California lawmakers approve 'sanctuary state' bill ( Bringing Down America )

Bringing Down America

Twenty-two out of 24 Latino legislative members are Democrats.
Latinos now constitute nearly 40% of California’s population, surpassing the white, non-Latino population.

Lawmakers in California on Saturday passed “sanctuary state” legislation even as President Trump and his administration have vowed to crack down on jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration agents.

The bill approved early Saturday limits police cooperation with federal immigration authorities and is intended to bolster protections for illegal immigrants in the state.

But the acting director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Saturday warned of “tragic consequences,” saying the policy “will make California communities less safe.”
“By passing this bill, California politicians have chosen to prioritize politics over public safety,” Thomas Homan, the acting director of ICE, said in a statement. “Disturbingly, the legislation serves to codify a dangerous policy that deliberately obstructs our country’s immigration laws and shelters serious criminal alien offenders.”
Homan said ICE wants to work with local law enforcement to prevent “dangerous criminal aliens” from being released back onto the streets.
The legislation will now be considered by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who announced his support after the top state Senate leader agreed to water down the bill and preserve authority for jail and prison officials to cooperate with immigration officers in many cases.
The bill that passed Saturday prohibits law enforcement officials from asking about a person's immigration status or participating in immigration enforcement efforts.
SANCTUARY CITIES: WHAT ARE THEY?
It also prohibits law enforcement officials from being deputized as immigration agents or arresting people on civil immigration warrants.
The legislation follows Trump’s vow to crack down on sanctuary cities. Such policies limit just how much local law enforcement officials cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The debate about sanctuary cities intensified in July 2015 when Katie Steinle, 32, was killed as she strolled along the San Francisco waterfront with her father. Steinle was fatally shot by a man with a criminal record who had slipped into the U.S. multiple times illegally.
On Friday, a federal judge in Chicago has ruled Attorney General Jeff Sessions can't withhold public grant money from so-called sanctuary cities for refusing to follow federal immigration policies.
U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber made the ruling Friday, in which he granted Chicago's request for a temporary "nationwide" injunction.
The ruling means the Justice Department cannot deny grant money requests until Chicago's lawsuit against the agency is concluded. Leinenweber wrote that Chicago has shown a "likelihood of success" in its arguments that Sessions overstepped his authority with the requirements.
The city of Chicago sued the Trump administration in August after it threatened to withhold funds from sanctuary cities, and refused to comply with the Justice Department's demand that it allow immigration agents access to local jails and notify agents when someone in the U.S. is about to be released from custody.
At least seven cities and counties, including Seattle and San Francisco, have refused to cooperate with new federal rules regarding sanctuary cities.

Today's Excuse

California's stupidest politicians in America Cartoons

Californians don't mess with Texas.

Californians don't mess with Texas.

Californians don't mess with Texas.

Californians don't mess with Texas.

Californians don't mess with Texas.

GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher: Violence in Charlottesville Was Masterminded by Dems

Republican U.S. Representative Dana Rohrabacher.

A Republican congressman say he believes the protests in Charlottesville were masterminded by liberals.
California Representative Dana Rohrabacher explained his views in an interview Thursday.
He believes it was an attempt to — quote — “put our president on the spot.”
Rohrabacher believes Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders hired Civil War re-enactors to defend the Confederate statue and pretend to be white nationalists.
The California lawmaker currently faces nine challengers in the 2018 election.
His district in the state traditionally votes Republican, but flipped for Clinton in the last election, making it a focus for Democrats trying to retake the House.

Chelsea Clinton tweets false story claiming Michigan passed bill allowing EMTs to deny gay patients treatment

Just like her mommy :-)

Chelsea Clinton falsely tweeted Friday that the Michigan House of Representatives had voted to allow emergency medical providers choice in treating patients, specifically giving EMTs the option to deny treatment to gay patients.

"Absolutely appalling," the former First Daughter tweeted, "Michigan House Passed Bill Allowing EMTs To Refuse Treatment To Gay People."

The story Clinton cited was from a website for the LGBT New Now Next Awards, and was posted in 2014. When followers pointed out the story was old, Clinton deleted her tweet.
Not only was the story old, but the actual premise was deeply flawed. What the Michigan House actually passed was a garden variety Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which would have exempted religious individuals from laws that infringed on their religious beliefs.
Like most state RFRAs, the Michigan bill contained a clause that allows the state to infringe on religious beliefs when there's a "compelling government interest." The preservation of human life is widely considered to qualify, according to legal experts.

Newt Gingrich: Tax cuts for small business would change GOP trajectory

Time is running out for Republicans if they want to keep their governing majority in 2018.

After 238 days of having control of the White House and both houses of Congress, the GOP has only one major legislative achievement – the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.

This is, in part, because Republicans tried to run before they could walk. Attempting to immediately repeal and replace ObamaCare without an iron-clad strategy for success was a mistake driven by post-election excitement and inexperience. Remember, many current House Republicans have never served when there was a Republican in the White House, and our Senate majority is still too slim to pass transformative conservative legislation.
But while early mistakes are to be expected, it is not too late to change the Republican trajectory.
Before we can fully bring our country out of the liberal, big government, dependency model, Republicans need to develop an economic-growth-focused strategy, build legislative momentum on the floor of Congress, and gain full support from the American people.
The key to achieving these goals – and growing our majority in both the House and Senate next year – is to pass simple, popular, tax cut legislation by this year’s end – preferably by Thanksgiving.
The cornerstone of this legislation must be a serious tax cut for small businesses so they can expand, create more jobs, and revive the middle class.
Small businesses represent 99 percent of our country’s employers, employing nearly half of our country’s private sector workers and creating three out of every four new jobs. However, instead of paying the corporate tax rate, more than 90 percent of these businesses report their income through their owners’ individual income tax filings.
Despite what some on the Left assert, these are not “the rich” or “the top 1 percent” – far from it. Most small businesses are truly small.
U.S. Treasury data and a report by the National Federation of Independent Business show only 2.4 percent of small businesses report incomes in excess of $250,000 a year. In fact, 88 percent of income tax returns by small business owners show adjusted gross income of less than $200,000. Seventy-one percent of such returns show adjusted income that is less than $100,000 a year.
On the high end, the Tax Foundation reports that the top earning small businesses pay marginal federal tax rates as high as 44.6 percent (when you combine the individual rate, the self-employment tax, and the net investment income tax). Adding state income taxes to the mix means these small business owners face tax rates that approach 50 percent.
This must change.
Republican lawmakers should create a graduated system that caps the tax rate on the highest small business incomes at no more than the corporate rate of 38.92 percent, drastically reduce the individual income tax rates, or both.
Relieving small businesses of this enormous tax burden will allow them to buy more equipment, expand their operations, hire more people, raise workers’ wages, and generate massive economic growth.
Despite a slow start for the Republican-led government, Gallup reported on Wednesday that 51 percent of Americans approve of the way President Trump has handled the economy. This is higher than the economic ratings Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton each received during their eighth month in office.  Only George W. Bush in 2001 had a higher economic approval rating, at 72 percent.
It is not surprising that Americans approve of how President Trump has been handling the economy. Since taking office, the stock market has been booming. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 12.25 percent; The Nasdaq Composite Index is up 22.92 percent; and the S&P 500 is up 11.49 percent.
Tax cuts on small business and the middle class will provide an enormous boost to the already improving economy. This will result in even more jobs, higher take home pay, and stronger growth.
When voters head to the polls on November 6, 2018, if they have been experiencing a robust American economy that is dramatically stronger than the slow-growth economy during the previous years of Democratic leadership, then they will elect more Republicans to office.
But Republicans must pass serious tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses by Thanksgiving to make that happen. It’s that simple.
Newt Gingrich is a Fox News contributor. A Republican, he was speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. Follow him on Twitter @NewtGingrich. His latest book is "Understanding Trump."

California Assembly OKs plan for March presidential primary

The only problem Texans have with Californians moving to Texas is that they bring their stupid ideas of government with them. Look what they've done to their state, Don't mess with Texas.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. –  The California Assembly has voted to move the 2020 presidential primary to March to give the nation's most populous state more influence in choosing nominees.

The bill approved Friday will now go to the state Senate where it's expected to pass. Gov. Jerry Brown has not said whether he'll sign it.

The bill would move the presidential primary to the Tuesday after the first Monday in March -- three months earlier than the June contest held in 2016, when Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were already the presumptive nominees.

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

A March primary would likely fall on so-called "Super Tuesday," when roughly a dozen states typically vote following the early primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and several other states.
"Candidates will have to spend more time in California," said Democratic Assemblyman Kevin Mullin of San Francisco.
An earlier primary could give an edge to well-funded candidates.
California is home to 11 media markets, making it expensive to campaign.
It's easier for candidates with limited money to compete alongside financial heavy-hitters in early primary states such as Iowa and New Hampshire. In 2016, for example, John Kasich took second in New Hampshire with limited money, while Jeb Bush, who had more than $100 million, placed fourth.
"The cost of playing in California versus playing in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina is incredibly different," said Mike Biundo, Republican Rick Santorum's 2012 campaign manager who later worked for Kasich and Trump. "A Jeb Bush or a Hillary Clinton, I think, have the advantage if California is earlier."
An earlier primary, especially one held on Super Tuesday, wouldn't mean every candidate will spend more time in the state. In 2016, for example, Texas, Colorado, Massachusetts, Virginia and eight other states voted that day.
And it doesn't ensure the political relevance that California lawmakers crave. The last time California voted early -- in February 2008 -- the state backed Clinton, but Barack Obama went on to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency.
California's last truly relevant presidential primary was perhaps in 1972, when George McGovern defeated Hubert Humphrey on McGovern's way to winning the Democratic nomination.
Michael Schroeder, Republican Ted Cruz's California political director in 2016, said it's too early in the political calendar to predict the impact of an earlier primary in 2020.
"Right now, California is completely irrelevant for picking presidents. We didn't pick Hillary (Clinton) and we didn't pick (President Donald) Trump," he said, referring to 2016 contests that were essentially settled before the state voted.
Changing the date "will make us at least somewhat relevant; it could make us very relevant," he said.
The Republican and Democratic national committees have not yet set rules for the 2020 contests, including the preferred primary calendar and delegates awarded to each state. Depending on rules set, other states could attempt to leapfrog ahead of California, pushing the entire primary season earlier.
California historically awards more delegates than any other state.
California may also become the first state to require presidential candidates to release their tax returns to appear on the state ballot. Lawmakers sent Brown a bill Friday requiring candidates to publicly share five years of returns; he hasn't said if he'll sign it.
President Donald Trump's refusal to release his tax returns during the 2016 sparked similar legislation in dozens of states from New Jersey to Hawaii. The documents reveal income sources, tax exemptions, charitable donations and potential financial conflicts of interest. Until Trump, every major presidential candidates has released his or hers for decades.

North Korea Cartoons

A war with North Korea -- the American people aren't ready

When it comes to North Korea, much digital ink as has been spilled by yours truly on these very pages concerning the dangers and challenges ahead—demonstrated by North Korea’s latest missile launch—when it comes to dealing with and deterring the so-called “hermit kingdom.”

So, let me spare you hours of reading countless articles, op-eds, and tweets.

To be honest, there is only one thing you really need to know: A war with North Korea—meaning a full-blown, all out conflict where nuclear, chemical, biological and large amounts of conventional weapons are used—would be a war like no other.
Such a conflict would be nothing like the First Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, the Second Gulf War or Libya.

One way to achieve such a result would be a North Korean attack on South Korea’s vast civilian nuclear infrastructure. Remember Chernobyl or the nuclear tragedy in Japan a few years ago? Well Pyongyang could weaponize such a disaster with ease.

Oh no, this would be an epic conflict where millions of people on the Korean Peninsula, in Japan and even in the U.S. homeland could lose their lives in the most horrific of ways.
Some might call such talk fear-mongering. But I call it reality—and we need to face up to it. Now.
Imagine large cities like Seoul, Tokyo, and perhaps Los Angeles turned to atomic ash before it’s all over. Imagine the millions of internally and externally displaced refugees whose lives would be destroyed from the sheer carnage. Then, imagine the trillions of dollars needed to put back together the economics pieces, to say nothing of the hopes and dreams of countless millions of people that would be wiped out in a nuclear nightmare that seems almost unthinkable.
Accept this nightmare is all too real.
And thanks to administration after administration—Democrat and Republican—who decided taking on North Korea was just not worth the risk, who thought patience, appeasement or bribery were better choices, we now face a crisis with no easy solution.
While I have already gone into specific detail over just how horrific just a conflict would be thanks to war games I have conducted over the years, such a war would be waged on many different fronts and have many pathways towards a humanitarian disaster that this planet has not seen in decades.
For example, North Korea does not need to launch a full-out nuclear attack on America and its allies to kill scores of people—it just needs to get a little creative.
One way to achieve such a result would be a North Korean attack on South Korea’s vast civilian nuclear infrastructure. Remember Chernobyl or the nuclear tragedy in Japan a few years ago? Well Pyongyang could weaponize such a disaster with ease.
Seoul operates 24 nuclear power plants that could all come under North Korean attack. And while these plants are relatively far from the north, Kim Jong Un does not have to be a military mastermind to conceive of a way to destroy such nuclear reactors, spreading atomic materials across the Korean Peninsula and into Northeast Asia. With many of these facilities lumped together, Pyongyang could fire a salvo of missiles at these plants with devastating impact.
Or, Kim could utilize his special forces who could infiltrate the south from tunnels or who could already be in place, launching terror attacks against such facilities. If North Korea were to destroy just a few reactors, imagine multiple Chernobyl-style nuclear disasters while South Korean and U.S. forces are trying to fight North Korea’s other forces. With millions of people trying to flee the inevitable radioactive fallout, fear might just be Kim Jong Un’s best weapon.
Considering the dangers America and its allies face, the Trump Administration needs to do all it can to contain the North Korea threat. As I have said on a few occasions here, our best strategy is to eliminate any possible funds going into North Korea, driving up the costs for Kim to deploy his military assets and develop new even more dangerous weapons of mass destruction.
Team Trump should begin by asking for a new and much more robust sanctions package at the UN—something that makes Pyongyang finally pay for its risky actions. As an oil embargo is unlikely to pass and could destabilize the regime—something that could be even worse than a war—North Korea should be stopped from exporting its slave labor that it uses to make important hard currency, currency that of course goes into funding its military machine. Such a practice is nothing but revolting, and should have never been allowed in the first place.
President Trump should also announce that any entity that is caught helping the North Koreans evade sanctions, whether it’s Chinese banks or businesses or any private firm or entity from any nation, would be immediately banned from doing any business in the U.S.
In fact, President Trump should embrace a bipartisan bill crafted by Senators Marco Rubio, R-Fla., Cory Gardner, R-Colo., Ed Markey, D-Mass., Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Rob Portman, R-Ohio, called the North Korean Enablers Accountability Act. The bill, if passed, would “ban any entity that does business with North Korea or its enablers from using the United States financial system, and impose U.S. sanctions on all those participating in North Korean labor trafficking abuses.” The president should push for such legislation to be passed without delay, but include a 30-day grace period so such entities could be given a chance to halt their activities. But after that, it’s time these entities suffer for enabling a regime that has as many as 200,000 in prison camps and treats their citizens like prisoners.
But whatever the Trump Administration decides to do—they need to do it now. Letting North Korea slip off our collective national security radar once again for whatever the other challenge of the day is would be a big mistake. We could end up paying for such a mistake with countless innocent American lives—a tragedy we have the power to avoid.
Harry J. Kazianis (@grecianformula) is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, founded by former President Richard M. Nixon. Click here, for more on Mr. Kazianis.

Berkeley Republican student: Lessons from life-threatening moments as a conservative on a liberal campus

As my campus at the University of California, Berkeley (UCB) “braces” itself for an appearance by conservative Ben Shapiro, I am taking a step back to think about all the moments and highlights that I have faced while being a vocal conservative in a liberal atmosphere. Now that I am a senior I am beginning to realize the crucial points that not every average conservative would or should ever face in his or her lifetime. With some of these moments being described as life-threatening, I have experienced it all through the radicalism of UCB.

The first time my life was actually threatened was on the evening of February 1, 2017. I still remember sitting on the top floor of the Martin Luther King Building where Milo Yiannopoulos was supposed to speak, thinking about how my colleagues and I were ever going to get out of there, while outside the protestors were throwing anything they could grab at the windows. Even the cops who were being paid $10,000 in security fees were astounded at the sheer chaos that had formed outside the building in the form of Antifa, BAMN (By Any Means Necessary), student, and other civilian protestors. Even after the cops had created a window for us to escape out of the back of the building, I remember being followed by one shady figure who only stopped following me after I turned around to confront him. Even then, the stranger didn’t leave me alone until he had his fill of yelling at me and calling me a “fascist, white supremist asshole.” I am in fact, Chinese and Cuban if anyone was wondering.

Even then, the stranger didn’t leave me alone until he had his fill of yelling at me and calling me a “fascist, white supremist asshole.” I am in fact, Chinese and Cuban if anyone was wondering.

I also remember how several members after that event advised the club that they were going to keep their heads low and avoid any attention for a little while, fearing for their personal safety. However, the rest of us decided that we were going to trudge on, determined to not give up on our commitment to providing a conservative voice at UCB no matter the costs. That was why I joined the Berkeley College Republicans (BCR) and why I chose to fight alongside the president at that time, Jose Marine Diaz, because I respected his commitment to the club and to its members.
After the moment on Feburary 1, my colleagues and I were consistently harassed and attacked at random times and places. Our signs were either destroyed or stolen, members of our club had been hit by people on bikes, our lists of new members had been stolen and the people on those lists had gotten threatening emails, along with the daily routine of spit, curse words, middle-fingers, and screaming. Nevertheless, we each looked out for one another, having each other’s backs, and making sure we all made it home safe and sound at the end of the day.
However, all good things must come to an end, unfortunately. Nowadays, the insincere attempts of UCB and the new leadership board of BCR to cooperate have made way for more extreme environments of political polarization, pushing regular people to plan controversial rallies on the weekends where they eventually physically clash with one another. BCR members who call themselves the champions of free speech act as though they are the reincarnations of Mario Salvo (a Berkeley Free Speech founding father, you might say), and that they live in constant fear of being arrested for speaking their minds. This is meant to get normal, conservative citizens upset. So upset, that in some cases they lash out against fellow Americans who believe in different political ideas.
This is the problem with groups on the left as well. Antifa and BAMN are so hopelessly set in their ways that they seem to forget that the people they are attacking are fellow American citizens. Instead, they see them as Nazis, bigots, fascists, racists, etc., all because they were told to think that way.
The hoopla that surrounds such events like the hosting of Yiannopoulos or Shapiro must be ignored. It is chaos for the sake of chaos where the only ones who benefit started the chaos, while the people stuck in the chaos destroy each other. The end result is more centrist conservatives like myself being stalked and harassed on our way home. The only way the senseless fighting at these rallies and events are going to truly end is when people start to realize how unimportant and ineffectual the fighting really is, and that the ones telling you that you should get angry and that you should riot are simply acting rash and should be called out for their destructive behaviors, not celebrated.
Jonathan Chow is a second-generation immigrant who grew up in Miami, Florida. His mother was born in Havana, Cuba and his father in Canton, China – both fled to the US as teenagers. He is a student at UC Berkeley majoring in early modern intellectual history.