Month: August 2017

Lankford’s Proposed Senate Rule Change Could End Gridlock on Trump’s Judicial Picks

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) has a proposal to change to how the Senate confirms presidential nominees for federal judgeships and the executive branch. It would break the gridlock that has sparked a nationwide campaign to staff the bench and federal government. A record number of President Donald Trump’s nominations to fill top positions in the federal government—including key positions such as those in the State Department, Defense Department, Treasury Department, and Justice Department—are being slow-walked in the U.S. Senate, preventing the three million employees of the federal government from carrying out vital parts of the president’s agenda. Article II of the Constitution requires that all federal judges and high-ranking administration officials are nominated by the president, and then must be confirmed by the Senate. By mid-July in each of the four previous administrations (Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama), the average number of Senate-confirmed appointments was 190. For President Trump, that number was 50. “But the minority can force the full 30 hours of debate time provided within the rules, which they have repeatedly demanded,” Lankford explains in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. “At the current rate, it will take 11 years to fill the executive branch.” When cloture is invoked to stop a filibuster, Senate rules technically allow another 30 hours of debate before a final vote. Senators typically give back most of that time because the battle is lost. Instead of following that convention, Senate Democrats are using all 30 hours before allowing the Senate to vote and move on to the next item of business. Many commentators thought that this form of obstruction would end with the “nuclear option.” Democrats in 2013 reinterpreted the Senate’s filibuster rule (Rule XXII) not to apply to any presidential nominations to the executive or judicial branches, with the Supreme Court being the sole exception. Senate Republicans abolished that extension earlier this year, resulting in the confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch. The situation is just as bad in the federal judiciary, where only a handful of 140 judicial vacancies have been filled with President Trump’s nominees. This has led to the Judicial Crisis Network launching a nationwide campaign with grassroots groups using the handle #GridlockReform, pushing senators to bring nominees to the Senate floor for an up or down vote. Lankford cites Judge David Nye as an example of this obstruction. President Barack Obama originally nominated Nye for a federal judgeship. Nye did not make it through the confirmation process before Obama left office, so President Trump re-nominated him as a gesture of bipartisanship to Senate Democrats. Every Senate Democrat finally joined all the Republicans to confirm Nye by a unanimous vote of 100-0, but only after consuming all 30 hours of debate. The solution? According to Lankford, “First, we should reduce floor debate time for executive nominees from 30 hours to eight or less. The Senate could debate and vote on five or more nominees a week, instead of just one or two.” Lankford notes that Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) agreed to this arrangement when he was majority leader. “It worked then, and it would work now,” he declares. “Second, we should lower the vote threshold on the ‘motion to proceed,’ which begins legislative debate and amendment consideration, from 60 votes to 51,” Lankford continued, explaining that almost every bill in the Senate requires two 60-vote approvals, one to begin debate and one to end it. Requiring only 51 votes to start debate would still protect minority-party rights by requiring 60 to move to an up-or-down vote, but move the process along. Such a change would also ensure that senators could no longer duck a tough issue by not letting it come up for debate. Coupled with Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley’s (R-IA) discretion to end the abuse of “blue slips” to filibuster nominees, such a change could lead to swift votes on judicial nominees, with the likely result that every one of President Trump’s picks would be confirmed. No word yet on whether Senate Republicans will use their votes as the majority to enact these changes.

These ideas are eminently reasonable.  And, the GOP won’t retain control of the Senate forever.   So, now is the time to enact such common sense changes to their cumbersome rules which prevent anything from getting done.  Kudos to Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) for starting this conversation.  Hopefully, when the Senate returns from it’s recess, they’ll make these changes their first order of business….so that they can get down to business and start approving these qualified Trump nominees.

Nancy Pelosi’s father helped dedicate Confederate monument

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has ramped up calls to remove “reprehensible” Confederate statues from the halls of Congress — but left unsaid in her public denunciations is that her father helped dedicate such a statue decades ago while mayor of Baltimore. It was May 2, 1948, when, according to a Baltimore Sun article from that day, “3,000” looked on as then-Governor William Preston Lane Jr. and Pelosi’s father, the late Thomas D’Alesandro Jr., spoke at the dedication of a monument to honor Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. The article said Lane delivered a speech, and Mayor D’Alesandro “accepted” the memorial. “Today, with our nation beset by subversive groups and propaganda which seeks to destroy our national unity, we can look for inspiration to the lives of Lee and Jackson to remind us to be resolute and determined in preserving our sacred institutions,” D’Alesandro said in his dedication. “We must remain steadfast in our determination to preserve freedom, not only for ourselves, but for the other liberty-loving nations who are striving to preserve their national unity as free nations.” He added: “In these days of uncertainty and turmoil, Americans must emulate Jackson’s example and stand like a stone wall against aggression in any form that would seek to destroy the liberty of the world.” With President Trump cautioning that the drive to purge Confederate statues could represent a slippery slope, the White House has flagged Pelosi’s family history as she fuels the statue opposition. Counselor Kellyanne Conway tweeted an earlier article from RedAlertPolitics noting Pelosi’s father’s role. “That’s rich,” she wrote. Last week, more than a half century after Pelosi’s father honored the Lee-Jackson monument, it was removed from its post along with three other Confederate statues in Baltimore, according to the Baltimore Sun. The removal came as numerous monuments were removed, vandalized or otherwise being debated in the wake of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., where a counter-protester was killed. Pelosi’s office did not respond to Fox News’ request for comment on her father’s involvement with one of the Baltimore monuments. But Pelosi, D-Calif., has been outspoken in fueling the backlash toward symbols of the Confederacy. Last week, she urged House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to remove the 10 Confederate statues memorialized on Capitol Hill “immediately” if “Republicans are serious about rejecting white supremacy.” When asked why Pelosi, after serving as House speaker for years, never pushed to remove the 10 figures, her office noted that she directed the relocation of the Robert E. Lee statue from Statuary Hall to the basement of the Capitol, known as the crypt. “As Speaker, we relocated Robert E. Lee out of a place of honor in National Statuary Hall – a place now occupied by the statue of Rosa Parks,” Pelosi said last week.

Point taken..   BUT..  The reporter should have pressed a little harder and asked why there were 10 figures in Statuary Hall…and not only was she speaker of the House.  But, she and her party controlled BOTH chambers of Congress AND Obama was in the White House.  Obama and his agenda were unopposed his first two years in office as President.  So, they could EASILY have taken care of all of that then…but they didn’t.  So, her current self-righteous, self-serving, and current political opportunistic push to do so now is entirely hypocritical and political pandering at it’s worst.  But, that’s typical for ol’ Nancy. And, one thing we love to do here at The Daily Buzz is expose the brazen hypocrisy of politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the liberal agenda of what we call the dominantly liberal mainstream media (i.e. ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR/PBS, CNN, the Washington Post, the NY Times, etc…and of course the absolute worst…MSNBC).  Let’s see if some enterprising reporter is able to confront that old windbag on camera with that line of questioning and THEN ask her about her father’s role mentioned in the article above.  That would be some fun tv worth watching!

Coulter: Peace Through Border Control

I’m dying to hear about the “3-D chess” Trump is playing with his announcement on Monday that he’s breaking his promise on Afghanistan and throwing more forces into that utterly pointless war. Will he be sending the transgender troops? But then the Emperor God gave a magnificent speech in Arizona Tuesday night. Curiously, when he talks to voters — as opposed to his Cabinet and White House staff — there’s very little about sending more U.S. troops to die in the human meat-grinder of Afghanistan. Trump got thunderous applause from his 30,000-person focus group for the wall, stepped-up deportations and Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio — recently convicted of contempt for “racially profiling” Hispanics. But you could hear a pin drop when he mentioned Afghanistan, Nikki Haley and Gen. John Kelly. (At least he had the good sense not to bring up Goldman Sachs’ Gary Cohn again.) There were long faces all over cable news after Trump’s speech, which surely triggers the reward center in his brain, like giving a mouse cheese. What was so refreshingly different about the Trump campaign was that the candidate didn’t use any of the idiotic, consultant-written bromides offered by every other GOP presidential candidate for at least the past 30 years. Instead, he looked around the country, saw what the problems were and said he’d fix them. Here are the highlights from every speech by any Non-Trump candidate for the past several decades: “I listened to the American people.” “People are frustrated.” “This election is about the future!” It may not seem like it at first, but another one of those head-scratching cliches is: “Peace through strength.” During the campaign, this was a staple of knuckleheads like Jeb!, but I’m sorry to report that our hero used it on the Arizona crowd, referring to his decision to send more troops to die in Afghanistan for no earthly purpose. The Swamp is sticky. When Reagan said, “peace through strength,” it meant something. But 30 years after Reagan won the Cold War, anyone who uses this expression conveys only that he has no understanding of the current war. During the Cold War, America was facing an aggressively imperialistic, nuclear-armed Soviet Union. By contrast, the main threat to Americans’ safety today comes not from a country, but from millions of individual savages spread throughout the globe. Americans aren’t being slaughtered by invading Soviet troops, “Red Dawn”-style, but by Islamic terrorists on tourist visas flying commercial airplanes into our skyscrapers, and by first- and second-generation Muslim immigrants setting off bombs and shooting people at the Boston Marathon, American military bases, community centers, and gay nightclubs. Americans are raped, addicted, and murdered not by the Red Army, but by millions of illegal aliens waltzing across our wide-open border. Our freedoms are being taken away not by a foreign power, but by our own government — in order to protect us from terrorists, international crime rings, and Mexican drug cartels operating in our own country. Defeating a non-country adversary may seem an impossible task, but the savages are perfectly containable. Today’s enemy has no capacity to harm a hair on a single American’s head — as long as we don’t let them come here. We don’t need a military victory. We need an immigration moratorium. The Non-Trump Republicans promised us only more immigration and more wars. PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH! How does a military buildup help Kate Steinle? How about the 3,000 Americans killed on 9/11? Did Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan protect soldiers at Fort Hood or nightclubbers in Orlando? Did it do anything for Grant Ronnebeck, who was fatally shot by an illegal alien robbing a convenience store in Mesa, Arizona, in 2015? More than 1,600 American troops died in Afghanistan under Obama, and not one American is safer. All we need to do to win the current war is: Keep our nuclear weapons in working order and stop allowing enemy forces into our country. If we must have troops constantly deployed somewhere, the only place they’d actually be useful is 10 feet into Mexico. (Let a court try to stop that!) During the campaign, Little Marco dismissed as unrealistic Trump’s proposed temporary suspension of Muslim immigration to our country — including the more than 2 million Muslims we’ve taken in just since 9/11. Instead, Rubio proposed we do something achievable, like remake the entire Middle East with wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan. Trump, and only Trump, promised to put our country first and protect our interests when it came to immigration and foreign wars. He didn’t care that political correctness dictated putting America’s interests dead last. But since becoming president, instead of draining the swamp, the swamp seems to have drained Trump. His agenda has been drowned out by the agenda of Washington’s Uni-Party. That’s why all we ever hear about is tax cuts and war (unless Trump is speaking to one of his 30,000-person focus groups). Rather than actually being like Reagan and winning the war we’re in, Trump has decided to continue Obama’s unconstitutional “executive amnesty” — opposition to which gave the GOP stunning victories in 2014 and 2016. This week, he grabbed the hot poker of Afghanistan, allowing ecstatic Democrats to scratch that disaster off Obama’s Greatest Hits list. Now, it’s Trump’s war. I don’t know why Trump would surround himself with people who oppose his agenda, but on Tuesday night he heard again from the people who see him as our country’s last hope. He should listen to them.

Exactly!!  Well said, Ann.  Conservative firebrand Ann Coulter is responsible for that op/ed.  Ann is exactly right that Pres. Trump needs to focus on those items that got him elected; halting illegal immigration, building a wall along our southern border, repealing & replacing Obamacare, etc.  To be fair, Trump HAS made a LOT of progress.  But, his agenda has been stalled in Congress.  As for Afghanistan (a subject near and dear to my heart, since I spent some time there)…  We, as a nation, need to make a decision about it one way or the other..  Either send in 100,000 troops and go through that all over again…OR  just put a few Special Ops outposts there from which to launch smaller special operations missions…and bring the majority of the troops at Bagram Air Base home.

Gregg Jarrett: Trump vs. crooks, liars and the liberal media

President Trump’s speech in Phoenix brought out the usual cast of misfits and miscreants. And no, I’m not just referring to the “Antifa” anarchists who were, for the most part, denied their typical practice of wielding clubs, hurling feces, throwing rocks, setting vehicles ablaze and destroying buildings. I’m talking about chronic Trump critics like James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence. Spouting off on CNN immediately after the speech, Clapper said he questioned the president’s “fitness to be in this office.” Clapper seems to be making a career out of trashing Trump. He’s like a guy who can’t resist cramming a cannoli in his mouth every time he passes a pastry shop. Whenever Trump speaks, Clapper starts yapping. It is no coincidence that his mouth, and the lie that came out of it back in 2013, is what should have landed him behind bars. While testifying before Congress, Clapper was asked, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” The DNI responded, “No.” It was a breathtaking lie, of course. Soon thereafter, the story broke that the National Security Agency had, indeed, been doing exactly what Clapper denied under oath. When confronted with his lie, he told a reporter, “I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or at least untruthful manner by saying ‘no.’” Huh? Later, Clapper apologized for his “clearly erroneous” answer, but explained he had simply forgotten all about the massive government operation to secretly collect metadata on hundreds of millions of U.S. citizens. That’s like saying Christmas slipped his mind. Lying to Congress is a felony. Yet Clapper managed to avoid prosecution for criminal perjury by hiding behind President Obama. Obama’s pal, Attorney General Eric Holder, made sure the case was tossed in a broom closet somewhere, never to be seen again. So, when Clapper decries the “complete intellectual, moral or ethical void” of President Trump, the irony is lost on no one. Clapper became the poster child for ethical decay when he served as the nation’s chief intelligence officer. At roughly the same time Clapper was spewing his usual drivel, Hillary Clinton was attempting to sideswipe Trump with her own revisionist rubbish. Clinton, who mangled her presidential aspirations with acts of self-immolation unmatched in modern political history, is at it again. Old habits are hard to break. You’ll recall that she famously blamed her husband’s infidelity with a young intern on a “vast right-wing conspiracy” two decades ago. She has been playing the narcissistic “blame game” ever since. Her latest incantation is really quite laughable. In a breathless recitation of excerpts from her new book “What Happened,” Clinton bemoans that the mere sight of Donald Trump during the campaign made her skin crawl. It is the tripe of dime novels, but no less hypocritical. Wouldn’t Hillary want to crawl out of her own skin because of her self-destruction? Wouldn’t she blame herself for the utterly unnecessary, but fatal, scandal of her own making? When she looks in the mirror, does she see a crook staring back? How could she not? Like Clapper’s lies, Clinton managed to escape prosecution and prison for what appears to be a clear violation of the Espionage Act in the mishandling of classified documents. Once again, Obama’s Justice Department provided cover, with a significant assist from then-FBI Director James Comey. Perhaps Clinton’s most revealing line in her book is when she recounts her “lifetime of dealing with difficult men trying to throw me off.” While it is intended to be a swipe at Trump, it sounds more like an angry confession of living a tortured life in the company of Bill Clinton. There will be more self-serving excerpts to come. Lucky us. But Hillary Clinton and James Clapper are like pesky flies compared to the mainstream media. Driven by its pronounced liberal bias, they immediately condemned Trump for denouncing them at the rally. The president knows he can provoke them into revealing their prejudices. And when he did so during the speech, they reacted like Pavlov’s dogs. The gnashing of teeth at CNN was predictable, if not comical. Calling the president “unhinged” and “wounded,” anchor Don Lemon declared that Trump “came out on stage and lied directly to the American people. His speech was without thought, without reason, devoid of facts, devoid of wisdom.” Lemon blathered on and on, but you get the picture. He seemed to light up like a pinball machine when his guest, Clapper, launched into his “unfit for office” shtick. Is it any wonder that the convention hall crowd began chanting, “CNN sucks?” The pompous media has never understood why much of America does not embrace their liberal values. Most members of the press are too insular and dogmatic to ever conceive of any intelligent beliefs beyond their own. Which is why journalists never imagined that Trump would be elected president. When it happened, they lapsed into something akin to “septic shock” from which they have yet to recover. Likely, they never will. They will persist in predicting Trump’s imminent demise and assert their own intellectual and moral superiority. In so doing, they are sowing the seeds of their own destruction. Not as a professional endeavor. There will always be journalists. But America will no longer hold them in respectable regard.

I would venture to guess they don’t already, Gregg.  Former attorney, and current Fox News anchor, Gregg Jarrett is responsible for that outstanding op/ed.   🙂

State Department issues travel warning for Mexico

The U.S. Department of State issued a travel warning Tuesday for Americans traveling to certain parts of Mexico. The advisory cautions citizens to avoid traveling to certain locations due to increased criminal activity. Areas such as Baja California Sur, where the popular tourist destination Cabo San Lucas is, and Quintana Roo, where Cancun and Riviera Maya are located, have seen a spike in homicide rates this year. “U.S. citizens have been the victims of violent crimes, including homicide, kidnapping, carjacking, and robbery in various Mexican states,” the travel advisory states. The advisory notes that resort areas and tourist destinations in the country don’t typically have the same level of drug-related violence and crime seen in other parts of the country. The notice adds that “gun battles between rival criminal organizations or with Mexican authorities have taken place on streets and in public places during broad daylight,” but that there’s no evidence to show criminal groups in Mexico have targeted Americans based on their nationality. U.S. citizens traveling may come across government checkpoints, operated by military personnel or law enforcement officials, but in some areas, criminal organizations have created their own “unauthorized checkpoints” and have killed or abducted those who haven’t stopped at them. The warning states that Americans “should cooperate at all checkpoints.” The advisory follows a March warning that cautioned U.S. college students from traveling to Mexico during spring break.

Given these developments, that sounds smart..

Poll: 85 Percent Say Freedom of Speech More Important Than Not Offending Others

An overwhelming 85 percent of Americans say freedom of speech is “more important than making sure no one is offended by what others say,” according to a poll published by Rasmussen Reports on Wednesday. A new poll released by Rasmussen Reports on Wednesday revealed that over 85 percent of American adults believe that the right to free speech is “more important than making sure no one is offended by what others say.” A mere eight percent said they believe that guarding against personal offense is more important than protecting free speech. 73 percent also agreed with the famous line often attributed to Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it.” Another 10 percent disagreed with that statement, and 17 percent said they are undecided. The poll reveals that there is bipartisan agreement with regards to freedom of speech. Despite overwhelming support for speech rights, Democrats are slightly less supportive as a group of protecting speech for those they disagree with than are Republicans. Additionally, 47 percent of respondents said they believe that most college administrators and professors are more interested in getting students to toe a specific political line rather than to participate in a free exchange of ideas.

Gee..  Imagine that!

NASA’s Voyager probes, 40 years out, are brought near in ‘the farthest’

Forty years ago, NASA launched twin robotic explorers on a mission to travel farther out than any spacecraft had gone before, and today, they continue to be our most distant emissaries. The story of those probes, and of the people behind them, is the focus of the aptly-titled documentary, “The Farthest,” airing Wednesday (Aug. 23) on PBS. The Voyager probes, referred to by numerical designators “1” and “2,” revealed the outer planets of our solar system and then continued to sail beyond. Voyager 2, which was the first to launch on Aug. 20, 1977, visited Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. Voyager 1 departed Earth on Sep. 5, 1977, overtook its counterpart, and was the first to arrive at Jupiter and Saturn. Three and a half decades later, on Aug. 25, 2012, Voyager 1 became the first craft to cross into interstellar space. It is the farthest of humanity’s creations, about 13 billion miles (21 billion km) from the sun, and it is still sending data. “There are two parts to Voyager,” said John Casani, who in 1977 was the project manager for Voyager at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. “There’s the part of getting the thing designed, tested and put together so it is working right, getting it to the launch pad and getting it launched. The really interesting part happens after that.” “That is where the clock that is counting down to 40 years starts, at liftoff,” said Casani, in an interview preceding an early screening of “The Farthest” at Space Center Houston in Texas on Aug. 1. “Voyager really is an amazing mission. Not only because it lasted so long, but it really, for the first time, gave anybody a picture of what the solar system out beyond Mars was like. We had no idea,” he said. Casani is featured in “The Farthest,” along with more than 20 other engineers, scientists and citizens who contributed to the Voyager mission 40 years ago. “Space films can be challenging because they can be very impersonal. This one sort of goes to the other extreme,” described Jared Lipworth, consulting producer with HHMI Tangled Bank Studios, which collaborated with the Ireland-based production company Crossing The Line to present the film. “There are just so many of the people who were involved who have stories to tell,” he said. “So, it really became as much about the people as it did about the mission.” That includes Casani and Frank Locatell, an engineer who led the design and development of the Voyager propulsion module and, for the year prior to launch, was responsible for the flight readiness of all the mechanical hardware on both probes. “I think Voyager represents an evolutionary step in human development. I don’t think that’s a stretch [to say],” Locatell told collectSPACE. “Voyager is a story about science, and about the application of science and what that application could mean on our development as human beings.” “When Voyager was launched, I don’t think we had any idea about some of the really strange worlds we detected out there,” said Don Gurnett, the principal scientist for the plasma wave instrument that provided the evidence that Voyager 1 had left the solar system in 2012. “I remember after going by Jupiter and Saturn, being invited to science fiction conferences to talk about the worlds we discovered out there.” “It wasn’t just the planets — Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune — but a whole collection of moons. I lost count, but there are some 30 or so moons,” Gurnett said. In addition to revealing the details of Jupiter’s and Saturn’s known satellites, Voyager 1 and 2 found three new moons at Jupiter and four at Saturn. Voyager 2 found 11 unknown moons at Uranus and six at Neptune.

And that’s just the beginning!  To read the rest of this article, click on the text above.

Gore documentary called ‘bad science’ as sales plummet

It was a tough weekend for Al Gore. Not only did “An Inconvenient Sequel” continue its nosedive at the box office, but the climate change documentary also drew a scathing rebuttal from a leading climate scientist. Climatologist Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, released Saturday an 81-page e-book on Amazon titled “An Inconvenient Deception: How Al Gore Distorts Climate Science and Energy Policy.” “After viewing Gore’s most recent movie, ‘An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power,’ and after reading the book version of the movie, I was more than a little astounded,” Mr. Spencer said on his blog, Global Warming. “The new movie and book are chock-full of bad science, bad policy, and factual errors.” Mr. Spencer said the sequel, like its 2006 predecessor “An Inconvenient Truth,” implies repeatedly that naturally occurring weather episodes are the result of human-caused global warming — for example, a shot in which the former vice president stands ankle-deep in a flooded Miami street. “That flooding is mostly a combination of (1) natural sea level rise (I show there has been no acceleration of sea level rise beyond what was already happening since the 1800s), and (2) satellite-measured sinking of the reclaimed swamps that have been built upon for over 100 years in Miami Beach,” said Mr. Spencer. Mr. Spencer isn’t new to the warming debate — he’s a well-known climate skeptic — but there’s no disputing his credentials: He’s an award-winning former NASA senior scientist for climate studies who continues to work with NASA on the U.S. Science Team. The author of three previously published books on climate change, Mr. Spencer said he wrote the point-by-point rebuttal in two weeks after the Aug. 4 wide release of “An Inconvenient Sequel,” which took another plunge last weekend at the box office. The movie earned $331,007, a 59 percent drop from the previous weekend’s gross of $816,150, for a total to date of $3 million. Meanwhile, the per-screen gross plummeted from $1,468 to $644, according to Box Office Mojo.

Al Gore is a documented fraud.  So, kudos to Mr. Spencer (and actual credible climate scientist) for writing his actual scientific rebuttal, and offering it for sale on  Excellent!

High school students say they were harassed at historically black Howard University for wearing pro-Trump gear

A Pennsylvania high school student who visited the nation’s capital last week says she was harassed for wearing “Make America Great Again” attire that showed her support for President Trump. Allie Vandee, a student from Union City, Pennsylvania, was in Washington, D.C. on Saturday when she and some high schoolers traveling with her decided to visit Howard University, a historically black college, for lunch. Vandee took to Twitter to describe her visit to HU. She said upon entering the cafeteria, a man shouted an expletive directed at her. The group of students hadn’t made it fully inside the cafeteria when someone “made physical contact” with her friend, Sarah Applequist, by grabbing her “MAGA” hat and removing it from her head. Vandee said one of her chaperones retrieved the hat, only for them to be “harassed continuously” by those in the cafeteria. She said that “students took videos and pictures of us saying WE were being ‘disrespectful,’ and that ‘us being Caucasian, we should have known better.’”

Typical liberal intolerance and hypocrisy on display here..  The president of Howard University should apologize to this poor girl for the way she was treated and then punish those who were caught on camera/video harassing her.

Milwaukee: Black male teen arrested for repeatedly punching teacher

One week into the school year, a student has been arrested for attacking a teacher in the middle of class. Cell phone video captured the exact moments a 16-year-old student went from a confrontation with a teacher to knocking him down and punching him over and over. “That scares me. Oh my god, that really scares me,” said Niki Gerth, who has a freshman daughter at South Division High School. Niki and Jerry Gerth did not know this fight happened at their daughter’s school earlier today until TODAY’S TMJ4 showed them the video. “It makes me mad,” said Jerry Gerth. A student from South Divison says the man is well known among kids. “He is kind of like helper,” said Gustavo Miramontes, 17. “He mostly just like if a kid has a question he will help them out if they are struggling or something.” Milwaukee police said the student was arrested at school. Milwaukee Public Schools would not comment further on what happened citing because it is a police matter. However, parents say this should not have happened on school grounds to a teacher. “Somebody didn’t teach your child enough respect to say don’t swing at a teacher. You don’t swing at an adult. You don’t disrespect adults,” Jerry said. Police say the case against the teen should be presented to the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office soon for possible charges of battery to a school district official.

Wow..  To see a video of this stomach-turning beat down of a high school teacher by this punk, click on the text above.  This thug loser is living the stereotype, and hopefully WILL be prosecuted for battery, and expelled.  What a nauseating piece of garbage!  I’m sure his parents are proud.  The local media in Milwaukee should show up on their doorstep and shame them publicly.  Clearly they didn’t raise a good kid.  And the teacher should sue those parents.