Uncategorized

Angel Mom Slams Kathy Griffin for ‘Propaganda’ Tweet: ‘She Has No Soul. She Has No Heart’

A mother whose son was killed by an illegal immigrant blasted Kathy Griffin after the comedian said President Trump is using angel parents “for propaganda.” Trump on Friday honored families in Washington who have had loved killed by illegal immigrants. Griffin tweeted that while she is sorry for the parents’ loss, the president is using them “for propaganda.” Sabine Durden, a legal immigrant from Germany, said her son Dominic was killed in 2012 when a truck slammed into his motorcycle. The truck’s driver, Juan Zacarias Tzun, was an illegal immigrant with two felonies and two DUIs, Durden has said. “[Griffin] needs to go [to] a stage somewhere in little back alley and entertain the two people that are still following her,” Durden said on “The Ingraham Angle.” “She just has no grounds. She has no soul. She has no heart. And I pray to God she never knows this feeling.” Durden added that her son’s killer was jailed for just 35 days. In response to Trump’s meeting with angel parents, CNN commentator Paul Begala accused the president of “politicizing” the pain that families are enduring. “It is monstrous to take these folks’ pain and then try to use it to divide America,” he said. Michelle Root, whose daughter was killed by an illegal immigrant, had no words for Begala’s remarks and said that the voices of angel parents need to be heard. “We need to hear the other side of it,” she said.

For someone like Paul Begala to suggest that the President is “politicizing” the situation is rich.  Paul was a political hack for the Bill Clinton administration, and a Democrat pollster.  What a hypocrite!  But, that’s the kind of disingenuous “fake news” bs you can rely on over at CNN.  Typical..  As for Kathy..  She continues to show herself to be totally clueless and out of touch.  Tool..

Supreme Court Rules that SEC Judges are Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 7-2 that administrative law judges (ALJs) at federal agencies are “officers of the United States” who must be appointed by the president or department heads, holding that the ALJs at the Securities and Exchange Commission violate the Constitution’s Appointments Clause because those ALJs are appointed by staff employees. “The Appointments Clause of the Constitution lays out the permissible methods of appointing “Officers of the United States,” a class of government officials distinct from mere employees,” Justice Elena Kagan began for the Court. “This case requires us to decide whether administrative law judges (ALJs) of the Securities and Exchange Commission … qualify as such ‘Officers.’” The Appointments Clause of Article II says that top officers of the government must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, and that Congress can choose by law whether lower-ranking officers are appointed by the president without the Senate, by department heads, or by the courts. “The SEC has statutory authority to enforce the nation’s securities laws. One way it can do so is by instituting an administrative proceeding against an alleged wrongdoer” Kagan continued. “By law, the Commission may itself preside over such a proceeding. But the Commission also may, and typically does, delegate that task to an ALJ.” “An ALJ assigned to hear an SEC enforcement action has extensive powers,” such as gathering evidence, issuing subpoenas, examining witnesses, and imposing sanctions, she added. “As that list suggests, an SEC ALJ exercises authority comparable to that of a federal district judge conducting a bench trial.” “The Commission can then review the ALJ’s decision,” Kagan explained. If it does not, then the “decision is deemed the action of the Commission.” The Court held that these powers clearly qualify ALJs as officers of the United States. The Court also held that under the Appointments Clause, the SEC commissioners acting together qualify as a department head. “But the Commission had left the task of appointing ALJs, including Judge Elliot, to SEC staff members,” the Court noted. Therefore the rulings of ALJs at the SEC are illegal. This ruling would also apply to ALJs at any other agency where the ALJs are appointed by staff, though evidently most – if not all – other agencies have their department heads do so. (For example, the attorney general appoints immigration judges, which are ALJs, and all those rulings would remain intact.) Congress is likely to enact a law swiftly that authorizes the SEC to appoint ALJs to make the agency’s procedures and programs conform to the Constitution. The justices left broader constitutional questions – such as whether the Constitution always requires these officers to be removable at will by the president or department heads – open for future cases. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Stephen Breyer concurred with the majority that the SEC’s ALJs were unconstitutional, but dissented from other parts of the Court’s decision. The case is Lucia v. SEC, No. 17-130 at the Supreme Court of the United States.

Supreme Court rules states can collect sales tax from out-of-state retailers

The Supreme Court overturned decades of precedent Thursday and paved the way for states to impose broader internet sales taxes, a ruling that has the potential to help local bricks-and-mortar retailers while dangling a new source of revenue for state governments. The justices, in the 5-4 ruling, said an old rule that applied only to businesses that had a physical presence in a state was a vestige of the mail-order catalog era and no longer applies in the internet age. “Each year, the physical presence rule becomes further removed from economic reality and results in significant revenue losses to the States,” wrote Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who delivered the opinion for the court in the case of South Dakota v. Wayfair. South Dakota had challenged the physical presence rule, saying it was losing roughly $48 million to $58 million in revenue each year. It enacted a law requiring online retailers with $100,000 in sales of goods or with more than 200 transactions to collect and remit sales taxes, and then brought cases against online retailer Overstock and home goods company Wayfair. Lower courts, using the physical presence precedent, ruled against the state’s law. But the high court said Thursday that it was time to overturn those rulings, which date back to 1967 and were updated in 1992. “The internet’s prevalence and power have changed the dynamics of the national economy,” Justice Kennedy wrote. The decision produced a curious lineup, crossing the court’s usual ideological divisions. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, perhaps the most liberal justice, joined four Republican-appointed members in the majority — besides Justice Kennedy, Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch. Meanwhile, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. led the dissent, joined by three Democrat-appointed jurists: Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice Roberts argued that Congress should be the one to address the regulation of commerce between states. “Nothing in today’s decision precludes Congress from continuing to seek a legislative solution. But by suddenly changing the ground rules, the court may have waylaid Congress’s consideration of the issue,” he wrote. Since every bricks-and-mortar store is located in only one state and most of the customers are from that state, the custom and law have always been for merchants to collect sales tax on behalf of that one state and then forward it to the government — a simple task. Online sellers could have clientele in every state but have a legal obligation to collect taxes from customers in only one. Theoretically, customers are supposed to pay sales taxes to the state themselves if merchants don’t charge them, but hardly anyone does. As a result, many online merchants simply didn’t collect sales taxes, which cost the state revenue and gave online merchants a price edge over bricks-and-mortar stores. Among the major online sellers that don’t charge sales taxes on goods shipped to every state are pet store Chewy.com, jeweler Blue Nile and clothier L.L. Bean. Etsy and eBay don’t require their sellers, who are usually smaller-scale, to collect sales tax.

Draining the swamp: White House proposes unprecedented reorganization of federal government

The White House on Thursday proposed the most comprehensive plan to reorganize the federal government in 100 years, including a merger of the departments of Education and Labor, and a proposal to add work requirements for welfare programs. “Businesses change all the time,” said White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney. “Government doesn’t, and one of the things you get when you hire a businessman to become president is you bring this attitude from the private sector.” The sweeping reorganization plan stems from an order signed by Mr. Trump in March 2017 calling for a review of the federal government to streamline agencies and reduce waste. The combined education and labor department would be called the Department of Education and the Workforce, or DEW, and would oversee programs for students and workers. In a presentation to the Cabinet, Mr. Mulvaney cited examples of bringing all food-safety regulations under the Agriculture Department, instead of sharing those responsibilities with the Food and Drug Administration. “If it’s cheese pizza, it’s FDA, but you put pepperoni on it and it becomes a USDA product. I mean, come on?” he said. “An open-faced roast beef sandwich is USDA, a closed-faced roast beef sandwich is FDA. Not making this up. You can’t make this kind of stuff up. This would only happen in the government.” The plan would also move the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, from the USDA to Health and Human Services, which would be renamed the Department of Health and Public Welfare and oversee public assistance programs. “We’re still dealing with a government that is from the early 20th century,” Mr. Mulvaney said. “It simply doesn’t make sense.” In merging the Departments of Education and Labor, Mr. Mulvaney said, the government’s 47-odd job-training programs could be reduced to 16. The plan also would privatize the U.S. Postal Service. The reorganization plan faces an uncertain fate in Congress, with some Democrats and unions representing the federal workforce saying it has no chance of being approved.

Glad to see our President and his team trying to our bloated and out-of-control federal government leaner and more efficient.  That is something that is WAY overdue.  But, if the Dems take even one of the chambers of Congress over after the midterms in November, it won’t happen.  For more click on the text above.

Opinion/Analysis: The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all credibility

After years of smearing good people with false charges of bigotry, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has finally been held to account. A former Islamic radical named Maajid Nawaz sued the center for including him in its bogus “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists,” and this week the SPLC agreed to pay him a $3.375 million settlement and issued a public apology. The SPLC is a once-storied organization that did important work filing civil rights lawsuits against the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s. But it has become a caricature of itself, labeling virtually anyone who does not fall in line with its left-wing ideology an “extremist” or “hate group.” Nawaz is a case in point. Since abandoning Islamic radicalism, he has advised three British prime ministers and created the Quilliam Foundation, to fight extremism. He is not anti-Muslim. He is a Muslim and has argued that “Islam is a religion of peace.” So how did he end up in the SPLC’s pseudo-guide to anti-Muslim bigots? His crime, apparently, is that he has become a leading critic of the radical Islamist ideology he once embraced. Thanks to his courage, the SPLC has been forced to pay a multimillion-dollar penalty and acknowledge in a statement that it was “wrong” and that Nawaz has “made valuable and important contributions to public discourse, including by promoting pluralism and condemning both anti-Muslim bigotry and Islamist extremism.” Let’s hope this settlement is the first of many, because this is not the first time the SPLC has done this. In 2010, it placed the Family Research Council (FRC) — a conservative Christian advocacy group that opposes abortion and same-sex marriage — on its “hate map.” Two years later, a gunman walked into the FRC headquarters with the intention to “kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-fil-A sandwiches in victims’ faces.” He told the FBI that he had used the SPLC website to pick his target. In the aftermath, the FBI removed the SPLC from its list of legitimate resources on hate crimes. While the FBI no longer takes the center seriously, many in the media still do. Last year, ABC News ran a story headlined: “Jeff Sessions addresses ‘anti-LGBT hate group,’ ” in which it reported that “Sessions addressed members of the Alliance Defending Freedom, which was designated an ‘anti-LGBT hate group’ by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2016.” The Alliance Defending Freedom is a respected organization of conservative lawyers dedicated to defending religious liberty, and it just argued a case before the Supreme Court, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. It won, 7 to 2. It is not a “hate group.” If anything, it is fighting anti-Christian hate. In 2014, the SPLC placed Ben Carson — later a Republican presidential candidate and now the current secretary of housing and urban development — on its “extremist watch list,” alongside neo-Nazis and white supremacists. After an uproar, the group removed him and apologized. The SPLC also lists Charles Murray, a colleague of mine at the American Enterprise Institute and one of the most respected conservative intellectuals in the United States, on its website as a “White Nationalist.” Last year, an angry mob of students, many citing the SPLC’s designation, physically attacked Murray during a speech at Middlebury College. He escaped unharmed, but the liberal professor who invited him ended up in the hospital. Little wonder that Nawaz was not just angry but also afraid about being designated an extremist by the SPLC. He told the Atlantic in 2016, “They put a target on my head. The kind of work that I do, if you tell the wrong kind of Muslims that I’m an extremist, then that means I’m a target.” Unfortunately, the settlement that the SPLC reached with Nawaz is not likely to deter it from smearing others — $3.4 million is a drop in the bucket for the center, which raised $132 million between November 2016 and October 2017 and has a $477 million endowment, including a reported $92 million in offshore accounts. Sliming conservatives is big business. The only way to stop the SPLC is if people stop giving it money and the media stop quoting it or taking it seriously.

Agreed!!  Thanks to Marc Thiessen over at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) for this outstanding piece.  SPLC is a total fraud.  The irony is that it is an agenda-driven, extreme liberal, anti-conservative, anti-Republican, and anti-Christian hate group that uses its vast legal resources under the direction of Morris Dees, a completely discredited leftist hack, to go after normal folks and family groups, just because they’re on the other side of the political aisle.  Glad to see Morris and SPLC finally getting a little public shaming.  Next time you see some leftist hack on PBS/NPR, ABC News, or CNN refer to them as a credible source, keep this story in mind.  Hopefully more people will have the courage to stand up to Morris and SPLC either in court or on tv.

US Air Force picks SpaceX for 2020 satellite launch

Back in 2014, SpaceX decided to sue the US government after the military gave United Launch Alliance (ULA) a sweetheart deal for sending government payloads into space. The reason was simple: a complete lack of competition for 36 launches. The end result was a settlement and SpaceX receiving certification for launches. As CNN reports, SpaceX’s lawsuit was worth the effort as the US Air Force just opted to award SpaceX a contract for the launch of a military satellite in 2020. The only other bidder, ULA, was unsuccessful and isn’t commenting. This counts as SpaceX’s second military contract, but the first that will use a Falcon Heavy, the world’s most powerful rocket. The Air Force refers to it as an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch service contract. SpaceX has been awarded a “$130 million firm-fixed price contract for launch services to deliver Air Force Space Command (AFSPC)-52 satellite to the intended orbit.” It sees the company provide a total launch solution with the launch happening at some point in 2020 from Kennedy Space Center, Florida. The AFSPC-52 is part of a classified mission, so we have no idea what systems it will be carrying into orbit. However, it will be operated by the Air Force Space Command’s Space and Missile Systems Center, which specializes in, “Global Positioning System, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control networks, space based infrared systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.”

Jeff Landry: Despite Media’s ‘Shameful Propaganda Effort,’ Congress Must Stop Illegal Immigration

Throughout the 2016 Presidential campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump was clear that he intended to enforce our nation’s immigration laws. As commander-in-chief, President Trump and his Attorney General Jeff Sessions have dutifully kept that promise. But now that the laws are being faithfully executed, we are witnessing just how broken our system truly is. The way our immigration laws are currently constituted, they provide for two enforcement options: full enforcement or no enforcement. For the safety of our children, no enforcement is not an option. The Obama policy of catch and release served as a notice to all illegal aliens that they could violate our laws without consequence. And the flawed policies that Congress has allowed to remain in place have encouraged illegals to bring their children, or those claimed to be their children, because it would more likely secure their release. In effect, children have been used as get out of jail free cards. The major influx of unaccompanied minors entering through our Southern border and the family separation policy went largely unnoticed and unreported before President Trump took office. And the hysteria we have witnessed over the past week was non-existent during the Obama administration, by the public and the press. There are facts and there is hyperbole; and the mainstream media has recently chosen to go with full-blown hyperbole by deceptively showing videos of unaccompanied minors as though they were children separated from their parents after illegally crossing the border together. They have repeatedly played videos edited for dramatic effect and audio yet to be authenticated as infallible. This propaganda effort by the mainstream media is shameful. The mainstream media has failed to fully report how the Trump administration is spending $1 billion dollars per year to provide food and education to unaccompanied minors while providing them with an unprecedented level of dignity and security. They have ignored the Trump administration’s unmatched compassion and use of this money that could have been spent on the welfare of American children. The mainstream media has also failed to mention that many unaccompanied minors were separated from their families in their countries of origin by their parents’ choice to send them on the dangerous trek north with drug smugglers and sex traffickers. The mainstream media has glossed over the fact that the separation policy only applied to a small fraction of people who willfully broke the law and violated the sovereignty of the United States. Had these relatively few families gone to a port of entry, there would have bene no separation. Furthermore, the mainstream media has diminished MS-13’s use of the child loophole to perpetuate their drug smuggling, human trafficking, and other criminal enterprises. They have rarely reported that this terror organization’s motto is “kill, rape, control” or that it has taken over schools. So while Rachel Maddow and other coastal elites feign tears of sadness – I join the American parents who have taught their children to follow the law, salute the flag, and love their brothers and sisters who are wailing at funerals of those whose dreams were ended by unaccompanied minors not in federal custody. And I refuse to play another game with feckless leftists who repeatedly use serious issues like illegal immigration as political weapons against the Trump administration rather than fix crises they claim to care about. So I call on Congress to take action. Stop kicking the can down the road. Stop the political gamesmanship and make the hard decisions. Close the loopholes necessitating executive action. Build the wall. Beef up our border security. And defend our sovereignty. American children are counting on you to do so.

Well said, Jeff.  AG Jeff Landry is the elected attorney general for Louisiana, and used to serve in Congress as a U.S. rep.  Please consider this your “Read of the Day.”  If you read anything here at The Daily Buzz today, then READ THIS!!  Then, pass it along to all of your friends and family members, especially those who are Democrats or who watch CNN or MSNBC.  Excellent!!    🙂