(Q Anon ) WARNINGTO MILLIONS AMERICANS! Will Trump Be Arrested? Arrested Who's Next?

Trump criticizes border wall deal: 'Can't say I'm happy'

on Tuesday knocked a bipartisan deal to avert a government shutdown, but suggested he could still get his long-desired border wall built and expressed confidence the government would remain open.

“I’m not happy about it. It’s not doing the trick,” Trump told reporters during a Cabinet meeting at the White House.

“I’m adding things to it, and when you add whatever I have to add, it’s all going to happen where we’re going to build a beautiful, big, strong wall,” the president continued.

The government will enter another partial shutdown on Saturday if Trump does not sign the agreement, which was struck by Capitol Hill negotiators just one day earlier and contains only a fraction of the money he demanded for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Trump predicted there would not be a shutdown but added “if you did have it, it's the Democrats fault.”

“I would hope that there won’t be a shutdown,” he said. “I am extremely unhappy with what the Democrats have given us. It’s sad. They’re doing the country no favors.”

Trump’s comments added fresh uncertainty to the emerging compromise, which must be signed into law by midnight Friday. Roughly one quarter of the federal government, including the Department of Homeland Security, will shut down for the second time this year if the deal fails.

The proposal would provide $1.375 billion in funding for roughly 55 miles of new barriers along the southern border, well short of the $5.7 billion Trump demanded.

In exchange, Democrats dropped their insistence that Congress place a hard cap on the number of immigrants that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is allowed to detain at a given time.

A bipartisan committee reached the deal on Monday night after talks appeared to have reached a stalemate over the weekend amid an intense fight over whether the number of detention beds should be capped. Negotiators cast the deal as the best solution to avert a shutdown.

“You know, would I like to have done more? Absolutely. But in negotiations, you give and take, and we think overall it’s a pretty good deal,” said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).

Trump did not say how he would add to the budget deal but he appeared to open the door to redirecting certain federal funding dedicated for other projects toward the wall, a move recently floated by White House advisers to begin wall construction while stopping short of making a controversial national emergency declaration.

“I am not happy. But am I happy with where we’re going? I’m thrilled because we’re supplementing things and moving things around and we’re doing things that are fantastic and taking from far less important areas and the bottom line is we’re building a lot of wall,” Trump said.

Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Sunday he has already found funds in other accounts that could be repurposed for wall construction, but did not identify specific sources.

“There’s pots of money where presidents, all presidents, have access to without a national emergency. And there’s ones that he will not have access to without that declaration,” Mulvaney said on NBC News’s “Meet the Press.”

The president also did not rule out declaring a national emergency to circumvent Congress to build the wall, saying “I’m considering everything.”

But those moves could face legal challenges that could stymie any attempt to build a wall using the executive authority.

The deal, and Trump’s response to it, came under attack from conservatives who said it would not result in getting the wall built, one of the president’s core campaign promises from 2016.

“Trump talks a good game on the border wall but it's increasingly clear he's afraid to fight for it. Call this his ‘Yellow New Deal,’ ” right-wing commentator Ann Coulter tweeted on Tuesday around the same time Trump was speaking.

Trump triggered the last shutdown in December after conservatives blasted him for initially backing a spending deal that included no wall funding. Trump has repeatedly defended his decision, even though it resulted in a massive hit for his approval ratings.

“I'm proud of what we've accomplished because people learned during that shutdown all about the problems coming in from the southern border,” he said. “I accept it. I've always accepted it. But this one, I would never accept it if it happens, but I don't think it's going to happen. But this would be totally on the Democrats.”

Trump was also facing pressure from congressional Republicans who are eager to avoid another shutdown. Polls showed GOP lawmakers also received heavy blame for the last funding lapse, which lasted 35 days, caused roughly 800,000 federal workers to miss two paychecks and resulted in major disruptions at airports and national parks.

“I told the president I thought he, as well as all of us, ought to wait until we've actually read the final deal. I have recommended that if it becomes what we think it is, I do recommend he sign it,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

“I think the experience is sufficient to show them this does no good at all,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.).

While Trump’s remarks suggested he may reluctantly accept the deal, lawmakers were taking a wait-and-see approach. Republicans were caught off-guard in late December when the president reversed himself and decided not to sign the budget agreement.

“I think this thing’s a long way from being over. Nobody should start humming ‘One Shining Moment’ yet,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), referring to the Luther Vandross song that is played on television at the end of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament.

God Emperor Trump Conquers Italy While Terror Stricken European Socialists Cower In FearAn interesting new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today confirming that there are no plans for President Putin to meet with President Trump, states that this a normal occurrence as both Russian and United States leaders throughout modern times have kept a distance from each other during times of European Union chaos and upheaval so as not to be accused of interference—but that Trump has stunningly and inadvertently been thrust into the volatile center of after over 600,000 peoples attending the Carnevale Di Viargeggio festival in Viareggio-Italy burst into ecstatic cheers upon seeing in their midst a nearly 50-foot statue called “God Emperor Trump”—and to the horror and fear of cowering European socialists, had in its right hand a sword with a ring of blue Twitter birdies on its hilt having the Latin phrase “Dazi Vostri”, which translates to “your taxes”—and had inscribed on its blade the Latin phrase “Cazzi Vostri”—an expression that is actually a play on words meaning “none of your fucking business”  

According to this report, last week President Trump vowed to his peoples that he would never allow America to become a socialist nation—a vow immediately met with his approval rating soaring among likely voters to its best in 23-months at 52%--and that echoed into the European Union where Trump’s approval rating already towers over all of its socialist leaders—such as French President Macron only having a 27% approval rating, British Prime Minister May only having an approval rating of 28%, and German Chancellor Merkel only having an approval rating at 29%. 
By President Trump being the most popular Western leader in the European Union, this report explains, socialist leaders throughout Europe continue to tremble in fear over the impact this will have on their upcoming 2019 European Parliament Election—where between the dates of 23-26 May 2019, a total of 751 Members of the European Parliament currently representing more than 512 million people from 28 member states will be elected to power.

Having lived for nearly 70-years under near continuous tyrannical socialist rule, this report continues, the European peoples were mesmerized in 2016 by the election of President Trump—whom their socialist leaders and propaganda media first told them could never be elected, but when he was were then told he would, in essence, destroy the American economy.
Most unfortunately for these socialist European leaders, however, this report notes, is that upon taking power, President Trump has created one of the greatest economic miracles ever seen in modern times—and today sees him having made the United States the most economically powerful nation our world has ever seen—a fact not lost on the European peoples being economically strangled to death by high taxes and thousands of petty regulations—and in France has led to their now unstoppable Yellow Vest protest movement demanding that their socialist leaders start following Trump’s policies—and whom today are being stopped by police to prevent them from entering Italy—and whose reasons for wanting to get into Italy is so they can join forces with Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, (who dominates the government in Rome) who has just declared to Trump “I can be your closest ally in Europe”.

Along with Italian Deputy Prime Minister Salvini rushing to aid President Trump in freeing the European peoples from tyrannical socialist rule, this reports says, is Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, who will meet Trump later this month at the White House, and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has just announced seven family-friendly government programmes that will encourage Hungarians to have children as the country rejects the European Union’s progressive mass migration agenda.
Most ingeniously being done by President Trump to free the European peoples from tyrannical socialist rule, however, this report states, is his having created for them a mass media establishment that’s been able to break through leftist mainstream propaganda—that on one side is anchored by top Trump aid Steve Bannon through his “Movement” organization spread throughout Europe—and on the other side is anchored by the Gatestone Institute—that has flooded Europe with hundreds of national-populist truth telling websites, and is headed by Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton. 

The greatest fear underlying President Trump and his allies actions in freeing Europe from tyrannical socialist rule, this report explains, is their knowing that throughout history, the end result of socialist politically correct identity politics policies is genocide—as best exampled last century by the National Socialists Workers’ Party of Germany (Nazis), whose rampage across Europe to destroy capitalism caused the deaths of tens-of-millions—most particularly those deemed as “deplorables”, who happened to be Jewish peoples—and whose fears of happening again is even being noted by Germany’s powerful Frankfurter Allgemeiner newspaper—who explicitly touches the ‘”live rail”  in their op-ed titled “A Nazi EU?” [English] where they openly speculated on whether or not the present European Union, dominated by Germany, should be understood as a lineal extension of German National Socialism..
In support of these fears that socialism is about to yet again blossom into full Nazism in the European Union, this report warns, radical socialist forces in France opposing Yellow Vest protesters have begun a campaign of attacks against Jewish peoples, monuments and businesses—the most chilling of which was when the word “Juden” was spray painted on a Jewish bakery in Paris—and was a vile act shockingly supported by socialist Democrat Party US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar who then proceeded to go on a Twitter rampage against Jewish peoples the like of which has never been seen. 

Trying at all costs to stop President Trump from freeing the European peoples from socialist tyranny, this report concludes, is globalist-socialist multi-billionaire George Soros—a self admitted collaborator with the Nazis during World War II, who in 1992 masterminded “Black Wednesday” to crash the British economy, and in 2016 became the “puppetmaster” hidden behind the scene to pull strings for Hillary Clinton and her Democrat Party—but who today lives in terror of what’s soon to come, and as evidenced in the words he just issued that, in part, say:
Europe is sleepwalking into oblivion, and the people of Europe need to wake up before it is too late.
If they don’t, the European Union will go the way of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Neither our leaders nor ordinary citizens seem to understand that we are experiencing a revolutionary moment, that the range of possibilities is very broad, and that the eventual outcome is thus highly uncertain.
The next inflection point will be the elections for the European Parliament in May 2019.  Unfortunately, anti-European forces will enjoy a competitive advantage in the balloting.
It is difficult to see how the pro-European parties can emerge victorious from the election in May unless they put Europe’s interests ahead of their own.  One can still make a case for preserving the EU in order radically to reinvent it.
But that would require a change of heart in the EU.
The current leadership is reminiscent of the politburo when the Soviet Union collapsed – continuing to issue proclimations as if they were still relevant.

President Trump's SOTU Affirmed Liberty to Unresponsive Subversives

An hour before Pres. Donald Trump's State of the Union Address, I opened my mail.  It included a thank-you note regarding a contribution I had made to a right-wing organization.  The author of the note quoted Nikita Khrushchev, who said, "You Americans are so gullible.  No, you won't accept communism outright, but we'll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you finally wake up and find you already have communism."  The author of the thank-you note was revolted by this remark by N.K. and knew I would be as well. 

I grew up during the Cold War and understood that communism was not merely an alternative theory of politics and economics to that held by most Americans, but was a living and breathing threat to our freedom emanating 24-7 from the USSR, the PRC, and a determined fifth column of traitorous leftists living in these United States.  Our conflict with communism was not a mere academic or drawing room debate between gentleman-scholars.  Rather, the ardent supporters of communism wished to extract the essence of our freedom and opportunities from our society. 

In the name of curbing the rich, they wish to curb us all, grab power, assert governmental force over every area of our lives, and make themselves arbiters of every life decision we make – where we live, what kind of work each of us does, where and when we can and cannot travel, how to heat our homes or even build our homes, where to go to school, how many children to have, how long we live and under what conditions we live, and even the thoughts we think.  Almost all that we now consider "private" they would refashion and reconfigure to be seen as "public."  Our individual rights would be subsumed under collective rights. 

As Richard Overy relates in his remarkable volume, The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia, under the Soviet Union system of law, a person could be deemed guilty of a crime simply because he was documented to have had thoughts similar to the thoughts of  those who actually plotted and committed a crime even if he had had no part in planning or carrying out the crime.  Thus, when I see Bernie Sanders's bespectacled face, I see not just another person with whom I have some differences of opinion, but, behind his college professor visage, a hideous expression of hatred for all that we hold dear.  In like manner do I perceive the other leftists of the Democratic Party with their pro-communism agenda despite their attempts to present those views as mainstream or make them sound less threatening by calling them socialistic.

Pres. Donald Trump spat in the face of the socialists and socialists in sheep's clothing of the Democratic Party during Tuesday evening's State of the Union address.  "America was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination, and control," he said to Republican applause.  He continued, "We are born free and we will stay free.  Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country."  These sentences cleared the air.  There is no hiding from the truth encapsulated in these words.  Fresh air blew through the hall and could be felt over the airwaves. 

The Democrats should be repudiating the extreme leftists in their party; instead, they are embracing the far left ideology.  During the 1930s and 1940s, the Democrats went through a crisis where they had to repudiate the extreme left wing of the party, which roughly can be designated as those led by Henry Wallace.  President Harry Truman fired Wallace from his position as secretary of commerce because he perceived Wallace as being too conciliatory toward the Soviet Union.  Wallace subsequently formed the Progressive Party and ran for president against Truman and the Republican candidate, Thomas Dewey, in 1948 but garnered only 2.4% of the vote.  Here was a case where the Democratic Party's leader repudiated the far-left wing of that party.  Nevertheless, it was an ironic and striking reality that a large percentage of the Socialist Party platform of 1912 had been implemented in the U.S., including the graduated income tax, by the time Wallace was rejected.  Most of the implementation came during the New Deal under President Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Only in their program of "Collective Ownership" were the goals of the Socialist Party not met over time.  The people of the U.S. decided on regulation instead of ownership.  The socialists wanted ownership of all banks, all transportation, all mines, all means of communication, and all land.

Similar trends can be seen in the labor movement in the 1940s era.  Many unions that had been strongly supportive of Pres. Franklin Roosevelt because of his initiative in getting the Wagner Act through Congress at the same time tried to purge their ranks of communist leadership.  My own father was a union activist with the Transport Workers' Union.  That union had been formed both by men who were communist unionists and by non-communist unionists.  Under the leadership of Michael Quill, whose base was staunchly Irish Catholic and still held many so-called "bourgeois values," repudiated and kicked out the communist wing of the union, also in 1948, as the Cold War picked up a head of steam. 

Earlier in the century, Eugene V. Debs had run for president three times as leader of the Socialist Party, but his aggressive objection to World War I led to his imprisonment and severely set back the socialist-communist agenda in the U.S.

Make no mistake about it: the Socialist Party was adamantly against private ownership of property.  One need only read its platform of 1912 to see that.  Labeling themselves socialists to distinguish themselves from communists should be taken with a grain of salt.  Early on, the socialists realized that the word "communism" had so many negative connotations for Americans that the term "socialism" would be more palatable to the citizenry.  However, their desire to control (not merely regulate) all major industries was explicit, with control of smaller industries and businesses implied. 

By the last presidential election of 2016, the platform of the socialists had morphed into 248 bullet points, a veritable stew of negativism that advocated for intense federal controls to invade almost every area of American life.  Today's Democrats are no longer repudiating communist ideas and ideals, but are embracing in ever greater numbers its calls for universal Medicare, universal free higher education, open borders under the rubric of compassion, elimination of the electoral college, and an embrace of worldwide climate change agendas with a massive redistribution of wealth to the Third World and ever increasing government controls over every detail of daily life.  These policy themes that would require a tremendous curtailment of freedom are being embraced and advocated by Democrats rather than repudiated. 

The communist focus of 1948 was repudiated by the Democrats of 1948, but it is being incorporated as the mainstream ideas and ideals of that party today, and individual choice and individual property rights are disparaged.  During the State of the Union address, President Trump spoke forcefully and directly into the faces of subversion.  Although many on the left were dressed in white, they represented the dark side of humanity.  All the purity was in Trump's liberty-loving remarks.

The Hijacking of a Presidential Election

In January of 2017, the Federal Election Commission reported that in the 2016 general election Mrs. Clinton received 65,853,516 votes and Mr. Trump received 62,984,825 votes. Clinton therefore beat Trump by 2,868,691 popular votes.

President Trump has said that if the illegal votes were deducted that he would have won the popular vote. If one looks at that FEC report, one sees that in California, the state with the most illegal aliens, Clinton got 8,753,788 votes, while Trump got 4,483,810 votes. So Clinton beat Trump in California by 4,269,978 votes.

What’s interesting is that Clinton beat Trump by more votes in California than she did nationwide, precisely 1,401,287 more votes. Though Trump’s claim that illegal voting threw the popular vote to Clinton is sheer speculation, we can say that if we exclude California that Trump did in fact win the popular vote in the rest of the nation, and by exactly 1,401,287 votes.

Because Trump didn’t get any electoral votes in California and New York, when we subtract the electoral votes of those two states, Clinton won just 143 electoral votes in the rest of the nation while Trump’s electoral total remains unchanged at 304. In the Electoral College, which is what we use to elect our presidents, Trump beats Clinton by more than 2-to-1 when California and New York are excluded. Even if the votes of the seven faithless electors were given to Clinton, Trump would still have trounced Clinton by more than 2-1 in the 48 states of “real America.”

It takes a bare minimum of 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. Had Clinton received all 46 electoral votes in the blue wall states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, she would have gotten 273 electoral votes. She then could afford to lose only the least populous of those three states, Wisconsin, and still prevail, but only if she were also awarded all seven votes of the faithless electors. In which case, Clinton would have won with a grand total of 270 electoral votes.

Government officials have assured us that Russians did not change the vote counts in 2016. Elections are conducted by the states, and each state has its own separate election system, so changing the votes would be enormously difficult. And besides, “there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections, in part because they’re so decentralized.” We were told this by no less than Obama Himself, (so it must be true).

Obama fails to see the obvious. If the Russians wanted to throw the popular vote to Trump in 2016, all they would have needed to change is the popular vote in just one state, California with its 55 electoral votes… not the entire country. Trump could have even lost his three “blue wall” states and still have won had he gotten California, and he’d have had an even greater total at 313 electoral votes.

Some progressives think we should junk the Electoral College and elect presidents with the popular vote. Other progressives think we should rejigger the College and allocate its votes in a way that is closer to the popular vote. But if one believes in federalism, the above data argues just the opposite. We can’t have the preferences of two populous coastal states being imposed on the other 48 states merely because they have some tiny majority. That’s especially so when those two states are so very different from the rest of the country. Let California have its tent cities, its free healthcare for illegal aliens, and its San Francisco values, but leave us “hicks” in the heartland alone.

Given the above, I think we can say that in 2016 the Electoral College worked as intended, and that America got the correct president, the one she needed. Even so, the electoral vote is derived from the popular vote, so there’s still the nagging little question of what thelegitimate popular vote count really was.

One of the safeguards to ensuring the integrity of the popular vote is voter registration. But the states are failing at this important task. Recently, California came under fire for registering illegal aliens at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

On October 8, the San Francisco Chronicle ran “California DMV may have registered noncitizens to vote” by Melody Gutierrez, who quoted Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno:

“There is much more to see here than what the DMV is admitting to,” Patterson said. “They have either been hiding the truth from the public or are completely unaware of this voter registration disaster -- either should be a startling realization for this governor and the public... We cannot trust the current management to fix the very problems they created.”

(But what does Patterson know, he’s an Anglo. He might even have a MAGA hat.)

The Secretary of State has responsibility for voter registration in California. But despite the snafus in his office, Secy. Alex Padilla was re-elected in November, and in a landslide.

On October 10, the New York Times reported in its “California Today” series: “At the center of the controversy is California’s new Motor Voter program, which automatically registers eligible voters who visit the D.M.V. to renew or replace their drivers’ licenses.”

On January 7, Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times reported on a settlement to a suit brought by Judicial Watch (video) in which Los Angeles County agreed to purge its voter registries of inactive voters perhaps numbering 1.5 million:

Judicial Watch said it targeted Los Angeles after finding the county’s total voter population was higher than the number of people the Census Bureau estimates to be citizens of voting age in the county. That’s true for the state overall, which Judicial Watch said has a 101 percent registration rate for its eligible adult population.

Here’s the thing about California’s voter registries: a federal law enacted 23 years ago mandates that only citizens can vote for federal officials. It was called the “Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.” For the operative language, see SEC. 216 on page 26 of the pdf of the entire act, or if you want the short sweet excision, click 18 U.S. Code § 611. Voting by aliens.

Since they’re corrupted, can California’s voter registries be used in the election of a federal official? The problem of illegal aliens on California voter registries isn’t just a problem at the DMV, as voter registration in California asks for only the last four digits of one’s SSN. California isn’t doing even the most basic vetting to comply with the requirement that voters for federal officials be citizens.

California is by no means unique, however, as none of the states really verify registrants’ citizenship, not even in Kris Kobach’s Kansas. Perhaps the Electoral College should reject a state’s votes if that state cannot demonstrate that all of its registrants and voters are citizens.

The vulnerability of our federal elections to fraud is just fine and dandy with the Democrats because they’ve been planning to steal the 2020 election anyway. Why do you suppose the Dems hate voter ID laws and love open borders? Democrats don’t want President Trump’s wall precisely because it keeps their voters out. The illegal alien vote is the Democrats’ “insurance policy.”