Sheriff Joe
DA
Fries U, what a deal!
The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
Sheriff Joe
DA
Elections have consequences,
Supreme Court Lets New Trump Asylum Restrictions Take Effect
September 11th, 2019
Migrants walk in Chiapas state, Mexico on July 25, 2019. (Alfredo Estrella/AFP/Getty Images)
The Supreme Court will allow the Trump administration to enforce new immigration rules against asylum seekers at the southern border.
The high court did not give reasons for its Wednesday night decision or disclose a vote count, as is typical of orders of this nature. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a short dissent, which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined.
In effect, the restrictions deny asylum to migrants who pass through another country on their way to the U.S. without first seeking protected status there. Border Patrol has intercepted approximately 350,000 asylum seekers from the northern triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in 2019. The new restrictions would generally deny asylum to those migrants if they did not first seek protection in Mexico.
The rule includes exceptions for victims of human trafficking or migrants who were denied asylum elsewhere. President Donald Trump cast the ruling as a significant victory in a tweet following the decision.
Supreme Court Lets New Trump Asylum Restrictions Take Effect
September 11th, 2019
Migrants walk in Chiapas state, Mexico on July 25, 2019. (Alfredo Estrella/AFP/Getty Images)
- The Supreme Court will allow the Trump administration to enforce new restrictions on asylum seekers at the southern border.
- In practice, the new rules would deny asylum to any migrant who passed through another country without first seeking protected status there.
- A federal judge in California issued a nationwide injunction barring enforcement of the rules, prompting several rounds of breakneck lawyering between the government and liberal groups that oppose the measure.
The Supreme Court will allow the Trump administration to enforce new immigration rules against asylum seekers at the southern border.
The high court did not give reasons for its Wednesday night decision or disclose a vote count, as is typical of orders of this nature. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a short dissent, which Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined.
In effect, the restrictions deny asylum to migrants who pass through another country on their way to the U.S. without first seeking protected status there. Border Patrol has intercepted approximately 350,000 asylum seekers from the northern triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in 2019. The new restrictions would generally deny asylum to those migrants if they did not first seek protection in Mexico.
The rule includes exceptions for victims of human trafficking or migrants who were denied asylum elsewhere. President Donald Trump cast the ruling as a significant victory in a tweet following the decision.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Quite the climber isnʻt she.
Sheriff Joe
DA
'Historic milestone': Senate confirms 150th Trump judicial nominee
By Alex Swoyer - The Washington Times - Wednesday, September 11, 2019
The U.S. Senate confirmed President Trump’s 150th judicial nominee Wednesday, helping to fulfill the president’s campaign promise to remake the federal bench with a conservative bent.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham called the number of confirmations a “historic milestone.”
“These conservative judicial appointments will impact our nation for years to come,” the South Carolina Republican said.
Six district court nominees won confirmation Wednesday, bringing the president’s total number of appointed judges to the lower federal courts to 105. Mr. Trump has also appointed 43 circuit court nominees and two Supreme Court justices since taking office.
The pace has far outdone President Obama, who only saw 20 circuit court nominees and 74 district court judges confirmed during the same period of time. Mr. Obama, though, like Mr. Trump had two Supreme Court appointments within his first three years.
By Alex Swoyer - The Washington Times - Wednesday, September 11, 2019
The U.S. Senate confirmed President Trump’s 150th judicial nominee Wednesday, helping to fulfill the president’s campaign promise to remake the federal bench with a conservative bent.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham called the number of confirmations a “historic milestone.”
“These conservative judicial appointments will impact our nation for years to come,” the South Carolina Republican said.
Six district court nominees won confirmation Wednesday, bringing the president’s total number of appointed judges to the lower federal courts to 105. Mr. Trump has also appointed 43 circuit court nominees and two Supreme Court justices since taking office.
The pace has far outdone President Obama, who only saw 20 circuit court nominees and 74 district court judges confirmed during the same period of time. Mr. Obama, though, like Mr. Trump had two Supreme Court appointments within his first three years.
Sheriff Joe
DA
America's sweeping tide of diversity
Reproduced from a Brookings Institution map; Map: Axios Visuals
America is more racially diverse than at any point in history, and racial minorities are becoming more geographically dispersed than ever before.
Why it matters: Even before the 2020 census gets underway, recent population data makes it quite clear that rapidly expanding diversity will be the overarching theme of this century's demographic shift.
What's happening: Nationally, Hispanics and Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial minority groups, increasing by 18.6% and 27.4%, respectively, between 2010 and 2018, according to an analysis by the Brookings Institution demographer Bill Frey, whose 2018 book "Diversity Explosion" outlined the country's majority-minority future.
The bottom line: The country's rapidly changing racial makeup is exposing a growing cultural gap between generations.
Reproduced from a Brookings Institution map; Map: Axios Visuals
America is more racially diverse than at any point in history, and racial minorities are becoming more geographically dispersed than ever before.
Why it matters: Even before the 2020 census gets underway, recent population data makes it quite clear that rapidly expanding diversity will be the overarching theme of this century's demographic shift.
What's happening: Nationally, Hispanics and Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial minority groups, increasing by 18.6% and 27.4%, respectively, between 2010 and 2018, according to an analysis by the Brookings Institution demographer Bill Frey, whose 2018 book "Diversity Explosion" outlined the country's majority-minority future.
- They're moving beyond the large metro areas that have historically been popular with immigrants (New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco) to smaller cities across the country, including the Midwest and Northeast.
- Black Americans are returning to the South, with Atlanta, Charlotte, Orlando and Dallas seeing big gains since 2010. Phoenix, Las Vegas and Seattle also registered substantial growth in their black populations.
- The map above appears to have large "white" areas where racial minorities are not highly represented. But these are small, less-populated areas where the white population is stagnating, per Frey's analysis.
- Since 2010, 96% of all U.S. counties saw declines in shares of white population — and those declines aren't likely to be offset by white immigration from other countries or increased U.S. birth rates going forward.
- "In the next 5–6 years, we're going to see an actual decline in white population," Frey told Axios, noting the shrinking share of the white population since 2000 among children under the age of 18. "In the next 10 years or so, the 20-something population will become minority white. It's happening from the bottom up of the age structure."
The bottom line: The country's rapidly changing racial makeup is exposing a growing cultural gap between generations.
- "Baby boomers grew up in an era where America was mostly white, and the biggest racial minority was African Americans who were still mostly segregated," Frey noted. "Millennials and post-millennials are much more open to diversity and integration."
Sheriff Joe
DA
Trump Admin To Undo ‘Oppressive’ Obama-Era Water Regulation
September 12th, 2019
Obama speaks at Germany town hall, and Trump talks in front of NRA (Reuters)
The Trump administration is officially rolling back an Obama-era environmental rule that threatened farmers and other landowners with significant fines or jail time if they failed to comply with onerous regulations on waterways.
The Clean Water Rule, more commonly referred to as the “Waters of the US” rule or WOTUS, was finalized by the Obama administration in 2015. The rule attempted to clarify which waters were subject to the regulations of the Clean Water Act, but in many cases ended up confusing land owners even further.
For example, WOTUS is supposed to contain agricultural exemptions for farmers. But the federal government sued John Duartefor $2.8 million for plowing his field without a permit because he resided on seasonal wetlands. (RELATED: Feds Fine Farmer $2.8 Million For ‘Deep Ripping’ Of Farmland)
A senior administration official described the Trump administration’s move to undo WOTUS as a win for land owners and a pushback on government overreach.
The official told the Daily Caller, “Today, the Trump Administration announced its repeal of President Obama’s oppressive WOTUS regulation. For years, this rule has been used by government agencies to punish farmers and private land owners with out-of-control fines and imprisonment for simply working to protect or better their property. This is another promise kept for our farmers and ranchers as President Trump continues to remove crushing regulations from the American people.”
Sheriff Joe
DA
This is CNN.
US attorney recommends proceeding with charges against McCabe, as DOJ rejects last-ditch appeal
By Jake Gibson, Alex Pappas | Fox News
Video
Jason Chaffetz on Andrew McCabe headlining Lancaster, Pa. Dem banquet
U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended moving forward with charges against Andrew McCabe, Fox News has learned, as the Justice Department rejects a last-ditch appeal from the former top FBI official.
McCabe -- the former deputy and acting director of the FBI -- appealed the decision of the U.S. attorney for Washington all the way up to Jeffrey Rosen, the deputy attorney general, but he rejected that request, according to a person familiar with the situation.
FEDS IN FINAL STAGES OF POSSIBLE PROSECUTION DECISION FOR MCCABE: 'TARGET ON HIS BACK’
The potential charges relate to DOJ inspector general findings against him regarding misleading statements concerning a Hillary Clinton-related investigation.
A source close to McCabe’s legal team said they received an email from the Department of Justice which said, "The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office."
McCabe, who recently was hired as a paid CNN commentator, spent 21 years with the FBI. He became the acting director in May 2017 after President Trump fired former director James Comey.
Last month, a source close to the process told Fox News that McCabe had a “target on his back” because of the Justice Department inspector general findings.
Video
Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe in March 2018 after the inspector general found he had repeatedly misstated his involvement in a leak to The Wall Street Journal regarding an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
The IG report faulted McCabe for leaking information to then-Wall Street Journal reporter Devlin Barrett for an Oct. 30, 2016 story titled “FBI in Internal Feud Over Hillary Clinton Probe.” The story -- written just days before the presidential election – focused on the FBI announcing the reopening of the Clinton investigation after finding thousands of her emails on a laptop belonging to former Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, who was married to Clinton aide Huma Abedin.
The Journal's account of the call said a senior Justice Department official expressed displeasure to McCabe that FBI agents were still looking into the Clinton Foundation, and that McCabe had defended the agent's authority to pursue the issue.
That leak confirmed the existence of the probe, the report said, which Comey had up to that point refused to do.
The report said that McCabe "lacked candor" in a conversation with Comey when he said he had not authorized the disclosure and didn't know who had done so. The IG also found that he lacked candor when questioned by FBI agents on multiple occasions since that conversation.
TRUMP BLASTS CNN FOR 'DISGRACEFUL' HIRING OF EX-FBI OFFICIAL ANDREW MCCABE
McCabe has denied any wrongdoing and said the inspector general's conclusions relied on mischaracterizations and omissions, including of information favorable to McCabe.
Last month, McCabe sued the FBI and the Justice Department over his firing, arguing it was part of Trump's plan to rid the bureau of leaders he perceived as disloyal to him. McCabe argued in his complaint that the two officials responsible for demoting and then firing McCabe — FBI Director Chris Wray and Sessions — created a pretext to force him out in accordance with the president's wishes.
The stated reason for the firing was that McCabe had misled investigators over his involvement in a news media leak, but McCabe says the real reason was "his refusal to pledge allegiance to a single man."
McCabe has been attacked by the president since before he was elected after news emerged in the fall of 2016 that McCabe's wife had accepted campaign contributions from a political action committee associated with former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe during an unsuccessful run for the state Senate there. McAuliffe is a close ally of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who was being investigated at the time for her use of a personal email server while she was secretary of state.
After McCabe's hiring by CNN, Trump called it “disgraceful.”
CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
US attorney recommends proceeding with charges against McCabe, as DOJ rejects last-ditch appeal
By Jake Gibson, Alex Pappas | Fox News
VideoJason Chaffetz on Andrew McCabe headlining Lancaster, Pa. Dem banquet
U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended moving forward with charges against Andrew McCabe, Fox News has learned, as the Justice Department rejects a last-ditch appeal from the former top FBI official.
McCabe -- the former deputy and acting director of the FBI -- appealed the decision of the U.S. attorney for Washington all the way up to Jeffrey Rosen, the deputy attorney general, but he rejected that request, according to a person familiar with the situation.
FEDS IN FINAL STAGES OF POSSIBLE PROSECUTION DECISION FOR MCCABE: 'TARGET ON HIS BACK’
The potential charges relate to DOJ inspector general findings against him regarding misleading statements concerning a Hillary Clinton-related investigation.
A source close to McCabe’s legal team said they received an email from the Department of Justice which said, "The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office."
McCabe, who recently was hired as a paid CNN commentator, spent 21 years with the FBI. He became the acting director in May 2017 after President Trump fired former director James Comey.
Last month, a source close to the process told Fox News that McCabe had a “target on his back” because of the Justice Department inspector general findings.
VideoThen-Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe in March 2018 after the inspector general found he had repeatedly misstated his involvement in a leak to The Wall Street Journal regarding an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
The IG report faulted McCabe for leaking information to then-Wall Street Journal reporter Devlin Barrett for an Oct. 30, 2016 story titled “FBI in Internal Feud Over Hillary Clinton Probe.” The story -- written just days before the presidential election – focused on the FBI announcing the reopening of the Clinton investigation after finding thousands of her emails on a laptop belonging to former Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, who was married to Clinton aide Huma Abedin.
The Journal's account of the call said a senior Justice Department official expressed displeasure to McCabe that FBI agents were still looking into the Clinton Foundation, and that McCabe had defended the agent's authority to pursue the issue.
That leak confirmed the existence of the probe, the report said, which Comey had up to that point refused to do.
The report said that McCabe "lacked candor" in a conversation with Comey when he said he had not authorized the disclosure and didn't know who had done so. The IG also found that he lacked candor when questioned by FBI agents on multiple occasions since that conversation.
TRUMP BLASTS CNN FOR 'DISGRACEFUL' HIRING OF EX-FBI OFFICIAL ANDREW MCCABE
McCabe has denied any wrongdoing and said the inspector general's conclusions relied on mischaracterizations and omissions, including of information favorable to McCabe.
Last month, McCabe sued the FBI and the Justice Department over his firing, arguing it was part of Trump's plan to rid the bureau of leaders he perceived as disloyal to him. McCabe argued in his complaint that the two officials responsible for demoting and then firing McCabe — FBI Director Chris Wray and Sessions — created a pretext to force him out in accordance with the president's wishes.
The stated reason for the firing was that McCabe had misled investigators over his involvement in a news media leak, but McCabe says the real reason was "his refusal to pledge allegiance to a single man."
McCabe has been attacked by the president since before he was elected after news emerged in the fall of 2016 that McCabe's wife had accepted campaign contributions from a political action committee associated with former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe during an unsuccessful run for the state Senate there. McAuliffe is a close ally of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who was being investigated at the time for her use of a personal email server while she was secretary of state.
After McCabe's hiring by CNN, Trump called it “disgraceful.”
CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
Sheriff Joe
DA
This should be fun,
Democrats outline impeachment hearings as moderates wary
By MARY CLARE JALONICK13 minutes ago
View attachment upload_2019-9-12_11-42-13.png
Democrats outline impeachment hearings as moderates wary
By MARY CLARE JALONICK13 minutes ago
View attachment upload_2019-9-12_11-42-13.png
Sheriff Joe
DA
Can you imagine what will happen if Trump wins?
Again?
OMG
Don’t look now, but there’s more border wall news
JAZZ SHAW Posted at 9:21 am on September 12, 2019
I’m sure you’ve seen the gloating headlines about border wall construction in the media from liberal outlets recently. A few days ago, Axios crowed that “not a single mile has been built where no barrier existed before.” Last week the WaPo declared that “Trump’s border wall is now a monument to his failure.” So I guess that about wraps it up, eh? No wall for you, Mr. President.
ADVERTISEMENT
Hillary Clinton ... performance artist? Update: Doubles down
Except that doesn’t seem to be the case. In fact, construction is gearing up in multiple locations already. More on this from the Associated Press.
South of Yuma, Arizona, the tall brown bollards rising against a cloudless desert sky will replace much shorter barriers that are meant to keep out cars, but not people.
This 5-mile (8-kilometer) section of fencing is where President Donald Trump’s most salient campaign promise — to build a wall along the entire southern border — is taking shape.
The president and his administration said this week that they plan on building between 450 and 500 miles (724 and 806 kilometers) of fencing along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,218-kilometer) border by the end of 2020, an ambitious undertaking funded by billions of defense dollars that had been earmarked for things like military base schools, target ranges and maintenance facilities.
I agree with the AP report saying that 450 to 500 miles of the border wall by next year is “ambitious” (to say the least), but it’s not impossible. And as long as the new construction is focused on the areas where the most illegal traffic is crossing the border, it will make a significant difference. (We’re already seeing measurable decreases in crossings thanks to help from Mexico, but we still need a significant barrier to really drive those numbers down.)
Again?
OMG
Don’t look now, but there’s more border wall news
JAZZ SHAW Posted at 9:21 am on September 12, 2019
I’m sure you’ve seen the gloating headlines about border wall construction in the media from liberal outlets recently. A few days ago, Axios crowed that “not a single mile has been built where no barrier existed before.” Last week the WaPo declared that “Trump’s border wall is now a monument to his failure.” So I guess that about wraps it up, eh? No wall for you, Mr. President.
ADVERTISEMENT
Hillary Clinton ... performance artist? Update: Doubles down
Except that doesn’t seem to be the case. In fact, construction is gearing up in multiple locations already. More on this from the Associated Press.
South of Yuma, Arizona, the tall brown bollards rising against a cloudless desert sky will replace much shorter barriers that are meant to keep out cars, but not people.
This 5-mile (8-kilometer) section of fencing is where President Donald Trump’s most salient campaign promise — to build a wall along the entire southern border — is taking shape.
The president and his administration said this week that they plan on building between 450 and 500 miles (724 and 806 kilometers) of fencing along the nearly 2,000-mile (3,218-kilometer) border by the end of 2020, an ambitious undertaking funded by billions of defense dollars that had been earmarked for things like military base schools, target ranges and maintenance facilities.
I agree with the AP report saying that 450 to 500 miles of the border wall by next year is “ambitious” (to say the least), but it’s not impossible. And as long as the new construction is focused on the areas where the most illegal traffic is crossing the border, it will make a significant difference. (We’re already seeing measurable decreases in crossings thanks to help from Mexico, but we still need a significant barrier to really drive those numbers down.)
Sheriff Joe
DA
Lots of good news tod
Game Changer: DOJ Memo Exonerating Michael Flynn Of Russian Collusion Withheld By Prosecutors; Puts James Comey In The Hot Seat
Posted at 9:40 am on September 12, 2019 by Elizabeth Vaughn
National Security Adviser Michael Flynn arrives in the east Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, Feb. 13, 2017, for a news conference with President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. . (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn sure knew what he was doing when he fired his legal team and hired Sidney Powell to represent him last December.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Powell accused prosecutors of “egregious misconduct” and “hiding exculpatory information.” My colleague, Bonchie, posted on this story here.
Specifically, she revealed the existence a DOJ memo, dated January 30, 2017, which exonerates Flynn of colluding with the Russians. Investigative journalist Sara Carter said this document is “currently under protective order and Powell is working with prosecutors to get it disclosed.” And this memo is only part of the Brady material Powell is demanding.
The date of this memo is especially relevant because, as stated in former FBI Director James Comey’s memo written immediately after his February 14th Oval Office meeting with the President, Trump asked him to end the investigation into Flynn. Trump’s words to Comey, according to his memo, were “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey used these remarks as the basis for his obstruction of justice case against Trump.
Further, it was also revealed at Tuesday’s hearing that, at the same time, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe had advised that Flynn had not violated Logan Act.
Game Changer: DOJ Memo Exonerating Michael Flynn Of Russian Collusion Withheld By Prosecutors; Puts James Comey In The Hot Seat
Posted at 9:40 am on September 12, 2019 by Elizabeth Vaughn
National Security Adviser Michael Flynn arrives in the east Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, Feb. 13, 2017, for a news conference with President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. . (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn sure knew what he was doing when he fired his legal team and hired Sidney Powell to represent him last December.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Powell accused prosecutors of “egregious misconduct” and “hiding exculpatory information.” My colleague, Bonchie, posted on this story here.
Specifically, she revealed the existence a DOJ memo, dated January 30, 2017, which exonerates Flynn of colluding with the Russians. Investigative journalist Sara Carter said this document is “currently under protective order and Powell is working with prosecutors to get it disclosed.” And this memo is only part of the Brady material Powell is demanding.
The date of this memo is especially relevant because, as stated in former FBI Director James Comey’s memo written immediately after his February 14th Oval Office meeting with the President, Trump asked him to end the investigation into Flynn. Trump’s words to Comey, according to his memo, were “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey used these remarks as the basis for his obstruction of justice case against Trump.
Further, it was also revealed at Tuesday’s hearing that, at the same time, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe had advised that Flynn had not violated Logan Act.
Nonononono
PREMIER
Hey Village Idiot. Have you started researching the Pence family name yet? Get on it. I’m confident it was originally from the Pounce’ region of France, so he was right all along.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Joe BiDone.
What a loser.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Can you believe Bernie is going to eliminate all student loan debt?
Trump 2020.
Trump 2020.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Our fine and noble president is always right even when he is criminally wrong just ask his ardent swallowers.
How many babies did he yell at tonight?
Sheriff Joe
DA
Annoyed Pelosi: I’m done talking about impeachment right now, America
ALLAHPUNDIT Posted at 4:01 pm on September 12, 2019
Remember six months ago when she tried to put the impeachment debate to bed by declaring that she wasn’t for it?
ADVERTISEMENT
Today's hot topics: Impeachment confusion, McCabe occlusion, Hillary's delusion, Ball of Collusion, and more!
That was a fun three minutes.
Six months later, a majority of her caucus has declared itself in favor of impeaching the president. Democratic leaders are incoherent on the subject, with Jerry Nadler crowing that he’s proceeding with a formal impeachment inquiry and Steny Hoyer insisting that a formal impeachment inquiry doesn’t exist. It’s Schrodinger’s impeachment! Trump now exists in a quantum state where he both is and isn’t the subject of an impeachment investigation.
Pelosi couldn’t hide her irritation at Democrats’ predicament in her press conference this morning, flashing annoyance more than once as you’ll see below. The presser ended with her whining that reporters should go bother Mitch McConnell about America’s problem with gun violence instead of hassling her with questions about a topic on which she has nothing new to offer. This has become a bona fide liability for the party (albeit temporarily), as Ed noted in his post earlier, with the Democratic faithful glum at the cynicism of its leaders’ doublespeak and discouraged by their lack of nerve. I think Pelosi believed the left’s interest in impeachment would fade over the course of the summer as interest in the presidential race rose. But Nadler appears to have surprised her by taking a greater interest in it than she anticipated and Dem backbenchers have come under pressure back home to take a stand.
Sheriff Joe
DA
DAILYWIRE.COM
‘ELDER ABUSE’: Julian Castro Shreds Joe Biden Over Memory Problems
Stephen Maturen/Stringer via Getty Images
By ERIC QUINTANAR
September 12, 2019
22.4k views
During Thursday night’s Democratic presidential primary debate in Houston, former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro attacked former Vice President Joe Biden over his health care plan, saying that it would leave many Americans uninsured.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51715/elder-abuse-julian-castro-shreds-joe-biden-over-eric-quintanar
‘ELDER ABUSE’: Julian Castro Shreds Joe Biden Over Memory Problems
Stephen Maturen/Stringer via Getty Images
By ERIC QUINTANAR
September 12, 2019
22.4k views
During Thursday night’s Democratic presidential primary debate in Houston, former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro attacked former Vice President Joe Biden over his health care plan, saying that it would leave many Americans uninsured.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51715/elder-abuse-julian-castro-shreds-joe-biden-over-eric-quintanar
Sheriff Joe
DA
OPINION
Published 1 hour ago
Democratic Debate: Trump the winner as Biden again proves he’s not cut out to be nominee
By Michael Goodwin | New York Post
Video
Julian Castro defends challenging Joe Biden on the debate stage
Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro joins Peter Doocy on 'Fox News @ Night' following the third presidential debate in Houston.
And the winner is . . . Donald Trump.
The Democrats’ third presidential debate was a long-winded, platitude-filled disaster where no single candidate could claim a clear victory. Instead, the seven men and three women took turns displaying why they are all probably unelectable.
Start with Joe Biden’s incoherence. The nominal frontrunner, the former vice president had a 40-year reputation for never shutting up. Now he can’t manage to finish a sentence without interrupting himself.
Video
Nearly all his efforts to make a point were swamped by a sudden change of direction mid-sentence, and then another change a few words later as a random thought popped into his head and out his mouth. None of his rivals needed to interrupt him–he did it to himself.
Most of the time I had no idea what he was trying to say, let alone what he actually said. I veered between feeling sorry for him and expecting the AFLAC duck to come out on stage and shake its head in bewilderment.
GET THE FOX NEWS APP
I have said all along that I don’t believe Biden will be the nominee, and last night left me more certain than ever. He’s not capable of going the distance in the primaries and then taking on Trump.
Published 1 hour ago
Democratic Debate: Trump the winner as Biden again proves he’s not cut out to be nominee
By Michael Goodwin | New York Post
VideoJulian Castro defends challenging Joe Biden on the debate stage
Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro joins Peter Doocy on 'Fox News @ Night' following the third presidential debate in Houston.
And the winner is . . . Donald Trump.
The Democrats’ third presidential debate was a long-winded, platitude-filled disaster where no single candidate could claim a clear victory. Instead, the seven men and three women took turns displaying why they are all probably unelectable.
Start with Joe Biden’s incoherence. The nominal frontrunner, the former vice president had a 40-year reputation for never shutting up. Now he can’t manage to finish a sentence without interrupting himself.
VideoNearly all his efforts to make a point were swamped by a sudden change of direction mid-sentence, and then another change a few words later as a random thought popped into his head and out his mouth. None of his rivals needed to interrupt him–he did it to himself.
Most of the time I had no idea what he was trying to say, let alone what he actually said. I veered between feeling sorry for him and expecting the AFLAC duck to come out on stage and shake its head in bewilderment.
GET THE FOX NEWS APP
I have said all along that I don’t believe Biden will be the nominee, and last night left me more certain than ever. He’s not capable of going the distance in the primaries and then taking on Trump.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Watch: Biden Struggles to Keep His Teeth in Mouth During Debate
Joe Biden Has Problem Adjusting His Teeth on Stage During Debate
00:22
00:22
HANNAH BLEAU12 Sep 20192,087
1:02
Former Vice President Joe Biden (D) appeared to struggle to keep his teeth securely in his mouth during the third Democrat debate in Houston, Texas, Thursday evening.
ABC’s David Muir asked the Democrat frontrunner about a measure that aimed to expand background checks failing on the Senate floor following the Sandy Hook massacre.
“If you couldn’t get it done after Sandy Hook, why should voters give you another chance?” Muir asked.
Biden initially struggled to answer the question, slurring his response while adjusting his teeth in his mouth.
“Because I got it done before,” Biden sputtered.
“I’m the only one up here who has ever beat the NRA,” he continued after regaining control of his teeth. “I’m the only one to ever beat the NRA nationally. I’m the guy who brought the Brady Bill into focus and became law.”
Biden’s struggle quickly became a point of interest on social media:
Joe Biden Has Problem Adjusting His Teeth on Stage During Debate
00:22
00:22
HANNAH BLEAU12 Sep 20192,087
1:02
Former Vice President Joe Biden (D) appeared to struggle to keep his teeth securely in his mouth during the third Democrat debate in Houston, Texas, Thursday evening.
ABC’s David Muir asked the Democrat frontrunner about a measure that aimed to expand background checks failing on the Senate floor following the Sandy Hook massacre.
“If you couldn’t get it done after Sandy Hook, why should voters give you another chance?” Muir asked.
Biden initially struggled to answer the question, slurring his response while adjusting his teeth in his mouth.
“Because I got it done before,” Biden sputtered.
“I’m the only one up here who has ever beat the NRA,” he continued after regaining control of his teeth. “I’m the only one to ever beat the NRA nationally. I’m the guy who brought the Brady Bill into focus and became law.”
Biden’s struggle quickly became a point of interest on social media:
Sheriff Joe
DA
FACT CHECK: Jorge Ramos Falsely Claims Greenland Melting at ‘Record Pace’
ABC News' Jorge Ramos: 'Greenland Is Melting at a Record Pace'
AMY FURR12 Sep 201996
2:47
Greenland is melting at a record pace and the Amazon is burning, Univision anchor Jorge Ramos claimed during the Democrat debate Thursday night in Houston, Texas.
Ramos prefaced a question directed to former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) by stating, “Congressman O’Rourke, Hurricane Harvey hit this town two years ago and not only is the Amazon burning, Greenland is melting at a record pace.”
However, Willis Eschenbach of the Watts Up With That? website debunked the claim regarding Greenland on August 3, Breitbart News reported.
Breitbart TV
CLICK TO PLAY
David J. Harris Jr. Claims Facebook 'Killed' His Reach for Posting 'Fake News' ... a CNN Clip
Eschenbach wrote:
We can ask, IF Greenland were to continue losing ice mass at a rate of 103 billion tonnes per year, how long would it take to melt say half of the ice sheet? Not all of it, mind you, but half of it. (Note that I am NOT saying that extending a current trend is a way to estimate the future evolution of the ice sheet—I’m merely using it as a way to compare large numbers.)
To answer our question if 103 billion tonnes lost per year is a big number, we have to compare the annual ice mass loss to the amount of ice in the Greenland ice sheet. The Greenland ice sheet contains about 2.6E+15 (2,600,000,000,000,000) tonnes of water in the form of snow and ice.
So IF the Greenland ice sheet were to lose 103 billion tonnes per year into the indefinite future, it would take about twelve thousand five hundred years to lose half of it …
On August 26, Forbes contributor Michael Shellenberger wrotethat the hysteria surrounding the fires in the Amazon was actually misinformation. Shellenberger also noted that Dan Nepstad, one of the world’s leading Amazon forest experts, told him the claim that the Amazon is the “lungs of the earth” was also not true.
“There’s no science behind that. The Amazon produces a lot of oxygen but it uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration so it’s a wash,” Nepstad said.
Shellenberger also noted that the deforestation of the Amazon declined “a whopping 70 percent from 2004 to 2012” and that recent increases are still at “one-quarter of its 2004 peak.”
Photos of the forest fires that were shared on social media by celebrities were not actually pictures of the Amazon, according to Shellenberger.
“The photo Ronaldo shared was taken in southern Brazil, far from the Amazon, in 2013,” he wrote. “The photo that DiCaprio and Macron shared is over 20 years old. The photo Madonna and Smith shared is over 30. Some celebrities shared photos from Montana, India, and Sweden.”
ABC News' Jorge Ramos: 'Greenland Is Melting at a Record Pace'
AMY FURR12 Sep 201996
2:47
Greenland is melting at a record pace and the Amazon is burning, Univision anchor Jorge Ramos claimed during the Democrat debate Thursday night in Houston, Texas.
Ramos prefaced a question directed to former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) by stating, “Congressman O’Rourke, Hurricane Harvey hit this town two years ago and not only is the Amazon burning, Greenland is melting at a record pace.”
However, Willis Eschenbach of the Watts Up With That? website debunked the claim regarding Greenland on August 3, Breitbart News reported.
Breitbart TV
CLICK TO PLAY
David J. Harris Jr. Claims Facebook 'Killed' His Reach for Posting 'Fake News' ... a CNN Clip
Eschenbach wrote:
We can ask, IF Greenland were to continue losing ice mass at a rate of 103 billion tonnes per year, how long would it take to melt say half of the ice sheet? Not all of it, mind you, but half of it. (Note that I am NOT saying that extending a current trend is a way to estimate the future evolution of the ice sheet—I’m merely using it as a way to compare large numbers.)
To answer our question if 103 billion tonnes lost per year is a big number, we have to compare the annual ice mass loss to the amount of ice in the Greenland ice sheet. The Greenland ice sheet contains about 2.6E+15 (2,600,000,000,000,000) tonnes of water in the form of snow and ice.
So IF the Greenland ice sheet were to lose 103 billion tonnes per year into the indefinite future, it would take about twelve thousand five hundred years to lose half of it …
On August 26, Forbes contributor Michael Shellenberger wrotethat the hysteria surrounding the fires in the Amazon was actually misinformation. Shellenberger also noted that Dan Nepstad, one of the world’s leading Amazon forest experts, told him the claim that the Amazon is the “lungs of the earth” was also not true.
“There’s no science behind that. The Amazon produces a lot of oxygen but it uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration so it’s a wash,” Nepstad said.
Shellenberger also noted that the deforestation of the Amazon declined “a whopping 70 percent from 2004 to 2012” and that recent increases are still at “one-quarter of its 2004 peak.”
Photos of the forest fires that were shared on social media by celebrities were not actually pictures of the Amazon, according to Shellenberger.
“The photo Ronaldo shared was taken in southern Brazil, far from the Amazon, in 2013,” he wrote. “The photo that DiCaprio and Macron shared is over 20 years old. The photo Madonna and Smith shared is over 30. Some celebrities shared photos from Montana, India, and Sweden.”