Custom Search

Monday, December 18, 2017

Mueller's House Of Cards Continues To Crumble After 'Unlawfully' Obtaining Trump Team Transition Emails - How Many Scandals Have To Engulf Team Mueller Before He Is Disqualified?

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine






Team Mueller appears to be a gift that never stops giving..... to President Trump.

Never have we seen a "special counsel" team become so embroiled in scandal, corruption, political bias and now, 'improper" activities, with the recent accusation by the top lawyer of the Trump presidential transition team, that Robert Mueller's team illegally obtained thousands of transition documents, including attorney-client communications and other privileged communications.

First lets go over the acronyms we will be using in this article: GSA - General Services Administration - An independent agency declared by congressional act to help "promote the orderly transfer of the executive power in connection with the expiration of the term of office of the President and the inauguration of a new President." TFA - Trump for America also known as the PTT: Presidential Transition Team or PETT for President-elect Transition Team.

THE BACK-STORY: MUELLER 'IMPROPERLY' OBTAINS EMAILS FROM GSA

Via Fox News:

The attorney said they discovered the “unauthorized disclosures” by the GSA on Dec. 12 and 13 and raised concerns with the special counsel’s office. The Associated Press reported that the GSA turned over a flash drive containing tens of thousands of records on Sept. 1 after receiving requests from Mueller's office in late August.

Those records included emails sent and received by 13 senior Trump transition officials. Among the officials who used transition email accounts was former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to a count of making false statements to FBI agents in January and is now cooperating with Mueller's investigation.

“We understand that the special counsel’s office has subsequently made extensive use of the materials it obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims," Langhofer wrote. He added that some of the records obtained by the special counsel’s office from the GSA “have been leaked to the press by unknown persons.”

The special counsel team, led by Robert Mueller, requested, without a subpoena, emails sent and received by Trump transition officials. GSA  handed over said transition documents, said to include thousands of emails, to the special counsel, in an act that Kory Langhofer, the counsel to (TFA) calls "unlawful conduct," in a letter sent to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs and U.S. House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform.

Via page one of the seven page document:

1. To inform the Committees of unlawful conduct that undermines the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, as amended, and will impair the ability of future presidential transition teams to candidly discuss policy and internal matters that benefit the country as a whole. More specifically, we write to inform you that (a) career staff at the General Services Administration (“GSA”) have unlawfully produced TFA’s private materials, including privileged communications, to the Special Counsel’s Office; and (b) although the Special Counsel’s Office was aware that the GSA did not own or control the records in question, the Special Counsel’s Office has extensively used the materials in question, including portions that are susceptible to claims of privilege, and without notifying TFA or taking customary precautions to protect TFA’s rights and privileges; and

2. To request that Congress act immediately to protect future presidential transitions from having their private records misappropriated by government agencies, particularly in the context of sensitive investigations intersecting with political motives.

Team Mueller denies the illegality of receiving the documents from the GSA, versus having to go directly to the TFA, who is claiming they legally owned the documents, stating "When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner’s consent or appropriate criminal process."

Mueller's team has not addressed how some of the information contained in those documents ended up being leaked to the press. Nor have they issued a statement on why they approached the GSA rather than TFA.

Mike Allen over at Axios explains the nature of what those emails included as part of the transition process: "The transition emails are said to include sensitive exchanges on matters such as potential appointments, gossip about the views of particular senators involved in the confirmation process, speculation about vulnerabilities of Trump nominees, strategizing about press statements, and policy planning on everything from war to taxes."

The fact that Michael Flynn was part of the transition team makes the issue of whether GSA had a legal right to hand over transition activity extremely important, if any of that information was used to force Flynn's compliance, and the information was provided illegally to Mueller, that taints any potential cases against any of the transition team, including Flynn.

This was highlighted by well known and respected law professor, Jonathan Turley, who states "Trump lawyers claim Mueller obtained privileged email through GSA. If so, it would be a uniquely stupid mistake that could taint the SC investigation." Turley continues on to say "The privilege issue is a novel one but it was clearly inappropriate to use the GSA as an avenue to obtain emails that should be reviewed by counsel first."

I specifically use Turley as the expert to quote because in a case like this we have liberal leaning lawyers favoring Mueller's actions, while conservative leaning lawyers will make a different argument, but Turley has a self-proclaimed "socially liberal agenda" for the most part, while favoring the rule of law and is highly respected and the second most cited law professor in the country.

shadowdeepstate456.png

WHO 'OWNED' THE DOCUMENTS?

Bottom line up front: If TFA legally owned the documents than the GSA illegally handed them to Mueller's team, something a team of career prosecutors and investigators would have been fully aware of. Kory Langhofer, TFA's attorney, states in the letter to congress that "GSA had no right to access or control the records but was simply serving as TFA’s records custodian."

The question is whether Langhofer is correct, and the citations he offers, directly from the Department of Justice and the government's own archive sites, provides a very persuasive argument.

Page two of Langhofer's letter to the Senate and the House:

The U.S. Department of Justice has for nearly 30 years maintained that presidential transition entities are not “agencies” within the meaning of the Freedom of Information Act. This interpretation was most recently affirmed during the Obama Administration. See U.S. Dep’t of Justice, FOIA Counselor: Transition Team FOIA Issues, FOIA Update, Vol. IX, No. 4 (Jan. 1, 1988, rev. Sept. 1, 2016), available at https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-update-foia-counselor-transition-teamfoia-issues.

While the link provided by Langhofer to the DOJ website cited as supporting his assertion that transition records are not considered  GSA "agency records,"  is for the purposes of any Freedom Of Information Act requests, it does support his claim that a transition team holds a "nonagency status," and transitional team records are indeed considered "personal records."

VIA the DOJ website:

A complication can arise, however, when a member of a transition team brings copies of transition team documents with him to a federal agency when appointed as an agency official. In both of the FOIA cases in which requesters have sought such documents, the courts held that they were not "agency records" under the Act but rather were the "personal records" of the former transition employees. See Wolfe v. HHS, 711 F.2d 1077, 1080 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (document did not lose "its private character simply upon arrival within the agency building"); Illinois Inst. for Continuing Legal Educ. v. Department of Labor, 545 F. Supp. at 1234 ("To be 'agency records,' something more than mere possession of the records by an agency official must be shown.").

An element in each of those cases, though, was that the documents had never been integrated into the agency's files and were not formally used by the official who possessed it or by anyone else in conducting official agency business. See Wolfe v. HHS, 711 F.2d at 1081 ("no one [else] in the agency ever read or relied upon these documents"); Illinois Inst. for Continuing Legal Educ. v. Department of Labor, 545 F. Supp. at 1235 (document never was "actually used by an agency official"). The dicta statements in these cases suggest that had the documents been used not merely for personal reference, but rather to conduct agency business, they might have been found to be "agency records." See also FOIA Update, Fall 1984, at 4.

Applicability of Exemption 5

The fact that a transition team is not a part of the executive branch presents an interesting issue with respect to the applicability of Exemption 5 to deliberative materials drafted by agency personnel for a transition team's use. (In this context, it is essential to distinguish between agency employees who continue to work for their federal agency and those who, under Section 3 of the Transition Act, are detailed to a transition team and who therefore are not generally regarded as agency employees. For the purpose of this discussion, detailees are not considered to be agency employees.) The concern here results from Exemption 5's awkward threshold language (covering "inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters"), a requirement which might at first seem to preclude the exemption's applicability to communications between agencies and transition teams.

This appears to support both Langhofer and Turley's argument that while these are in regards to FOIA, it sets a legal precedent that unless the documents in question were drafted by the "agency," meaning GSA, they belonged to the transition team and the GSA had no legal standing to provide them to Mueller's team.

The next citation by Langhofer in his letters to Congress, is directly from the National Archives, last updated November 16, 2016. A memorandum to federal records agency officers as "Guidance Relating to President-Elect Transition Team Materials," which states the following:

The President-elect’s Transition Team (PETT) represents the President-elect during the 2016-2017 Presidential transition. The materials that PETT members create or receive are not Federal or Presidential records, but are considered private materials. However, transition briefing materials created by a Federal agency and agency communications with the PETT are Federal records and must be managed in accordance with an approved agency records schedule.

If a PETT member is appointed to an agency position as part of the new Administration, the status of PETT materials that the individual brings to the agency may change at that time. If PETT materials are incorporated as agency working files, they become records under either the Federal Records Act (FRA), for individuals working at Federal agencies, or the Presidential Records Act (PRA), for individuals working in PRA creating entities of the Executive Office of the President. If the PETT materials are kept separate from Federal agency files or from files of a PRA entity, then they remain private materials.

On page six of Laghofer's letter to Congress, he specifically accuses not only the GSA, but the special counsel itself of "misconduct," stating "As discussed above, the GSA’s unlawful production of TFA’s internal records was exacerbated by the Special Counsel’s Office failure to preserve and respect the legal privileges that attach to a large number of those documents. More generally, however, the GSA’s and the Special Counsel’s Office’s misconduct in this matter demonstrates why investigators and government attorneys, who in many cases are not entirely neutral, should not be trusted to decide without proper oversight which records belonging to private parties are privileged. "

Read the entire letter, via a seven page PDF file.

MUELLER'S  TEAM HAS HISTORY OF QUESTIONABLE TACTICS

While Robert Mueller has come under heavy criticism for he team he chose, the majority of which were Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama donors and supporters, and the most recent scandals that have engulfed at least a half dozen members of his team over the last three weeks, from plotting against President Trump before the election, to questionable ties with Fusion GPS and the Kremlin sourced Trump dossier, to members of Mueller's team talking about an "insurance policy" if Trump won the election, Mueller has also personally been criticized by fellow attorneys for his and members of his team's "history of questionable tactics."

Harvey Silverglate, a criminal defense attorney in Massachusetts, wrote an opinion piece accusing Mueller of once trying to entrap him when Mueller was acting U.S. attorney in Boston. Silvergate offered this warning back in October 2017, "My experience has taught me to approach whatever he does in the Trump investigation with a requisite degree of skepticism or, at the very least, extreme caution."

Another former prosecutor speaks about the ethics of Andrew Weissmann, another member of Mueller's team, finding his conduct so egregious she filed a formal complaint of prosecutorial misconduct with the Texas bar and the DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility, accusing him of "witness threatening, withholding exculpatory evidence, and the use of 'false and misleading summaries'." (Source)

MUELLER MUST BE REPLACED

With Mueller's and his teams exposure for unethical behaviors, the only remedy is to have Mueller replaced, all evidence sorted through and all tainted evidence, whether by Mueller's misconduct here, or his "teams" newly revealed biases, possible criminal behaviors and conflicts of interest, discarded, so that a fair investigation can continue.

Legal analyst for Fox News Gregg Jarrett provides the court precedent for disqualifying Mueller:

The use by Mueller of even one privileged document can, and must, result in his disqualification from the case.

The case of Finn v. Schiller, 72 F.3rd 1182, 1189 spells out the required remedy for this violation of the law: "Courts have frequently used their supervisory authority to disqualify prosecutors for obtaining materials protected by the attorney-client privilege."

Statutory law also demands Mueller's removal. Pursuant to 5 C.F.R. 2635.501, government employees, including prosecutors, are directed to "take appropriate steps to avoid an appearance of loss of impartiality in the performance of his or her official duties."

BOTTOM LINE

Mueller's actions or the actions of his team in this transition documents issue, may only be improper, may be underhanded but not meet the standard for being "illegal," unless of course he used the attorney-client emails that got swept up with the rest of them for investigative purposes, but in conjunction with all the other issues we have seen revealed about Mueller's team over the past few weeks, we are seeing a pattern of behavior, a "witch hunt" as the president would call it, all conducted by partisans that are now about to be subpoenaed by Congress over their prior actions.

Mueller has got to go and it falls to Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, who has admitted recently in front of Congress that oversight of Mueller's investigation falls directly on his shoulders, to deal with this issue, to remove Mueller, to sort through the mess he and his team have made of this investigation and act accordingly.









Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Full Antifa Documentary Exposes Democrats & Allies Behind Domestic Terrorist Groups - Antifa Is The Militant Arm Of The Democratic Party

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine







At the Berkeley Free Speech Week event, which was cancelled at the last minute when student organizers withdrew their sponsorship after accusing UC Berkeley officials of threatening them, a 37 minute+ documentary was to have premiered, created as part of the "America Under Siege" series by Dangerous Documentaries, this one titled America Under Siege: Antifa.

After the cancellation of the Free Speech Week at Berkeley, Capital Research Center released the documentary on the Dangerous Documentaries website and at YouTube, where Trevor Loudon does an outstanding job of documenting not only the history of Antifa, but the rise of the group whose activities have been labeled "domestic terror" by the FBI and DHS, here in America.

The film was written by and stars conservative author Trevor Loudon, directed by Judd Saul, produced by Jake (Joseph) Klein and Victoria Loudon, and executive produced by the Capital Research Center’s Scott Walter and Matthew Vadum.

Jake Klein, the film’s producer, issued the following statement after free Speech Week at Berkeley was cancelled:

We are extremely disappointed by the cancellation of this screening and of ‘Free Speech Week’ as a whole. This is a major blow to the First Amendment, which we hope will be remedied in court. The fear of violence at this event, which was key to its cancellation, does not stem from anything we have done, nor from the actions of anyone else involved in organizing Free Speech Week. That fear is the fault of those who would use and have used violence to silence those with whom they disagree.

Let’s be clear: Antifa shut down a film screening criticizing Antifa through fear


Unlike the compilation clips that can be found over at YouTube showing the violence that has been associated with Antifa protests in Washington DC, Portland, Seattle, New York, Berkeley, California and Washington, since the beginning of 2017, this film provides the context and purpose of Antifa's groups, which uses what Loudon describes as "concept creep," - A two step process to first "vilify and dehumanize" those Antifa groups consider the enemy (meaning anyone that disagrees with their socialism ideology) and then to "destroy," that enemy, to ultimately overthrow the government of the United States.

Related: A Timeline Of Antifa Violence: January – August 2017

DEMOCRATS AND ALLIES BEHIND ANTIFA

Along with interviews with high profile conservative names that have been threatened and/or attacked by Antifa groups personally, and historical goals of Antifa groups, as well as their recently stated goal to overthrow the duly elected government here in the United States, Louden also highlights the direct ties between these violent Antifa groups and the official Democratic party itself as well as their affiliates and allies, including organizations funded by George Soros.

One example detailed in the documentary, is who is behind the violent Antifa protests that occurred at the May Day rally in Portland, Oregon, which descended into utter chaos when Antifa showed up, attacking police, setting fires, vandalizing police vehicles and launching projectiles "at police and firefighters including rocks, bottles, ball bearings, fireworks, smoke bombs, and road flares."

Evidently, as visual proof has been obtained, these Antifa groups are not only funded or sponsored by Democratic affiliates, specifically the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) who donates heavily to the Democratic Party, spending even more millions against the Republican Party, and endorsed Hillary Clinton for president, but were also being trained in SEIU owned facilities, as is noted on the flier/poster shown below, at the bottom where it states clearly "SEIU Local."

Note the three diagonal arrows in the upper right corner of the poster below, which matches the Antifa patches worn by some members, example at this link.

PortlandAntifaTraining.jpg


For those that do not have the time or the bandwidth to watch a 37 minute documentary, although it is highly recommended due to the well presented information contained within, we will recap some of the highlights of those affiliations.

AdamWhitmerAntifa.jpg

Another example: The leader of the Antifa group Knights of Socialism in Florida is Dylan Tyler. The Knights of Socialism is directly funded by the Democratic Socialists of America. Tyler also serves on the executive committee at the local DSA and the chairman of that committee is Adam Whitmer, who is also a regional field director for the Florida Democratic Party.

For those unaware of what type of group the Knights of Socialism is, they made headlines back in February 2017 for an event they organized at the University of Central Florida called 'Whack-A-Trump' where students could take a baseball bat directly to Trump and his Cabinet members' faces. The group is the same one that promoted a "Leftist Fight Club" on Super Bowl Sunday, which taught students how to fight Trump supporters. (Source)

At one point, the group appears to encourage a group of elementary schoolers on a tour to be part of the Trump bashing.

The elementary schoolers beg the Knights to join in on the fun, which the group cheers on. Some children gleefully ask their teacher if they can "kill Donald Trump."

“Show Donald Trump something!” the kids shout. “Hit him hard!”

The children shout and clap as the piñata falls to the ground. They scramble to seize the Twizzlers and other candy strewn across the lawn.

One of the protesters was also spotted wearing an "Antifa International" sweatshirt.

Campus Reform has a 13 minute video of that event posted on their website and article about it, titled "UCF socialist club urges young children to 'kill Donald Trump'."

We also see in the documentary that the current Mayor of Berkeley, Jesse Arreguin, Former Mayor of Berkeley Loni Hancock, and current city councilor Kriss Worthington, were all Facebook group members of the Antifa affiliated group BAMN (By Any Means Necessary), which was largely responsible for the massive riot that caused $100,000 of UC Berkeley damage in February 2017, with another few hundred thousands dollars in damages to the city itself.

Another little tidbit we find out in the documentary below is that the man representing Eric Clanton, the CA professor that was arrested and charged with four counts of assault with a deadly weapon after hitting four Trump supporters in the head with a bike lock when participating in Antifa protests, is a man named Dan Siegel. Siegel is also a Facebook group member of BAMN, and the former leader of the pro-North Korea Communists Workers Party, USA. That group has been known to publicly boast how they "utilize" the Democratic Party.

antifaterrorkickingmandown.jpg
(Antifa kicking, punching downed Trump supporter - August 2017)

BOTTOM LINE

Given the information laid out in the documentary below, it becomes even more clear why, no matter how violent the rioting and chaos, the injuries the attacks on police and Trump supports, Democrats on the whole never once spoke up against Antifa and in fact, heavily criticized President Trump when he did so.

It wasn't until late August after Antifa attacked Trump supporters and images went viral of masked, black clad members of Antifa attacking a man on the ground, punching and kicking him until another African American man jumped onto the victim to protect him, saying he thought they were going to kill him, that a Democrat, Nancy Pelosi finally deemed it necessary to speak to Antifa's violence.

Even then, it was one rebuke after dozens of injuries and millions in damages across multiple states since January, all precipitated by Attacking Antifa members, with no follow up.

That is because Antifa is the militant arm of the Democratic Party.

Watch below: America Under Siege: Antifa - The full Documentary.



Help Keep Independent Media Alive, Become A Patron for All News PipeLine at https://www.patreon.com/AllNewsPipeLine








Monday, July 03, 2017

Media Freaks Out: President Trump 'Body-Slams' CNN In Video And The MSM Drops Everything To Focus On A Tweet

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine





If people thought that giving one Tweet from President Trump 28 times more coverage than Congress passing milestone immigration bills, and covering the start of travel ban, then brace yourselves for a record breaking freakout over the President's latest tweet, in where footage from WrestleMania 23 in 2007 where Trump went up against WWE CEO Vince McMahon during a "Battle of the Billionaires" match, has been retouched to show the President body-slamming a figure with the letters "CNN" superimposed over the person's head, with just two hashtags as the only commentary. #FraudNewsCNN #FNN.

SEE THE VIDEO and the media's complete meltdown at All News PipeLine


Monday, February 20, 2017

Triggered Liberal Snowflakes Heads Exploding All Across America - Fake News Media 'Is The Enemy Of The American People' Trump Tweet Goes Viral

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine



Well, President Trump did it again. With one tweet (actually two, since he deleted the first one to add more MSM names), he managed to trigger liberal snowflakes, especially those in the MSM, making heads explode from one end of the country to the other, when he said "The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!"

Read the entire article at All News PipeLine







Senator John McCain Pranked By Russian Phone Pranksters - Priceless!

By Stefan Stanford - All News PipeLine





What do Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Maxine Waters and Elton John all have in common? They've all been 'punked' by Russian phone pranksters Vovan and Lexus. Newly released 'punking' of Senator John McCain within this video. Next time John McCain talks about 'intelligence', ask him about why he'd get punked by two Russians!




You can see the entire 'punking' video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqrw2vIvBv0



Thursday, February 09, 2017

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

MAGA! Trump 100 Day Contract With American Voter Almost Fully Fulfilled In Just 10 Days

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine




In the Vlog below, I discuss how President Trump has already fulfilled the majority of his 100 day plan, stated in his Contract With the American Voter... in just 10 days


Links discussed in the video above:

President Trump has already fulfilled the majority of his 100 day plan, stated in his Contract With the American Voter... in just 10 days. Contract embedded here - http://allnewspipeline.com/Trump_Has_Already_Won_The_Biggest_Battle.php

 Presidential Actions on WH website - https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions

 Nikki Haley puts United Nations on notice "Don't have our backs? We're Taking Names' - http://allnewspipeline.com/Message_To_UN_Were_Taking_Names.php





Saturday, January 28, 2017

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

The Vulgar Vagina March In DC By 'Nasty Women' - American Women Push Back Against Man Hating Holly-Whores: 'They Do Not Speak For Me'

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine


Feminism used to be demand for equality, but today, as shown so clearly in the embarrassingly display in DC yesterday, it has become a demand for superiority by women who are admittedly, in fact proud, of being "nasty."

That is the one statement out of the list of confused "causes" the nasties spewed throughout the day, that I can completely agree with as I watched them march,  observed their nonsensical speeches, wearing pink p*ssyhats, carrying signs of vaginas, using vulgarity in public and on public television as if it is something to be proud of.... they are nasty.

Misandry was on full display as well, which for those unfamiliar with the term, is a "person who hates men." As a women, that is what I saw on display yesterday, nasties that want to be superior, nasties that want to dominate men, but more importantly, they want to emasculate men.





WOMEN TELL THE NASTIES 'YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR US'

As of the 2014 census there were 162 million women in the U.S. in comparison to 157 million men, so those "huge" crowds the media has been gushing over, even if we gave them the benefit of the doubt and called it a million nationwide, does not represent the other 152 million women in America, as has been made very clear all throughout the comment sections of multiple articles on the vulgar vagina event.

CommentsPsyEvent1.png


The march should not have been called the "women's march," it should have been named a "nasty vulgar vagina  march" because the behaviors I witnessed throughout the day, was nothing more than a disgusting and in most cases, vulgar, display of females having a major temper tantrum because their candidate lost the presidential election.

Hillary Clinton cardboard cutouts were held up, and even in Ashley Judd's, crude and rude "nasty women" speech, she ended it with Hillary Clinton's name. The theme wasn't about women, or women's rights, after all women now have the same right to vote, drive, go into combat, they can work in any job they want, do whatever they want.

No, other than misandry, the other pattern noted was their constant focus on Hillary Clinton losing.

CardboardClinton1.jpg

Look at the example of Madonna, a "nasty" that publicly offered to give men blow jobs if they would vote for Hillary before the election (which she reneged on), up there dropping F-bombs which aired live on  C-SPAN, CNN and MSNBC, after she informed the audience she had thought a lot about blowing up the White House," spewing her vitriol while claiming she "chooses love" over hatred.

MadonnaVulgarNasty.jpg

The Daily Mail reports the Secret Service will be investigating Madonna over her statements about blowing up the White House.

Then we have the vulgar rant offer by Ashley Judd, droning on about "nasty women," as if that is something to be proud of, before calling Ivanka Trump, the "wet dream" of Donald Trump, in a sickening temper tantrum because Hillary Clinton lost, which was made clear at the end of her screed when she lists Hillary  as the last name of female activists throughout history.... most of which had dignity and class, and who most likely would have been appalled at what was seen in Washington yesterday.


The observations I have noted are not just mine as a female Trump supporter, but are being noted in comment sections all across the web, as well as by women that attended the march, not because they wanted to be part of it, but to observe, such as Katie Hopkins, who shares those observations over at Daily Mail in an article titled "It’s hard to argue with a million p*ssy-marchers – especially the really nasty ones like Madonna - but possessing a vagina is a matter of biology, not a political argument."

Another speaker, short on content but gushing with oestrogen shouted: 'We are here'. (She was not wrong, we were). We will not be silenced. We will not play dead'.

To be fair to Trump, I have not heard the silencing of females or women playing dead in his 100 day plan. Perhaps a more suitable venue for this speech would be outside the Saudi embassy, where the silencing of women is all the rage.

A woman whipped into a frenzy by her own brilliance started listing girls' names, 'Emily, Conchita, Malala, Edith, Tonia, Shania (we had all got the point but she carried on regardless) Maria Guadalupe, Kayleigh....we are here to be respected. We are here to be nasty.

I think Madonna had already received this memo.

And fuelled by these pearls of wisdom, the women set off for the streets, pussy ears perked, banners aloft, chanting as they went.

'Tell me what democracy looks like?' 'This is what democracy looks like'.

I wanted to point out, respectfully, that democracy is the Electoral College system that saw Trump turn the map from blue to red. But there were a few million of them. And they had pictures of vaginas. So I decided this was not the time.

I thought I heard the women chanting 'Menstrual brew' which had me wondering exactly what this lot were on. But listening more closely it turned out to be 'Pence Sucks Too.' I was grateful for the clarity. I thought it was just Trump they hated. But it turns out it is all men. Apart from the ones who are transitioning to women.

Read the entire article, it is excellent as she describes the lack of a coherent message other than "anger" to which she says is "not enough," where people couldn't even explain exactly what it was they were marching for, there was no cohesion, the messages were all over the board, contradictory... it all came down to anger.

They are very angry people, and according to them, very "nasty women." Again... I agree, they are and they showed the whole world exactly how nasty they are, but they do not speak for all American women.

Other women, some that support some of the same causes that these "nasty women" claim to support, are saying the mission of the vagina march has already failed. In fact one activists that is a proponent of killing babies in the womb, which is what abortion is, take them to task.

Via Breitbart:


Writing at the Week, abortion rights supporter Shikha Dalmia asserts the demonstration has already failed in its mission.

"Demonstrations serve a useful function in a democracy — but only when they have clarity of purpose," she writes, adding that the march is "shaping up to be a feel-good exercise in search of a cause."

Dalmia writes some of the "absurdity" related to the event stems from "the fact that they are billing this event as the voice of women when 42 percent of women (and 62 percent of non-college educated white women) actually voted for Trump."

The Vulgar Vagina March failed on so many levels, but they accomplished their goal of being able to have a temper tantrum and embarrassing American women in the eyes of the world as they proudly wore their "pink p*ssy hats," which in and of itself according to feminists is sexist to associate pink with women (see how confused these snowflakes are?) and marched throughout DC, which was to get the MSM to show their vulgarity.

NASTY CELEBRITIES LEFT OUT IN THE COLD

The has-beens of Hollywood, like Madonna and Judd and Cher, all that attended, did so because when Trump was elected, they were left out in the cold. They donated to Clinton, they created video after videos telling their fans to vote against Trump, they pushed their "influence" at every given opportunity, just to find out that they didn't have any.

Hollywood’s top Democratic players were all set to watch one fellow liberal superstar, Barack Obama, pass the torch to another, Clinton herself. They were planning their inauguration parties, polishing their résumés and, in some cases, measuring the drapes in embassies around the world. Instead, they faced a shocking overnight reversal, as if a big budget movie that the tracking polls had guaranteed would be a blockbuster inexplicably tanked on opening weekend with no warning. A cadre of megastars and megadonors that had counted on four or eight more years of Access Washington, that has been happily benefiting from the psychic and social rewards of the increasing intermingling of celebrity culture and Democratic politics, suddenly found the door to the White House slammed squarely in its face.

And the rejection came with an extra, and especially scary, sting: It turned out that the industry supposedly known for having its finger on the popular pulse didn’t understand America—"red America,"  the "real America," the "rest of America"—at all.


That is the reason the vulgar vagina celebrities showed up for their latest temper tantrum... because they have no voice, they have no influence, they have no seat at the White House, and most importantly, from what I witnessed..... they have no class.

As one of the 152 million women in America that did not attend the march, let me say "They do not speak for me."

BOTTOM LINE

It should not have been called the "Women's March," because they do not speak for all women, in my mind they are not women and wouldn't understand the term "being a lady" in a hundred years. The so-called celebrities that showed up were nasty, vulgar vaginas, spewing hatred at men, because the flawed female candidate they wanted as president, didn't win.

This ladies and gentlemen is a lady, and I am very proud that Melania Trump is The First Lady, representing America's women and not the vulgar "nasty" vaginas on public display yesterday.

MelaniaFirstLady1.png


MelaniaTrump1.jpg



Tuesday, January 10, 2017