Omar: ‘When We Win in November, We Will Eliminate Social Security Entitlements for Seniors.

At a rally this week for communist fascist Bernie Sanders, Muslamic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar railed against entitlements for seniors, vowing to cut them and eventually eliminate them completely.

“These old people haven’t earned these entitlements! We need more funding for our infrastructure and education centers and the biggest government expense is social security entitlements for senior citizens. We will have these phased out completely by 2024. We need to look toward the future generations and provide them welfare benefits, not the past of these older generations. Their time is over. They ruined the economy and must be made to pay!”

This plan is right from the communist playbook. Avowed communist Joe Barron said Omar’s plan is “the best proposal we’ve ever seen to further our communist agenda to take control of American ideals.” if this doesn’t worry you, I’m afraid you have been sleeping.

Fortunately for seniors, we have a strong president fighting against these communists. President Donald Trump is against cuts to Social Security, and has even called for an expansion of benefits for seniors. This makes perfect sense because Social Security is not in any way a socialist program. This is why the communists want to get rid of it so badly. They would rather have us fighting amongst ourselves for the few scraps of healthcare and money that the rich communists leave for us.

It is imperative for all seniors and those who oppose communism and socialism that Donald Trump wins in 2020. If he should lose, say goodbye to your monthly Social Security check and your healthcare.

Kamala Harris:’After We Impeach, We Round Up The Trump Supporters

Shocking words were heard at a Democrat fundraiser for criminal justice reform yesterday from presidential hopeful, Kamala Harris. While giving a speech on the effectiveness of zero punishment prosecutions, she veered off script to talk about impeaching our president and describe in detail one “crime” she would not hesitate to punish, to the absolute delight of the liberal crowd.

“…and in conclusion, I am confident that if we stop being mean to these poor souls, they will come around and be productive members of society. There are no bad people, only bad judicial systems. That’s a whole new story that shall be written later.

Of course, there are exceptions. Like Cheeto. He’s just bad and we will impeach! There is so much evidence against this guy, the mind boggles.

New Rumors From Spider Man Universe
Fresh Leaks From ‘The Batman’ Set
Shocking Connects to Marvel’s MCU
Surfing questionable sites? Protect yourself!
And once he’s gone and we have regained our rightful place in the White House, look out if you supported him and endorsed his actions, because we’ll be coming for you next. You will feel the vengeance of a nation. No stone will be left unturned as we seek you out in every corner of this great nation. For it is you who have betrayed us.

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.

You like that s**t? It’s from some crappy, old book. That’s about Trump and his enablers. I use things like that when I run out of things to say.”

It seems that Kamala Harris plans to send those loyal to the president to concentration camps or something similar. We must be vigilant and see to it our rights are not removed by the Democrat menace.

Impeach Nancy Pelosi for Obstruction of Congress

Nancy Pelosi has begun and carried on this factional witch-chase prosecution after she guaranteed that she wouldn’t bolster arraignment except if it got bipartisan help. Prepare to have your mind blown. It didn’t. Not a solitary republican casted a ballot to indict, while a couple of democrats really casted a ballot against it. She is a liar and a convict. She has squandered a huge number of citizen dollars against huge numbers of their wills. This whole indictment process has been a direct result of one explanation: the left’s extreme loathe of President Donald Trump. Since she got what she needed, she is too hesitant to even think about sending the articles to the Senate! That is called Obstruction of Congress. She is keeping the Senate from carrying out their responsibility and carrying on their preliminary, yet you won’t hear anything about that since that is not what the media needs you to hear. “Slanted Nancy” and the remainder of her crew have pulled off this kind of chaos for a really long time, and it’s an ideal opportunity to take care of business. After the hoax arraignment at long last finished, she proceeded with her outrightly oblivious moves, including asking residents to go to Chinatown directly before the Coronavirus disturbed the lives of each American, gave a huge number of citizen dollars to displaced people, and attempts to turn the American individuals against President Trump inside and out. To the individuals who as of now have thank you such a great amount of, and for the individuals who haven’t, if it’s not too much trouble go along with me in marking this request and how about we dispose of Crooked Nancy unequivocally.

f one acknowledges the Democrats’ biased story of what happened on the now-notorious July 25 call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, their “maltreatment of intensity” denunciation article apparently fits inside Alexander Hamilton’s depiction, in Federalist 65, of the Constitution’s “horrific acts and misdeeds” as a “misuse or infringement of some open trust.” But their “deterrent of Congress” charge comes up short.

More awful, it is completely absurd and misconstrues and subverts the whole partition of-powers structure whereupon our protected republic was assembled. To discuss a president “blocking” Congress is to talk about detecting a unicorn. It is an irrational dream. Furthermore, leveling the very claim, in the main occasion, shows a basic protected absence of education.

Our tripartite division of-powers structure was barely formulated to guarantee pleasantry between the authoritative, official and legal branches. Despite what might be expected, the Framers imagined a national government where the three branches existed in a condition of constant, immovable strain with each other.

Specifically, the two political branches — Congress and the official branch — were intended to be envious gatekeepers of their own ambits and effective reaches. Incessant tussling between them was to be the standard. “Desire,” James Madison let us know in Federalist 51, “must be made to neutralize aspiration.”

Likewise, between branch political standoffs are standard. The president can veto enactment. Congress, utilizing its capacity of-the-satchel privilege, can defund presidential needs. Etc. Each branch has different devices available to its to help “check [the] aspiration” of the other.

That is the manner by which our partition of forces should work — in a state far nearer to enmity than to warmth. Which is accurately why House Democrats claiming “hindrance of Congress” as an article of denunciation has neither rhyme nor reason.

In the event that the president can’t help contradicting what Congress is doing, at that point he ought to legitimately hinder or deter its endeavors. Also, the correct route for Congress to push back on a frustrative president isn’t to depend on the extraordinary and particularly against majority rule cure of reprimand however to just defund his administrative needs or maybe power an administration shutdown.

Truth is, it is entirely inappropriate — and counter to the soul exemplified in our protected structure — for Congress to endeavor to denounce the president for blocking its congressional duties. To mope over indicated “block of Congress” is to groan that the president is reasserting the cliché that he is, truth be told, a different part of government and equipped for pushing back on different branches.

By endeavoring to impugn the president since he uses presidential force, House Democrats uncover that it is they themselves who are the ones manhandling power.

Paradoxically, an article of indictment for “obstacle of equity,” particularly if it somehow happened to involve the president straightforwardly resisting a legal request to regard a congressional summon, would convey more haul. Block of equity has truly been refered to in articles of prosecution. Not all that the articulate creation that is “block of Congress.”

In surrendering to such a ridiculous denunciation article, particularly in lieu of their nixing recently coasted articles relating to either pay off or the Mueller report, House Democrats have raised themselves on their own petard. They have at long last spread out their poker hand for the American individuals to see; turns out they were feigning from the start.

Their trick, which is as of now surveying intensely submerged in numerous crucial swing states, will just go further south from here. Speaker Nancy Pelosi will probably have the option to cobble together an exposed lion’s share to indict, yet the president’s inescapable absolution in the Senate will redound to Republicans’ appointive intrigue

next November.

To indict for “block of Congress” is much the same as denouncing James Madison, the dad of the Constitution, himself. What’s more, as much as current Democrats despise sacred guardrails, most likely that is a lot for the American individuals in general.

Josh Hammer is editorial manager everywhere of The Daily Wire and of direction at First Liberty Institute.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi Will Run for Her 17th Term

In 2020 Nancy Pelosi will run for a further term. Unlike several of her Republican retired colleagues, Pelosi will run for re-election with the potential to continue leading a Democratic majority in the House.
Pelosi is the top Democrat in Congress, and will turn 80 on Election Day, 2020.
“Yeah, well, okay, I’m not making any campaign plans right now, but we’re just going to take it one day at a time,” the Democrat initially told C-SPAN ‘s Steve Scully in an interview yesterday but then, she added, “I ‘m planning to file, we ‘re going to have to file by December of this year, so I’m going to file, yes.” All 435 House seats, 34 Of the 100 Senate seats, and the President’s office would be questioned.

Unlike Pelosi, as of early September 2019, 4 Democrats and 15 members of the Republican House announced that they would not seek re-election, as would 1 Democrat and 3 Republicans in the Senate.

Throughout her interview, the speaker expressed her views about why she thinks the 15 members of the Republican House should opt to retire in 2020.

“I think this is an indicator that Republicans know they’re going to serve in the minority in the next Congress and most going with a Democrat in the White House,” Pelosi said. “And now they think it is time to spend more time with their families.”

Republicans need to win 18 House seats to win the majority and gain control.

Pelosi said she was prepared to retire if Hillary Clinton had won after the 2016 election. Yet instead, she wanted to stay on after Donald Trump won to ensure there would be a woman in legislative talks, as the other top three members are all men.

Nancy Pelosi is the House’s 52nd Speaker, having made history when she was first elected to that prestigious post in 2007. Now in her third term as President, when she reclaimed her place in 2019, Pelosi once more made history.

Pelosi is currently representing the 12th Congressional District of California. She is the first and only woman to act as House Speaker. She is the highest-ranking member of that chamber, second in the line of presidential succession.
Scully asked the speaker during the interview about how things have changed since her election into Congress in the late ’80s.