Friday, December 11, 2015

Belief among Republicans that Donald Trump is their next likely presidential candidate continues to rise despite his condemnation by nearly all the other GOP candidates for proposing a temporary ban on immigrants from Muslim countries.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 70% of Likely Republican Voters now believe Trump is likely to be their party’s nominee, with 31% who say it’s Very Likely. This overall figure is up from 68% last week but still falls short of the survey’s all-time high of 74% in late October. Interestingly, however, the number who say a Trump nomination is Very Likely has moved very little.

Only 27% of GOP voters think Trump is unlikely to win the nomination, with 10% who say it’s Not At All Likely.  (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Among voters who support Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslim immigrants, 73% think he is likely to be the nominee, with 39% who say it’s Very Likely.

Overall belief among Republican voters that the billionaire developer is likely to win the nomination had generally run in the mid-50s for most weeks since Rasmussen Reports began the weekly survey in mid-August until the terrorist attacks in Paris in November.  Since then his numbers have been climbing steadily through the 60s.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_change

Donald Trump collects the best enemies – now including a Saudi billionaire prince who funds Islamist advocacy in American universities.


Reportedly the richest of many Saudi Princes, Alwaleed Bin Talal says Trump should quit the 2016 election as he’s “a disgrace not only to the GOP but to all America.”

His demand follows Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslim migration, since the San Bernardino massacre by two Muslims — an immigrant and a son of an immigrant.

The prince is supposedly worth roughly $24.8 billion — not as much as Trump’s other billionaire critics, Mark Zuckerberg, for example — but enough to be comfortable when socializing with Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg or Carlos Slim, the Mexican part-owner of the New York Times.

The prince has already donated tens of millions of dollars to set up pro-Islam advocacy centers at several U.S. universities, including Harvard and Georgetown.


http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2015/12/11/saudi-billionaire-prince-demands-donald-trump-exit-2016-race/



------------------------------------------------------------
If this prince is telling me not to vote for Trump I believe he is on side of Good...

The Saudis are well known helping and accepting refugees from all over the world by the hundred of thousands, well known defending freedom of speech, well known championing human rights, well known giving five star treatment to their female slave staff.



 

They could hire the team who built that tunnel for the el chapo's escape. They knew what they were doing...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh3RHV5G1Fc

A question for muslims who study (their religion): When I hear on TV "islam is never about hurting innocent people" or something similar...

From the perspective of your prophet and your holy book, are non muslims innocent people?

[...]
Clinton Foundation Donors. As has been widely reported, Hillary’s foundation took cash from virtually every corrupt regime on the globe, including Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar, and Oman. Bill was invited by multiple human rights violating regimes to speak for reams of cash. As Schweizer has documented, Hillary and Bill used the Foundation as a cash cow, raking in dough in violation of ethics agreements with the Obama administration.

Felons. Back during the first Clinton administration, Clinton infamously pardoned Marc Rich in the hours before he left office. It was no coincidence that Marc’s wife, Denise, had given $1 million to the Democratic Party and $100,000 to Hillary’s Senate campaign. The Clintons have also used as major fundraisers at least two felons.

China. In the first Clinton go-around, the Clinton administration worked with agents of China to raise cash for Clinton’s re-election. At approximately the same time, the Clinton administration released millions of pages of data on America’s nuclear weapons program. No wonder former Chinese intelligence official General Ji Shengde told illegal fundraiser Johnny Chung, “We like your president. We want to see him re-elected.”

Again, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. It doesn’t count Hillary’s support from Hollywood depravities like Lena Dunham (admitted to sexually abusing her sister, falsely accused a man of rape) or Black Lives Matter radicals or the Communist Party.

[...]


http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2015/12/11/left-targets-trump-finding-nutty-supporters-ok-lets-meet-obama-hillary-supporters/

A hardline shift from an immigration reformer.


I know this is not my usual position. But this is a war. Therefore I have come to believe there should be no immigration or visa waivers until the U.S. adopts a completely new system to stop radical Islamic terrorists from entering the country. A wartime lockdown. And a big change in my thinking.

ISIS and related Islamic terrorists are already here. More are coming. We must stop them.

Until FBI director James Comey gives us the green light, I say seal the borders.

Here’s what we must do: Completely reform the vetting process for immigrants and foreign visitors. Change the screening process. Come up with a new visa-application review process. Stop this nonsense of marriage-visa fraud. And in the meantime, seal the borders. I agree with Jessica Vaughn, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, who argued many of these points in excellent detail on the National Review website on Friday.

Again, why am I taking this hardline position? In the past, I have been an immigration reformer, not a restrictionist. But we are at war. That changes everything.

Let me emphasize that my support for wartime immigration restrictions is not based on religion. I think Donald Trump made a big mistake here. Instead, I agree with this Rupert Murdoch tweet: “Complete refugee pause to fix vetting makes sense.”

Fortunately, the Republican House voted to tighten restrictions on travel to the U.S. by citizens of 38 nations who presently enter our country without a visa. This covers 20 million visitors a year who are allowed to stay 90 days. And of course this system is abused, big time.

But I say seal the borders. People hoping to relocate to the U.S. from Syria, Iraq, and anywhere in the Middle East, and people coming here from France, England, Sweden, and wherever will be upset, at least for a while. There may be some unfairness to this. But I don’t care. Wars breed unfairness, just as they breed collateral damage.

We may set back tourism. We may anger Saudi princes whose kids are in American schools. But so be it. We need a wartime footing if we are going to protect the American homeland.

Of course, President Obama doesn’t get it. He never will. Already we should have led NATO into a declaration of war against ISIS. Already we should have pushed a resolution of war against ISIS through the UN Security Council. Already we should have convened meetings with our Mideast allies to formally declare war against ISIS. Already the U.S. Congress should have issued a formal declaration of war against ISIS.

The president had his last chance last Sunday night. And he didn’t do it. He is not a wartime commander in chief. In fact, he is not a commander in chief.

As I have written before, if the U.S. wants to destroy ISIS, it can destroy ISIS. We won’t end terrorism around the world. But we can destroy ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Prominent generals are telling us that. Prominent national security strategists are telling us that.

So let’s do it.

If there is to be a true wartime effort to destroy ISIS, our leaders must communicate a sense of urgency and energy. Define the clear goal: the destruction of ISIS. Speak to that goal constantly. Take steps at home and abroad to back up that goal. Lead the country. Rally the country.

Republican and Democratic commanders in chief have done this in the past. We must do it again.

I don’t believe a visa or immigration lockdown here in the U.S. will solve the Islamic terrorist threat. Many other steps must be taken. And I am not suggesting this in the name of religious profiling. Instead, I am hardening my position on immigration because we are at war and I fear we may be losing this war.

My shift in thinking comes from a deep desire to strengthen homeland security. Hopefully an immigration freeze will not be in place for very long. But for now I believe we must do it. (By the way, keeping America safe is a prerequisite for growth.)

And let me add, as I have in the past, if the U.S. has the will, the urgency, and the energy to destroy ISIS, then we will destroy ISIS.


http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/12/11/larry-kudlow-ive-changed-this-is-war-seal-the-borders-stop-the-visas/

Here’s the transcript from ABC News:

    Ever since Iranian terrorists imprisoned American Embassy personnel in Tehran early in November, these 50 men and women—their safety, their health, and their future—have been our central concern. We’ve made every effort to obtain their release on honorable, peaceful, and humanitarian terms, but the Iranians have refused to release them or even to improve the inhumane conditions under which these Americans are being held captive.

    The events of the last few days have revealed a new and significant dimension in this matter. The militants controlling the Embassy have stated they are willing to turn the hostages over to the Government of Iran, but the Government has refused to take custody of the American hostages. This lays bare the full responsibility of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Revolutionary Council for the continued illegal and outrageous holding of the innocent hostages. The Iranian Government can no longer escape full responsibility by hiding behind the militants at the Embassy.

    It must be made clear that the failure to release the hostages will involve increasingly heavy costs to Iran and to its interests. I have today ordered the following steps.

    First, the United States of America is breaking diplomatic relations with the Government of Iran. The Secretary of State has informed the Government of Iran that its Embassy and consulates in the United States are to be closed immediately. All Iranian diplomatic and consular officials have been declared persona non grata and must leave this country by midnight tomorrow.

    Second, the Secretary of the Treasury will put into effect official sanctions prohibiting exports from the United States to Iran, in accordance with the sanctions approved by 10 members of the United Nations Security Council on January 13 in the resolution which was vetoed by the Soviet Union. Although shipment of food and medicine were not included in the U.N. Security Council vote, it is expected that exports even of these items to Iran will be minimal or nonexistent.

    Third, the Secretary of Treasury will make a formal inventory of the assets of the Iranian Government, which were frozen by my previous order, and also will make a census or an inventory of the outstanding claims of American citizens and corporations against the Government of Iran. This accounting of claims will aid in designing a program against Iran for the hostages, for the hostage families, and other U.S. claimants. We are now preparing legislation, which will be introduced in the Congress, to facilitate processing and paying of these claims.

    Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

NEW EMAIL shows Pentagon ASKED Hillary to LET THEM send help to Benghazi, proving Leon Panetta LIED!!



[...]
But, if you want to know what forces were likely to be available, all you have to do is listen to, or read, the account from an ex Special Forces member who explained it to Bryan Suits on the “Dark Secret Place,” a popular radio show in Los Angeles.

In the interview from November of 2012, he explained why Panetta’s claim was a LIE, and described the CIF which stands for Commanders In extremis Force, that could have been sent to Benghazi:

    [The CIF is a] heretofore little known American option…You’ve probably never heard that before. It’s not secret per se, but it’s not publicized very much… the CIF, as it’s called is something that is available to every theater commander.

    The CIF are US army special forces soldiers who are specifically dedicated to being prepared at all times for months on end to leave with no notice, with little or no information to move by air or whatever vehicle, to a situation, that they have been determined to be the best immediate solution to. They oftentimes get in the air with absolutely no idea where they’re going or what the mission is. Oftentimes they are briefed in the air.”

    “The entire purpose of this [CIF]… in the extreme, there is no worse case than this. Something is happening right now, and we don’t have 24 hours to get Delta force in there. Something is happening right now, and that’s why these forces, the CIF are pre-positioned… to at the drop of a hat, to go anywhere and do anything.

    It’s time to explain what is angering so many people in the special operations community, because they’re aware of the CIF.

He then explained why Panetta was lying about there not being enough time to send them:

    The bottom line is this – did the president have an option? He did. What Leon Panetta said about “real-time information”, when Leon Panetta was saying that on Thursday, we know that’s a LIE. Because we’ve known for weeks that there was a predator drone orbiting the Benghazi consulate. Have US forces been sent places with less information? YES. I can personally vouch for being sent places where my initial mission was to find out what was going on.

    There’s no such principle that you don’t deploy people without information.

So there it is. Panetta and Hillary LIED to the American public over and over, and the media never pressed them enough to demand answers.

And this information has been available since a MONTH after the attack…


http://therightscoop.com/new-email-shows-pentagon-asked-hillary-to-let-them-send-help-to-benghazi-proving-leon-panetta-lied/

 August 2, 2011- In an interview with Countdown host Keith Olbermann on Tuesday, former vice president and Current TV founder Al Gore said the United States needed an “American spring” like the Arab spring in the Middle East and Northern Africa.

“We need to have an American spring,” he said. “Non-violent change, where people from the grassroots get involved again. Not in the tea party style. There are people who are genuinely upset in the tea party, I understand that, but that movement was funded with seed money from right-wing billionaires, the Koch brothers, and promoted on Fox News and turned into a stalking horse for this right-wing agenda that a lot of people have been trying to push on this country for a long time.”

“This country is in trouble,” Gore added. “Our democracy has been withering on the vine. This has been going on for some time.”

Monday on Countdown, Gore called the U.S. system of government “broken” and “in real trouble.”

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/2011/08/03/18/

--------------------------------------------------------------
The only way for this to happen is to massively import sharia law worshipers in the U.S.
0bama wants this. The global warming popes (al gore and francis) want this...

"Flowing Like Water." Obama's Speech Causes Gun Sales Spike


Barack Obama keeps padding his resume as the greatest gun salesman in history, and is causing gun, magazine,and ammunition sales to spike yet again:

    Gun and ammunition sales have been spiking in Wake County following President Obama’s Sunday prime-time address and the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., last week that left 14 people dead.

    Clay Ausley, the owner of Fuquay Gun & Gold, said shoppers are not just checking items off their Christmas lists, they are stocking up in anticipation that gun control laws will tighten.

    “We even saw an influx of customers coming in purchasing in fear of what (Obama) was going to say,” he said.

    Ausley said he started work at 4 a.m. Monday morning to replenish the stock.

    “With Obama making the statement that he wants to change legislation, get it to where its harder for the public to purchase high-capacity firearms, folks are going to start running to get what they can get ,” he said. “The heaviest hitters have been ammunition and high-capacity magazines. The AR mags, the AK mags – they have been flowing out of here like water.”

The anti-gun rhetoric of leading Democrats, and calls by some radical members of the New York media to gut the Second Amendment and even label National Rifle Association members as terrorists, led to the single greatest one day gun sales spike in American history just days ago.

Americans voted with their wallets, and purchased enough firearms to equip a militia the size of the U.S. Marine Corps with enough guns left over to equip two Army divisions.

But that was before the San Bernardino terrorist attacks on a Christmas party by a radicalized government employee and his jihadi bride, who came into the United States from Pakistan by exploiting weaknesses in the Obama Administration’s immigration schemes, and before the President’s prime-time Sunday night address that all but refused to blame the obvious role of Islamic terrorism in the attack, and instead attacked the right of Americans to own the very guns that brought these terrorists down.

Americans have since returned to their gun stores and are stocking up on more guns, magazines, optics, accouterments, and ammunition, anticipating a fight against enemies both foreign and domestic.


http://bearingarms.com/flowing-like-water-obamas-speech-causes-gun-sales-spike/

Federal authorities have arrested a naturalized U.S. citizen who they say was part of a conspiracy to provide firearm scopes, tactical vests and other supplies to a Syrian rebel group that “frequently fights alongside” al-Qaeda’s affiliate in that country.

Amin al-Baroudi, 50, who also goes by Abu al-Jud, was charged in an indictment unsealed last week with violating U.S. sanctions against Syria and conspiring to defraud the United States. Court records show that Baroudi was formally served with his charges on Thursday at Dulles International Airport. An indictment had been filed against him secretly in federal district court in Alexandria in April.

A burly man with a salt-and-pepper beard, Baroudi said nothing Monday at a brief court appearance at which a federal magistrate judge ordered him detained pending further legal proceedings. His attorney, Anthony Capozzolo, said in court that Baroudi had been to Saudi Arabia and suffered a heart attack there but offered no other details about the case or Baroudi’s background.
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/naturalized-us-citizen-accused-of-arming-rebel-group-in-syria/2015/12/07/0744edd8-9cfb-11e5-a3c5-c77f2cc5a43c_story.html

SCIENTISTS TO TURN RELIGION TO GET CLIMATE ACTION...





 PARIS (AP) -- The cold hard numbers of science haven't spurred the world to curb runaway global warming. So as climate negotiators struggle in Paris, some scientists who appealed to the rational brain are enlisting what many would consider a higher power: the majesty of faith.

It's not God versus science, but followers of God and science together trying to save humanity and the planet, they say.

Physicist John Schellnhuber, founder of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, said he has been coming to these international talks for 11 years and essentially seen negotiators throw up their hands and say "sorry guys we tried our best." And no one protested. But this time, with the power of Pope Francis' encyclical earlier this year calling global warming a moral issue and an even more energized interfaith community, Schellnhuber feels the world's faithful are watching and will hold world leaders accountable.

"They know they will be measured against the encyclical," Schellnhuber, a member of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy of Sciences, said Saturday at a Catholic Church event. Ever the scientist, Schellnhuber said on Saturday he hadn't seen any evidence yet during the first week of negotiations that this will happen, but he has faith it will.

In the first five days of climate negotiations, interfaith activists came, fasted, talked to media, buttonholed leaders and prayed. On Saturday night in a downtown Paris chapel, hundreds of people, many of them prostrated on the ground, sang and prayed for the climate negotiators and mostly for the world.

Faith "is much deeper" than science, said Caroline Bader of the Geneva-based Lutheran World Federation.

And so are their numbers. Bader said interfaith leaders recently handed top United Nations negotiators a petition with 1.8 million signatures begging for meaningful climate action. Such action was also sought by Brother Alois Taize, a Catholic member of the ecumenical monastery, as he was preaching at the song-laden service about how the faithful and the world have to open their eyes to solutions to global warming.

"The environment movement, which has primarily been a secular one, has realized that over the last 30 years or so it's not been that successful in achieving its goals," Joe Ware of Christian Aid wrote in an email from the Paris talks. "Increasingly it has looked to faith groups for help in mobilizing a broader movement of people calling for action on climate change. They are actually natural allies as almost all faiths have a theology of creation care at their heart."

Scripps Institution of Oceanography scientist Veerabhadran Ramanathan, a non-Catholic who advised Pope Francis on climate and is on the pontiff's science academy, says he thinks this new alliance will play a major role in what he hopes will be a historic agreement.

But for Ramanathan, now a member of the Holy See's delegation to the climate talks, it's more than science or history. About four years ago he had a moment that he called "a revelation."

He was presenting a paper on glacier melt to the scientists at the pontifical academy. It was academic and laid out the conclusions in cold hard facts. But then the chancellor to the academy, a bishop, added one sentence to the end: "If we want justice and peace, we must protect the habitat that sustains us."

It was quickly agreed to and Ramanathan started to look at climate science not as an academic issue but an issue of justice, because those who are hurt the most by climate change are the world's poorest 3 billion. He started volunteering, working with the poor and examining his own consumption habits, like how much he drives.

Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, said Pope Francis' encyclical Laudato Si is less about ecology than morality and fairness.

"Climate change is a global problem with serious social, environmental, economic, distributional and political dimensions, and poses one of the greatest challenges for humanity," the bishop said Saturday. "The poor populations are the most severely affected even though they are the least responsible."

Pope Francis, called a rock star by young religious climate activists, was not in Paris. But as he spoke to faithful in St. Peter's Square Sunday he appealed to those deciding on climate change measures to show courage by also fighting poverty, saying "the two choices go together."

He asked for prayers so that those making decisions on climate measures receive "the courage to always use as their criterion of choice the greater good of the human family."

Marcia McNutt, a former U.S. Geological Survey director and Science magazine editor who is about to become the head of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, can't say enough about the importance of the pope's message.

"You can argue the science until cows come home, but that just appeals to people's intellect," McNutt said. "The pope's argument appeals to someone's heart. Whenever you appeal to someone's heart that's a much more powerful message."

In some ways, the enlisting of the faith movement is a sign of scientists' desperation, but it's also a realization of the need for a moral revolution on climate, said Ramanathan, who actually briefed the pope on climate in a parking lot.

The world will not act enough on climate change, Ramanathan said, "until we teach this in every church, every mosque, every synagogue, every temple."




http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_CLIMATE_COUNTDOWN_GOD_FACTOR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-12-06-15-15-25

President Obama: No ‘specific and credible’ terrorism threats ahead of Thanksgiving holiday


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-no-specific-credible-threats-thanksgiving-article-1.2446532


------------------------------------------------
I guess he was technically right... The "workplace violence" in San Bernardino happened after Thanksgivings, by Amish extremists...

Woman asks Hillary: If all rape accusers have the right to be believed, should we believe the women who say your husband raped them?


She’s not asking this question idly. Hillary, who’s gearing up for a sub-moronic identity-politics campaign, actually did say recently that rape accusers have “the right to be believed” even though her own husband has been accused by multiple women of sexual assault. How does she resolve that dilemma?

I thought she’d never be asked, for the simple reason that no one in the media would dare risk access to a future Clinton administration by putting her on the spot about it. But sometimes, my friends, the questions don’t come from the media. Sometimes a candidate has to face the voters.

And that’s when magical things can happen.

Here’s the clip, via the Free Beacon. Obviously there’s no good answer to this question, which is why so many righties perked up when she first said something about the right to be believed. She set a trap for herself. If she stands by it now, it means she sides with Juanita Broaddrick over Bill. If she walks it back, which is what she has no choice but to do — accusers should be believed unless the evidence says otherwise, she clarifies — then it undermines the whole point of the pander. The “right to be believed” bit was her way of trying to leverage the feminist frenzy over “rape culture”; she was signaling to young women, whose votes she desperately needs, that she shares the progressive belief that rape defendants are guilty until proven innocent. Now that she’s on the spot, she retreats to the banal point that we should go where the evidence leads us. In practice, the “right to be believed” amounts to nothing more than the idea that the police should investigate when someone claims they’re the victim of a horrendous violent crime. All of us who took first-grade civics can agree.

Exit question: If accusers have a right to be taken seriously, if not quite “believed,” does that mean she took Broaddrick seriously when she first accused Bill of assault? That’s a follow-up question for the next townhall attendee who gets to quiz her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wr9PFK52wg



http://hotair.com/archives/2015/12/03/woman-asks-hillary-if-all-rape-accusers-have-the-right-to-be-believed-should-we-believe-the-women-who-say-your-husband-raped-them/

-------------------------------------------------
Narcissistic Sociopath Disorder Patterns...

Cool lyrics. Now you need a cool beat to educate the masses...



 

Liberal progressive state killing their own children: natural selection?

You don't like it? 49 other choices.

The Venezuelan government could always fall back on their amazing Miss Universe output for revenue...