It doesn’t suck as bad as Monday nor is it as good as Friday, it’s Wednesday again!
Trump Should Militarize Our Immigration Courts https://t.co/3Bb214KEqs pic.twitter.com/xuEKMX4eZl
— American Greatness (@theamgreatness) March 12, 2019
Trump Should Militarize Our Immigration Courts
Via American Greatness
Another option would be to declare an additional national emergency in order to militarize U.S. immigration courts. This would allow military personnel to serve as immigration judges, and these new judges could clear the backlog of asylum cases. Currently, there are only 400 immigration judges to hear more than 800,000 cases—thus the delay of up to five years.
By going this route, Trump could accelerate the adjudication of asylum claims. In fact, he could guarantee that future asylum requests would be processed on the spot. The migrants would thus never be released into the general population, and the vast majority of them would be quickly deported.
Would “Obama judges” attack such a program, and would the media condemn it? This is virtually guaranteed, but the fact remains that using the U.S. military to uphold the integrity of our borders is a mission consonant with its basic purpose—national defense.
Currently, U.S. military personnel at the border are banned from carrying out law enforcement functions, making them, in effect, mere auxiliaries to the Border Patrol. By deputizing U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines to serve as immigration judges, President Trump could vastly increase the effectiveness of the military in facing—even solving—our current border crisis.
Given the determination of the Democrats and leftist judges to block any commonsensical immigration policy, the Trump Administration needs to think big and act boldly. Militarizing our immigration courts could be the solution.
Read the entire article HERE.
Do Angelo Carusone’s Rules Apply To Angelo Carusone? https://t.co/voCOksIMY4 pic.twitter.com/mCN1rUpBDR
— The Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) March 13, 2019
Do Angelo Carusone’s Rules Apply To Angelo Carusone?
Via The Daily Caller
Media Matters President Angelo Carusone is currently leading a boycott campaign against Fox News host Tucker Carlson, a co-founder of The Daily Caller News Foundation, in an attempt to get him fired.
Carusone and Media Matters, which openly pine for the destruction of Fox News, have justified the left-wing boycott campaign by pointing to a number of statements that Carlson made on a radio shock jock show between 2006 and 2011.
But Carusone has his own track record of inflammatory statements. Carusone’s now-defunct blog included degrading references to “trannies,” “jewry” and Bangladeshis. (RELATED: Media Matters Gave MSNBC Host Joy Reid A Pass)
Carusone posted a lengthy diatribe in November 2005 about a Bangladeshi man who was robbed by “a gang of transvestites,” as Carusone described it. Carusone was offended that the gang was described as “attractive” in an article.
“Did you notice the word attractive? What the fuck is that doing in there? Is the write[r] a tranny lover too? Or, perhaps he’s trying to justify how these trannies tricked this Bangladeshi in the first place? Look man, we don’t need to know whether or not they were attractive. The fucking guy was Bangladeshi,” Carusone wrote. “And while we’re out, what the hell was he doing with $7,300 worth of stuff. The guy’s Banladeshi! [sic]”
Carusone also chided police for not advising the public to “stay away from tranny bars, stay away from places [sic] where Eddie Murphy and Robert Downey Jr. have/are visiting, don’t fucking kiss a transvestite, don’t bring a group of transvestites back to your room, etc…”
Read the entire article HERE.
Meet Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Rasputin https://t.co/BJK8IgMBvO pic.twitter.com/eZ5xvG8P8H
— CafeNetAmerica (@cafenetamerica) March 13, 2019
Meet Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Rasputin
Via The American Thinker
Meet Saikat Chakrabarti, the Rasputin of the 14th Congressional District and arguably the real brains behind the bright new shiny Democrat bauble of Congress now famously branded by the media as AOC, joining the exclusive club (JFK, LBJ, RFK, HRC) of politicians widely referred to by three initials.
In the space of just a few short months, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, with fewer than 16,000 votes in a primary election, went from the role of obscure bartender to perhaps the most famous and powerful freshman member of Congress ever. She instantly became a media darling who drives ratings and Internet clicks. Senior Democrats such as Sen. Ed Markey gush over her and edge in to get their picture taken with her as they appear to hang on her every word.
Ocasio-Cortez was given a plum seat on the House Financial Services Committee. Her placement on the exclusive House Banking Committee, as well as the appointments of other newbie progressives to top committees was part of a larger deal to re-secure the speakership for Nancy Pelosi ahead of the midterms. Pelosi agreed to 40 percent progressive representation on the five top House committees.
How could this have happened? Look behind the curtain. You’ll find her mysterious chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, a well-funded radical left wing activist who, with other veterans of the 2016 Sanders campaign, including “Young Turks” host Cenk Uygur (later purged over past allegedly sexist, racist, pro-rape statements), established a web of campaign organizations and LLC’s, including Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress. As many as 16 groups were housed in the same office space in Knoxville, TN, with no apparent legally-required “walls of separation.”
The larger plot was and remains to recruit attractive people to run for Congress. The longer-term strategy seems to be to gain control of the Democrat Party, Congress and ultimately the United States government itself. Their stated goal “was to run hundreds of Democratic candidates” who do “not take corporate money and serve the voters rather than the donors,” as well as “capture a significant amount of Congress with strong progressives” and “overpower the corporate Democrats.”
Read the entire article HERE.
Bernie Sanders Is Now The Moderate Democratic Presidential Candidate https://t.co/Kzv3GAdENt
— The Federalist (@FDRLST) March 12, 2019
Bernie Sanders Is Now The Moderate Democratic Presidential Candidate
Via The Federalist
When progressives rushed to fill the vacuum left by Clinton’s loss, however, they also brought plenty of identity politics with them. More than ever, the Democrats became an “upstairs/downstairs” party led by a small faction far to the left of the rank-and-file on issues including political correctness and identitarianism.
Bernie does not subscribe to identity politics, even though many argue his 2016 campaign failed because it failed to attract black voters, especially older black voters. Announcing his 2020 campaign last month, Sanders told Vermont Public Radio: “We have got to look at candidates, you know, not by the color of their skin, not by their sexual orientation or their gender and not by their age. I mean, I think we have got to try to move us toward a non-discriminatory society which looks at people based on their abilities, based on what they stand for.”
The blowback from the left was broad and swift. Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress commented: “At a time where folks feel under attack because of who they are, saying race or gender or sexual orientation or identity doesn’t matter is not off, it’s simply wrong.”
Late-night yakker Stephen Colbert “joked” that Sanders was saying: “Yes, like Dr. King, I have a dream—a dream where this diverse nation can come together and be led by an old white guy.” Even a writer at Teen Vogue opined that Bernie’s comment “feels like the equivalent of him telling everyone who is not a straight, white, cisgender male that we shouldn’t care about seeing ourselves represented in our government.”
Read the entire article HERE.
Facebook Reverses Zero Hedge Ban, Says It Made A "Mistake" https://t.co/nDye90JxXZ
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 12, 2019
Facebook Reverses Zero Hedge Ban, Says It Made A “Mistake”
Via Zero Hedge
t has been a strange 24 hours.
On Monday, we first learned that for the previous two days, Facebook had banned all Zero Hedge content across its various mediums, as it went against Facebook’s “Community Standards” (which to the best of our knowledge, neither we not anyone else has any idea what they are), a decision which – as we noted yesterday – surprised us for two reasons: not only do we not have an official Facebook account, but Facebook did not approach us even once with a warning or even notification.
While we were in the dark about what had triggered Facebook, or what was the company’s motive, we were humbled and delighted not only with the media coverage this event received, but far more so with the outpouring of support we received from readers and across social media, where Zero Hedge had not been yet banned, like Twitter, where figures from various industries and across the political spectrum voiced support and came to our defense, with many condemning what we felt was an arbitrary decision.
Among those who spoke up were President Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr., Nigel Farage, Peter Thiel’s liberal foil at Thiel Capital, Eric Weinstein, Infowars’ Paul Joseph Watson and many others.
To them, and to everyone else who reached out – either to us or to Facebook, or “said something” in private or on the Interweb – our sincerest gratitude.
And then on Tuesday morning, everything had suddenly returned to normal, and whether due to the unexpectedly widespread support we received, or because Facebook had made a sincere error, the ban was reversed.
Read the entire article HERE.
Be sure to subscribe to Def-Con News to get Breakfast For The Brain in your morning mailbox.