sanders was dating Bucklew’s ex-girlfriend when he was murdered.

Bucklew had assaulted the couple and stalked his ex-lover to find out the location of where she lived. Bucklew shot and killed Sanders and then fired his gun at his former girlfriend’s 6-year-old child.

He missed and kidnapped the woman and raped her several times. He was eventually arrested after a car chase and police shootout.

Justice Neil Gorsuch said, in summarizing his majority opinion, “Today we bring this case to a close at last because we agree with the courts below that Mr. Bucklew’s claim isn’t supported by either the law or the evidence.”

The court had previously ruled that inmates who challenged the method a state plans to use to execute them must have to show there’s an alternative that is likely to be less painful.

The Constitution does not guarantee a painless death. Missouri can execute Bucklew.

Bucklew had argued that death by lethal injection would be extremely painful because he had a blood-filled tumor in his throat. The tumor was caused by a rare medical condition that could most likely burst during the execution. That could cause him to choke on his own blood and cut off oxygen to his body for up to four minutes.

He called this cruel and unusual punishment that would violate the Constitution. Bucklew had stated that he wanted to die by inhaling pure nitrogen gas through a mask. This method has never been used in an execution.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch are the five justices in the majority who rejected Bucklew’s argument.

The ruling said that the inmate failed to show that the alternative method “would significantly reduce his risk of pain.”

Gorsuch noted that Bucklew failed to show that the state would carry out the alternative execution.

Gorsuch wrote, “The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death — something that, of course, isn’t guaranteed to many people, including most victims of capital crimes.”

Bucklew was granted a stay of execution by the Supreme Court hours before he was scheduled to die last year. Another stay of execution was granted in 2014 in the 11th hour.

Chris Nuelle is a spokesman for the Missouri Attorney General’s Office. He said in a statement that Monday’s ruling put the state and Bucklew’s victims “one step closer to justice.”

Do you believe in the death penalty? How humane should it be? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter in the comments below.

BOMBSHELL: Charges Against Jussie Smollett Dropped

by Daveda Gruber:

Charges against ” Empire” star Jussie Smollett were dropped in a stunning account from the Cook County State Attorney’s office.

It was announced that all 16 felony counts against Smollett, 36, were dropped in a nolle pros and the record in the case was sealed. Smollett voluntarily forfeited his bond money. Smollett’s attorney, Patricia Brown-Holmes, said the funds would likely go to the city of Chicago.

The charges had come after Smollet allegedly staged his own hate crime.

Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said that if he were accused of a crime that he would want his day in court to prove his innocence.

Johnson said, “Our job as police officers is to present them with the evidence … If someone ever falsely accused me [of a crime], I would never hide behind a brokered deal and secrecy. I don’t know what’s unusual for the state’s attorney but we found out about when you all did.
Prosecutors have their discretion of course, we still have to work with the state’s attorney’s office, we’ll have conversations after this. At the end of the day it was Smollett who committed this hoax.”

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel called it a “whitewash of justice” that cost the city more than $10,000.

Emanuel said, “Our officers did hard work day in and day out, countless hours working to unwind what actually happened that night. The city saw its reputation dragged through the mud … It’s not just the officers’ work, but the work of the grand jury that made a decision based on only a sliver of the evidence [presented]. Because of the judge’s decision, none of that evidence will ever be made public. [This case] sends a clear message that if you’re in a position of influence and power you’ll be treated one way and if you’re not you’ll be treated another way,”

Smollet maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty to all 16 counts against him.

Today, without a trial to determine if he was guilty of the 16 charges, Smollett is a free man.

Did Michael Avenatti Meet Karma Head On?

by Daveda Gruber:

On Monday, porn star Stormy Daniels’ former lawyer, Michael Avenatti, was arrested and charged by federal prosecutors for criminal extortion.

Avenatti briefly considered a run for the presidency. He was arrested for allegedly trying to extort NIKE for $15-$25 million.

Authorities charge that Avenatti threatened to hold a press conference on the eve of the NCAA basketball tournament to reveal damaging allegations against the firm unless it paid his client $1.5 million. Avenatti is also alleged to have NIKE agree to hire Avenatti and another lawyer for $15 to $25 million to conduct an “internal investigation” into the allegations.

Avenatti, as well, allegedly tried to extort the giant sports apparel company “by threatening to use his ability to garner publicity to inflict substantial financial and reputational harm on the company if his demands were not met.”

So far the charges against him, in New York, include conspiracy to transmit interstate communications with intent to extort, conspiracy to commit extortion and more.

Avenatti was on Twitter and these are two of his tweets:

According to the criminal complaint, Avenatti had offered to not have that press conference if he got what he wanted.

The counts against him include conspiracy to transmit interstate communications with intent to extort, conspiracy to commit extortion and more.

Meanwhile in California, a case against Avenatti was brought to light. Banking fraud and federal income tax evasion charges came from Los Angles.

He was accused of allergy embezzling a client’s money to pay his own expenses and debts, as well as those of his coffee business and law firm. The U.S. attorney’s office also said he defrauded a bank by using phony tax returns to obtain millions of dollars in loans.

To be honest, Avenatti was made larger than life all because he represented a porn star who claimed to have consensual sex with President Trump before he even became president.

The mainstream media loved Avenatti and he was made rather popular by the smearing of the president.

Maybe people should search out what happens to people who lie and use deceptive means to take down the greatest president this country has ever had. Karma can really be a bitch.

Would You Name Your Dog Trump?

by Daveda Gruber:

Do you have a dog? I have a sweet little three pound chocolate colored teacup poodle named Lady Godiva. Her name seems irregular to some but I had reasons to name her that.

Lady is so there is no mistake that she is a female dog. Godiva is for “Godiva Chocolate” and the fact that GOD is in my dog’s name will hopefully keep her protected from anything she faces in life.

Other people give thought to their dog’s name too.

In Florida a police dog was given the name TRUMP. A photo became a viral Facebook meme this week.

The image of a patrol car belonging to the Orange County Sheriff’s Office with a decal featuring K-9 Trump’s name has gotten more attention than anticipated.

The Orlando Sentinel reported that the Facebook page of Cop Humor, a self-described pro-law enforcement conservative group, posted the meme with accompanying text that read, “Atta boy, Trump! Making a difference.”

They tweeted:

Trump joined the sheriff’s office in March 2018. Three months later, he began patrol duty.

K-9 names are left to the discretion of their human partners. There is no policy that dictates how the dogs should be named. It appears that this rule could change.

The video is here:

Trump Signs Executive Order to Promote Free Speech in Universities

by Daveda Gruber:

On Thursday President Trump made a bold move to protect American values. Trump signed an executive order that promotes free speech on college campuses.

Trump was surrounded by conservative student activists at the signing ceremony. He said, “We’re here to take historic action to defend American students and American values. They’ve been under siege.”

The executive order directs 12 grant-making agencies to use their authority in coordination with the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to ensure institutions that receive federal research or education grants promote free speech and free inquiry.

The order would put into effect the loss of federal research funding if they do not protect those rights. It will apply to more than $35 billion in grants.

Trump also said, “Under the guise of speech codes, safe spaces and trigger warnings, these universities have tried to restrict free thought, impose total conformity and shut down the voices of great young Americans like those here today.”

While private schools would have more flexibility in limiting speech, they would need to commit to their own institutional rules.

On the other hand, public universities that seek funding would really just have to comply with something which already applies to them, the First Amendment.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference last month, Trump gave an indication that this was in the works.

Trump said, “Even as universities have received billions and billions of dollars from taxpayers, many have become increasingly hostile to free speech and the First Amendment.”

A conservative activist who was attacked while working a recruitment table on campus at the University of California-Berkeley, Hayden Williams, was brought up on the stage by the president.

Trump said of Williams, “He took a punch for all of us. And we could never allow that to happen. And here is, in closing with Hayden, here’s the good news. He’s going to be a wealthy young man.”

Apparently, a lawsuit by Hayden is being contemplated.

Trump said, “If they want our dollars, and we give it to them by the billions, they’ve got to allow people like Hayden and many other great young people and old people to speak. Free speech. If they don’t, it will be costly. That will be signed soon.”

Did Beto Really Eat Dirt?

by Daveda Gruber:

Have you ever heard of a child eating dirt? I have but it didn’t seem healthy or something a sane adult would do.

Adults can sometimes eat their own words, humble pie or even eat crow but these metaphors are just that; metaphors. We don’t have to actually digest the similes.

Beto (Robert Francis) O’Rourke took eating to a whole new level after he lost to incumbent Ted Cruz R-TX. Beto ate dirt.

O’Rourke raised $80 million for the Senate race against Cruz and is rejuvenating himself by eating dirt to draw energy.

Beto wrote a 3,000-word profile on himself and it reads, “In January, Beto hit the road, much as his father had done before him, and drew energy from the people he met, and — on one stop in New Mexico he didn’t write about in his blog — by eating New Mexican dirt said to have regenerative powers.”

It also reads, “He brought some home for the family to eat, too.”

Beto’s story was published by The Washington Post.

I wonder if Beto’s family all ate dirt. Someone told me on Twitter that America needs illegal immigrants to pick crops to supply the American people with food. I did argue the point in my reply tweet.

Well, if Beto is correct in his assumption that eating dirt is good for us, maybe we don’t need food? We can all just eat that yummy dirt.

Trump Administration Gets Good News from the SCOTUS

by Daveda Gruber:

On Tuesday the Supreme Court ruled, with conservative judges in the majority, on an immigration issue. The decision makes it easier to detain immigrants with criminal records.

The ruling was clearly a victory for the Trump administration. It was authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito and left open the possibility that some individual immigrants could challenge their detention.

A group of mostly green card holders argued that unless immigrants were picked up immediately after finishing their prison sentence, they should get a hearing to argue for their release while deportation proceedings go forward.

The law states the government can detain convicted immigrants “when the alien is released” from criminal detention. Civil rights lawyers argued the point that the language of the law shows that it applies only immediately after immigrants are released. On the other hand, the Trump administration said the government should have the power to detain such immigrants anytime.

The Tuesday decision was 5-4 ruling that federal immigration officials can detain undocumented immigrants at any time after their release from local or state custody.

The court also ruled that the government maintains broad discretion to decide who would represent a danger to the community in deciding who to release or detain.

Back in October, the Trump administration had argued that given the limited money and manpower available, it was almost impossible for the federal government to detain every immigrant immediately upon their release from custody.

Alito wrote that “neither the statute’s text nor its structure” supported the immigrants’ argument.

The court’s four more liberal justices differed in opinion from the conservative ones. Justice Stephen Breyer took the rare step of reading an oral disagreement from the bench.

Was Beto a Hacker?

by Daveda Gruber:

Would the mainstream media hold back on a story if it could possibly hurt a Democratic runner in an election? You wouldn’t think so, right? You’d be wrong if you thought that they would get the story out, no matter if it were good, bad or indifferent.

A reporter from Reuters, Joseph Menn, allegedly sat on a big story about Robert Francis O’Rourke. Ted Cruz and O’Rourke ran for a Senate seat in the 2018 mid-term election.

On Friday a famous group of hackers called the “Cult of the Dead Cow” revealed that now 2020 presidential candidate O’Rourke was a member. The hacking group has been credited with inventing the term “hacktivism.”

The group is responsible for a variety of shady activities. Stealing credit card numbers to pay for long-distance telephone service, violating copyright laws and hacking into computers were some of the activities that the hackers participated in. The report from Reuters did stress that O’Rourke himself never “engaged in the edgiest sorts of hacking activity.”

Also brought into light, was another allegation that I’ve written about Beto in connection with the group, wrote bizarre fiction stories under the name “Psychedelic Warlord,” which includes a story about the fantasy of murdering, by running over two children with a car.

As soon as the story came out, Beto was out expressing regret about his deeds.

Check out this VIDEO:

Menn knew about all of this in 2017 and he sat on it. According to Menn, members of the hacking group were protecting O’Rourke’s identity and would not confirm his connection  to them unless the reporter, Menn, promised not to write about it until after the November election.

Apparently, they made a deal. Menn agreed to sit on an adverse story about Beto until his Senate race was over. Beto lost to Cruz.

Reuters’s story was titled: “Backstory: How Reuters uncovered Beto O’Rourke’s teenage hacking days.”

The story went on to say:

“After more than a year of reporting, Menn persuaded O’Rourke to talk on the record. In an interview in late 2017, O’Rourke acknowledged that he was a member of the group, on the understanding that the information would not be made public until after his Senate race against Ted Cruz in November 2018.

Democratic 2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, 46, speaks with supporters during a three day road trip across Iowa, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, U.S., March 15, 2019. REUTERS/Ben Brewer

In an interview with Reuters senior producer Jane Lee, Menn explains how he broke the story and got O’Rourke to open up about his hacking days.

“I decided to write a book about the Cult of the Dead Cow because they were the most interesting and influential hacking group in history. They illustrated a lot of the things that I think are fascinating about hacking and security work.

Focus on Trump’s speech after attack on Muslims

“While I was looking into the Cult of the Dead Cow, I found out that they had a member who was sitting in Congress. I didn’t know which one. But I knew that they had a member of Congress.

“And then I figured out which one it was. And the members of the group wouldn’t talk to me about who it was. They wouldn’t confirm that it was this person unless I promised that I wouldn’t write about it until after the November election. That’s because the member of Congress had decided to run for Senate. Beto O’Rourke is who it was.

“I met Beto O’Rourke. I said ‘I’m writing a book about Cult of the Dead Cow, I think it’s really interesting. I know you were in this group. This book is going to publish after November and your Senate race is over. And he said, ‘OK.’

“And he told me about his time in the Cult of the Dead Cow.””

Cruz took to Twitter to express his feelings:

Menn had some interesting tweets on the subject too:

Do people actually understand that the news media is biased? Some do and some watch TV news blindly and listen to what they believe must be truth that is being reported.

I am personally disgusted in what I see being reported and not being reported. The media is backing the LEFT and they are not hiding their agenda.