CA Going Carbon Negative – Costs Don’t Matter

Posted by Jack

Nobody knows the costs or the impact on California taxpayers and businesses, but never mind that, the goal is to produce more clean air than dirty air so its worth it.

Senate Bill 100, signed yesterday by Governor Edmund Brown, increases the amount of electricity to be supplied by renewables to 60% by 2030 – up from the current target of 50% by 2030 – with all of its retail electricity supply to come from renewable energy and zero-carbon resources by 2045.

The bill also requires the state’s Public Utilities Commission and its Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to take steps to ensure that a transition to a zero-carbon electric system for California does not cause or contribute to greenhouse gas emission increases elsewhere in the western grid.

The executive order reaches beyond the electricity sector, which represents 16% of California’s GHG emissions, directing the state to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and net negative GHG emissions after that. This will require large investments across all sectors – energy, transportation, industrial, commercial and residential buildings, agriculture, and various forms of sequestration including natural and working lands, Brown said.

“This bill and the executive order put California on a path to meet the goals of Paris and beyond. It will not be easy. It will not be immediate. But it must be done,” Brown said. He did not mention costs or who was going to pay for it and what its overall impact would be on the State’s economy.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | 13 Comments

CA Health Care Costs About to Skyrocket!

by Jack

The California Senate is preparing to pass legislation that would add steep penalties and open the door for civil suits, against hospitals, should they attempt to discharge a homeless patient without first securing a whole host of things such as a free shelter, food and clothing, to a free medical plan.

Considering that CA already has attracted over 25% of the nations homeless to come here, because we offer so much, the new requirements on our hospitals is going to be overwhelming and quite possibly impossible to meet. What this bill means to you is, higher taxes and less access to critical medical care facilities, because very few hospitals will be able to cope with this bill. That means many big hospitals will likely be forced into bankruptcy and shut down. The liability to hospitals is going to be absolutely horrendous.

This bill provides that no homeless person can be discharged from a hospital before the hospital has secured for them, food, clothing and shelter and an extensive medical plan, including, but not limited to, free counselling, a posthospital care plan and re-entry life plan, plus many more things that are enumerated below.

A failure to satisfactorily provide for any one of these complex and costly steps will result in a violation of the Health and Safety Code and punitive active could result in a heavy fine, loss of license and it will make the offending hospital wide-open to a civil suit. This begs the question, would lawyers attempt to exploit the technical errors that are bound to arise because of this new law? After all, hospitals are known to have deep pockets and they have malpractice insurance! In the past, suing hospitals has made many an attorney quite wealthy and now we are about to deliver this gift to the lawyers of CA. It will be like throwing chum to the sharks.

SB 1152 – The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 1262.5 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

1262.5. (a) Each hospital shall have a written discharge planning policy and process.
(b) The policy required by subdivision (a) shall require that appropriate arrangements for posthospital care, including, but not limited to, care at home, in a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility, or from a hospice, are made prior to discharge for those patients who are likely to suffer adverse health consequences upon discharge if there is no adequate discharge planning. If the hospital determines that the patient and family members or interested persons need to be counseled to prepare them for posthospital care, the hospital shall provide for that counseling.
(c) As part of the discharge planning process, the hospital shall provide each patient who has been admitted to the hospital as an inpatient with an opportunity to identify one family caregiver who may assist in posthospital care, and shall record this information in the patient’s medical chart.
(1) In the event that the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapacitated upon admittance to the hospital, the hospital shall provide the patient or patient’s legal guardian with an opportunity to designate a caregiver within a specified time period, at the discretion of the attending physician, following the patient’s recovery of consciousness or capacity. The hospital shall promptly document the attempt in the patient’s medical record.
(2) In the event that the patient or legal guardian declines to designate a caregiver pursuant to this section, the hospital shall promptly document this declination in the patient’s medical record, when appropriate.
(d) The policy required by subdivision (a) shall require that the patient’s designated family caregiver be notified of the patient’s discharge or transfer to another facility as soon as possible and, in any event, upon issuance of a discharge order by the patient’s attending physician. If the hospital is unable to contact the designated caregiver, the lack of contact shall not interfere with, delay, or otherwise affect the medical care provided to the patient or an appropriate discharge of the patient. The hospital shall promptly document the attempted notification in the patient’s medical record.
(e) The process required by subdivision (a) shall require that the patient and family caregiver be informed of the continuing health care requirements following discharge from the hospital. The right to information regarding continuing health care requirements following discharge shall also apply to the person who has legal responsibility to make decisions regarding medical care on behalf of the patient, if the patient is unable to make those decisions for himself or herself. The hospital shall provide an opportunity for the patient and his or her designated family caregiver to engage in the discharge planning process, which shall include providing information and, when appropriate, instruction regarding the posthospital care needs of the patient. This information shall include, but is not limited to, education and counseling about the patient’s medications, including dosing and proper use of medication delivery devices, when applicable. The information shall be provided in a culturally competent manner and in a language that is comprehensible to the patient and caregiver, consistent with the requirements of state and federal law, and shall include an opportunity for the caregiver to ask questions about the posthospital care needs of the patient.
(f) (1) A transfer summary shall accompany the patient upon transfer to a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility or to the distinct part-skilled nursing or intermediate care service unit of the hospital. The transfer summary shall include essential information relative to the patient’s diagnosis, hospital course, pain treatment and management, medications, treatments, dietary requirement, rehabilitation potential, known allergies, and treatment plan, and shall be signed by the physician.
(2) A copy of the transfer summary shall be given to the patient and the patient’s legal representative, if any, prior to transfer to a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility.
(g) A hospital shall establish and implement a written policy to ensure that each patient receives, at the time of discharge, information regarding each medication dispensed, pursuant to Section 4074 of the Business and Professions Code.
(h) A hospital shall provide every patient anticipated to be in need of long-term care at the time of discharge with contact information for at least one public or nonprofit agency or organization dedicated to providing information or referral services relating to community-based long-term care options in the patient’s county of residence and appropriate to the needs and characteristics of the patient. At a minimum, this information shall include contact information for the area agency on aging serving the patient’s county of residence, local independent living centers, or other information appropriate to the needs and characteristics of the patient.
(i) A contract between a general acute care hospital and a health care service plan that is issued, amended, renewed, or delivered on or after January 1, 2002, shall not contain a provision that prohibits or restricts any health care facility’s compliance with the requirements of this section.
(j) Discharge planning policies adopted by a hospital in accordance with this section shall ensure that planning is appropriate to the condition of the patient being discharged from the hospital and to the discharge destination and meets the needs and acuity of patients.
(k) This section does not require a hospital to do any of the following:
(1) Adopt a policy that would delay discharge or transfer of a patient.
(2) Disclose information if the patient has not provided consent that meets the standards required by state and federal laws governing the privacy and security of protected health information.
(3) Comply with the requirements of this section in an area of the hospital where clinical care is provided, unless medically indicated.
(l) This section does not supersede or modify any privacy and information security requirements and protections in federal and state law regarding protected health information or personally identifiable information, including, but not limited to, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 300gg).
(m) For the purposes of this section, “family caregiver” means a relative, friend, or neighbor who provides assistance related to an underlying physical or mental disability but who is unpaid for those services.
(n) (1) Each hospital, as defined in subdivisions (a), (b), and (f) of Section 1250, shall include within its hospital discharge policy a written homeless patient discharge planning policy and process.
(2) The policy shall require a hospital to inquire about a patient’s housing status during the discharge planning process. Housing status may not be used to discriminate against a patient or prevent medically necessary care or hospital admission.
(3) The policy shall require an individual discharge plan for a homeless patient that helps prepare the homeless patient for return to the community by connecting him or her with available community resources, treatment, shelter, and other supportive services. The discharge planning shall be guided by the best interests of the homeless patient, his or her physical and mental condition, and the homeless patient’s preferences for placement. The homeless patient shall be informed of available placement options.
(4) Unless the homeless patient is being transferred to another licensed health facility, the policy shall require the hospital to identify a postdischarge destination for the homeless patient as follows, with priority given to identifying a sheltered destination with supportive services:
(A) A social services agency, nonprofit social services provider, or governmental service provider that has agreed to accept the homeless patient, if he or she has agreed to the placement. Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of subdivision (k) and subdivision (l), the hospital shall provide potential receiving agencies or providers written or electronic information about the homeless patient’s known posthospital health and behavioral health care needs and shall document the name of the person at the agency or provider who agreed to accept the homeless patient.
(B) The homeless patient’s residence. In the case of a homeless patient, “residence” for the purposes of this subparagraph means the location identified to the hospital by the homeless patient as his or her principal dwelling place.
(C) An alternative destination, as indicated by the homeless patient pursuant to the discharge planning process described in paragraph (3). The hospital shall document the destination indicated by the homeless patient or his or her representative.
(5) The policy shall require that information regarding discharge or transfer be provided to the homeless patient in a culturally competent manner and in a language that is understood by the homeless patient.
(o) The hospital shall document all of the following prior to discharging a homeless patient:
(1) The treating physician has determined the homeless patient’s clinical stability for discharge, including, but not limited to, an assessment as to whether the patient is alert and oriented to person, place, and time, and the physician or designee has communicated postdischarge medical needs to the homeless patient.
(2) The homeless patient has been offered a meal, unless medically indicated otherwise.
(3) If the homeless patient’s clothing is inadequate, the hospital shall offer the homeless patient weather-appropriate clothing.
(4) The homeless patient has been referred to a source of followup care, if medically necessary.
(5) The homeless patient has been provided with a prescription, if needed, and, for a hospital with an onsite pharmacy licensed and staffed to dispense outpatient medication, an appropriate supply of all necessary medication, if available.
(6) The homeless patient has been offered or referred to screening for infectious disease common to the region, as determined by the local health department.
(7) The homeless patient has been offered vaccinations appropriate to the homeless patient’s presenting medical condition.
(8) The treating physician has provided a medical screening examination and evaluation. If the treating physician determines that the results of the medical screening examination and evaluation indicate that followup behavioral health care is needed, the homeless patient shall be treated or referred to an appropriate provider. The hospital shall make a good faith effort to contact one of the following, if applicable:
(A) The homeless patient’s health plan, if the homeless patient is enrolled in a health plan.
(B) The homeless patient’s primary care provider, if the patient has identified one.
(C) Another appropriate provider, including, but not limited to, the coordinated entry system.
(9) The homeless patient has been screened for, and provided assistance to enroll in, any affordable health insurance coverage for which he or she is eligible.
(10) The hospital has offered the homeless patient transportation after discharge to the destination identified in paragraph (4) of subdivision (n), if that destination is within a maximum travel time of 30 minutes or a maximum travel distance of 30 miles of the hospital. This requirement shall not be construed to prevent a hospital from offering transportation to a more distant destination.
(p) For purposes of this section, “homeless patient” has the same meaning as provided in Section 1262.4.
(q) Subdivisions (n) to (p), inclusive, do not apply to the state hospitals under the jurisdiction of the State Department of State Hospitals, as specified in Sections 4100 and 7200 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(r) This section shall remain in effect only until July 1, 2019, and as of that date is repealed.

SEC. 2. Section 1262.5 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:

1262.5. (a) Each hospital shall have a written discharge planning policy and process.
(b) The policy required by subdivision (a) shall require that appropriate arrangements for posthospital care, including, but not limited to, care at home, in a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility, or from a hospice, are made prior to discharge for those patients who are likely to suffer adverse health consequences upon discharge if there is no adequate discharge planning. If the hospital determines that the patient and family members or interested persons need to be counseled to prepare them for posthospital care, the hospital shall provide for that counseling.
(c) As part of the discharge planning process, the hospital shall provide each patient who has been admitted to the hospital as an inpatient with an opportunity to identify one family caregiver who may assist in posthospital care, and shall record this information in the patient’s medical chart.
(1) In the event that the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapacitated upon admittance to the hospital, the hospital shall provide the patient or patient’s legal guardian with an opportunity to designate a caregiver within a specified time period, at the discretion of the attending physician, following the patient’s recovery of consciousness or capacity. The hospital shall promptly document the attempt in the patient’s medical record.
(2) In the event that the patient or legal guardian declines to designate a caregiver pursuant to this section, the hospital shall promptly document this declination in the patient’s medical record, when appropriate.
(d) The policy required by subdivision (a) shall require that the patient’s designated family caregiver be notified of the patient’s discharge or transfer to another facility as soon as possible and, in any event, upon issuance of a discharge order by the patient’s attending physician. If the hospital is unable to contact the designated caregiver, the lack of contact shall not interfere with, delay, or otherwise affect the medical care provided to the patient or an appropriate discharge of the patient. The hospital shall promptly document the attempted notification in the patient’s medical record.
(e) The process required by subdivision (a) shall require that the patient and family caregiver be informed of the continuing health care requirements following discharge from the hospital. The right to information regarding continuing health care requirements following discharge shall also apply to the person who has legal responsibility to make decisions regarding medical care on behalf of the patient, if the patient is unable to make those decisions for himself or herself. The hospital shall provide an opportunity for the patient and his or her designated family caregiver to engage in the discharge planning process, which shall include providing information and, when appropriate, instruction regarding the posthospital care needs of the patient. This information shall include, but is not limited to, education and counseling about the patient’s medications, including dosing and proper use of medication delivery devices, when applicable. The information shall be provided in a culturally competent manner and in a language that is comprehensible to the patient and caregiver, consistent with the requirements of state and federal law, and shall include an opportunity for the caregiver to ask questions about the posthospital care needs of the patient.
(f) (1) A transfer summary shall accompany the patient upon transfer to a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility or to the distinct part-skilled nursing or intermediate care service unit of the hospital. The transfer summary shall include essential information relative to the patient’s diagnosis, hospital course, pain treatment and management, medications, treatments, dietary requirement, rehabilitation potential, known allergies, and treatment plan, and shall be signed by the physician.
(2) A copy of the transfer summary shall be given to the patient and the patient’s legal representative, if any, prior to transfer to a skilled nursing or intermediate care facility.
(g) A hospital shall establish and implement a written policy to ensure that each patient receives, at the time of discharge, information regarding each medication dispensed, pursuant to Section 4074 of the Business and Professions Code.
(h) A hospital shall provide every patient anticipated to be in need of long-term care at the time of discharge with contact information for at least one public or nonprofit agency or organization dedicated to providing information or referral services relating to community-based long-term care options in the patient’s county of residence and appropriate to the needs and characteristics of the patient. At a minimum, this information shall include contact information for the area agency on aging serving the patient’s county of residence, local independent living centers, or other information appropriate to the needs and characteristics of the patient.
(i) A contract between a general acute care hospital and a health care service plan that is issued, amended, renewed, or delivered on or after January 1, 2002, shall not contain a provision that prohibits or restricts any health care facility’s compliance with the requirements of this section.
(j) Discharge planning policies adopted by a hospital in accordance with this section shall ensure that planning is appropriate to the condition of the patient being discharged from the hospital and to the discharge destination and meets the needs and acuity of patients.
(k) This section does not require a hospital to do any of the following:
(1) Adopt a policy that would delay discharge or transfer of a patient.
(2) Disclose information if the patient has not provided consent that meets the standards required by state and federal laws governing the privacy and security of protected health information.
(3) Comply with the requirements of this section in an area of the hospital where clinical care is provided, unless medically indicated.
(l) This section does not supersede or modify any privacy and information security requirements and protections in federal and state law regarding protected health information or personally identifiable information, including, but not limited to, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 300gg).
(m) For the purposes of this section, “family caregiver” means a relative, friend, or neighbor who provides assistance related to an underlying physical or mental disability but who is unpaid for those services.
(n) (1) Each hospital, as defined in subdivisions (a), (b), and (f) of Section 1250, shall include within its hospital discharge policy a written homeless patient discharge planning policy and process.
(2) The policy shall require a hospital to inquire about a patient’s housing status during the discharge planning process. Housing status may not be used to discriminate against a patient or prevent medically necessary care or hospital admission.
(3) The policy shall require an individual discharge plan for a homeless patient that helps prepare the homeless patient for return to the community by connecting him or her with available community resources, treatment, shelter, and other supportive services. The discharge planning shall be guided by the best interests of the homeless patient, his or her physical and mental condition, and the homeless patient’s preferences for placement. The homeless patient shall be informed of available placement options.
(4) Unless the homeless patient is being transferred to another licensed health facility, the policy shall require the hospital to identify a postdischarge destination for the homeless patient as follows, with priority given to identifying a sheltered destination with supportive services:
(A) A social services agency, nonprofit social services provider, or governmental service provider that has agreed to accept the homeless patient, if he or she has agreed to the placement. Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of subdivision (k) and subdivision (l), the hospital shall provide potential receiving agencies or providers written or electronic information about the homeless patient’s known posthospital health and behavioral health care needs and shall document the name of the person at the agency or provider who agreed to accept the homeless patient.
(B) The homeless patient’s residence. In the case of a homeless patient, “residence” for the purposes of this subparagraph means the location identified to the hospital by the homeless patient as his or her principal dwelling place.
(C) An alternative destination, as indicated by the homeless patient pursuant to the discharge planning process described in paragraph (3). The hospital shall document the destination indicated by the homeless patient or his or her representative.
(5) The policy shall require that information regarding discharge or transfer be provided to the homeless patient in a culturally competent manner and in a language that is understood by the homeless patient.
(o) The hospital shall document all of the following prior to discharging a homeless patient:
(1) The treating physician has determined the homeless patient’s clinical stability for discharge, including, but not limited to, an assessment as to whether the patient is alert and oriented to person, place, and time, and the physician or designee has communicated postdischarge medical needs to the homeless patient.
(2) The homeless patient has been offered a meal, unless medically indicated otherwise.
(3) If the homeless patient’s clothing is inadequate, the hospital shall offer the homeless patient weather-appropriate clothing.
(4) The homeless patient has been referred to a source of followup care, if medically necessary.
(5) The homeless patient has been provided with a prescription, if needed, and, for a hospital with an onsite pharmacy licensed and staffed to dispense outpatient medication, an appropriate supply of all necessary medication, if available.
(6) The homeless patient has been offered or referred to screening for infectious disease common to the region, as determined by the local health department.
(7) The homeless patient has been offered vaccinations appropriate to the homeless patient’s presenting medical condition.
(8) The treating physician has provided a medical screening examination and evaluation. If the treating physician determines that the results of the medical screening examination and evaluation indicate that followup behavioral health care is needed, the homeless patient shall be treated or referred to an appropriate provider. The hospital shall make a good faith effort to contact one of the following, if applicable:
(A) The homeless patient’s health plan, if the homeless patient is enrolled in a health plan.
(B) The homeless patient’s primary care provider, if the patient has identified one.
(C) Another appropriate provider, including, but not limited to, the coordinated entry system.
(9) The homeless patient has been screened for, and provided assistance to enroll in, any affordable health insurance coverage for which he or she is eligible.
(10) The hospital has offered the homeless patient transportation after discharge to the destination identified in paragraph (4) of subdivision (n), if that destination is within a maximum travel time of 30 minutes or a maximum travel distance of 30 miles of the hospital. This requirement shall not be construed to prevent a hospital from offering transportation to a more distant destination.
(p) A hospital shall develop a written plan for coordinating services and referrals for homeless patients with the county behavioral health agency, health care and social services agencies in the region, health care providers, and nonprofit social services providers, as available, to assist with ensuring appropriate homeless patient discharge. The plan shall be updated annually and shall include all of the following:
(1) A list of local homeless shelters, including their hours of operation, admission procedures and requirements, client population served, and general scope of medical and behavioral health services available.
(2) The hospital’s procedures for homeless patient discharge referrals to shelter, medical care, and behavioral health care.
(3) The contact information for the homeless shelter’s intake coordinator.
(4) Training protocols for discharge planning staff.
(q) Each hospital shall maintain a log of homeless patients discharged and the destinations to which they were released after discharge pursuant to paragraph (10) of subdivision (o), if any. The hospital shall maintain evidence of completion of the homeless patient discharge protocol in the log or in the patient’s medical record.
(r) For purposes of this section, “homeless patient” has the same meaning as provided in Section 1262.4.
(s) It is the intent of the Legislature that nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt, limit, prohibit, or otherwise affect, the adoption, implementation, or enforcement of local ordinances, codes, regulations, or orders related to the homeless patient discharge processes, except to the extent that any such provision of law is inconsistent with the provisions of this section, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. A local ordinance, code, regulation, or order is not deemed inconsistent with this section if it affords greater protection to homeless patients than the requirements set forth in this section. Where local ordinances, codes, regulations, or orders duplicate or supplement this section, this section shall be construed as providing alternative remedies and shall not be construed to preempt the field.
(t) Nothing in this section alters the health and social service obligations described in Section 17000 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(u) Subdivisions (n) to (t), inclusive, do not apply to the state hospitals under the jurisdiction of the State Department of State Hospitals, as specified in Sections 4100 and 7200 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(v) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2019.

SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

Posted in Healthcare, Homeless and Indigent | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments

Project Veritas to Expose Deep State Players

Posted by Tina

James O’Keefe will release his latest video next week, a project that will expose government employees who operate at the “deep state” level. He announced his plan at a Gateway-Eagle Forum meeting covered by Conservative Tree House:

This cuts to the heart of the questions surrounding: why are “new” Strzok messages being released now? Who was in control of this information prior to now? What was the motive for withholding this information over the past 16 months? What is the motive for releasing this information now?

Unknown, unnamed and faceless administrators (and investigators) within the institutions control almost all of the evidence within the system. The system is designed by those within it to protect itself. James O’Keefe is the first person to openly address this “administrative state”, question the underlying assumptions, and start to put names and faces behind this anonymous bureaucracy.

Should make for a very explosive week on Twitter and elsewhere.Watch for it and if we happen to miss it please cue us in comments.

An aside: I just read the “about us” section of The Last Refuge/Conservative Tree House blog site and decided to share it with you. It describes conservatism and contrasts conservatism and liberalism perfectly.

Posted in Education, Government Fraud and Corruption, Morals and Ethics, National Security, Political Intrigue, Western Values | 3 Comments

Investigations Snare Tony Podesta and Greg Craig

Posted by Tina

Tony Podesta, brother to Hillary Clinton friend and political ally John Podesta, has been named in connection with the Manafort case. Podesta’s lobbying firm worked closely with Paul Manafort according to the indictment. The Daily Caller:

Two lobbying firms, including one owned by Democratic superlobbyist Tony Podesta, knowingly worked with Paul Manafort at the direction of the Ukrainian government, according to an indictment released Friday by the special counsel’s office. …

… Working at Manafort’s direction, Mercury and Podesta Group lobbied dozens of members of Congress, their staffers, and White House and Department of State officials regarding a host of issues related to Ukraine, including the validity of its elections.

Manafort frequently briefed Yanukovych on Mercury and Podesta’s lobbying activities. He also tasked the companies to prepare reports that he could provide to Yanukovych.

Also under investigation and possible indictment is former Obama White House council Greg Craig. The Washington Examiner:

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are considering criminal charges against former White House counsel Greg Craig, who served during the first year of the Obama administration, as part of an investigation into former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, according to a new report.

Sources familiar with the matter told CNN that prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York are investigating whether Craig failed to register as a foreign agent. They’re also weighing action against law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, where Craig was employed during the activity under investigation, the report said.

An attorney for Craig told CNN his client “was not required to register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act.”

The charges were referred to the U.S. Attorney’s office by special counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

All of this activity was going on during Obama’s presidency and Hillary Clinton’s term as Secretary of State. It is totally unrelated to the presidency of Donald Trump.

Posted in Government Fraud and Corruption | 3 Comments

Swamp Related: Did John Kerry Undercut Trump Iran

Posted by Tina

Swamp related: Gateway Pundit, “Trump Slams John Kerry For ‘Illegal Meetings’ With Iran: ‘Was he registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act?'”

pop…pop pop…pop….

1 Comment

NATO Chief Thanks President Trump

Posted by Tina

His words were blunt. But he spoke the truth and in doing so, challenged the other members of NATO to hold up their end of the bargain.

He was criticized for his crude style, called unpresidential and accused of destroying relationships with our European allies.

The Washington Times reports today:

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has come through on one of President Trump’s major demands, that members other than the U.S. dramatically boost their defense spending to relieve the burden Washington faces propping up the military alliance.

Speaking in Washington on Friday Mr. Stoltenberg assured the U.S. that America’s leading military allies across Europe and Canada have spent an additional $41 billion on defense over the past year.

“As you know, President Trump has been outspoken on this issue,” Mr. Stoltenberg said during a keynote address at the Heritage Foundation think tank. “And I have thanked him for his leadership on defense spending.”

The President told the truth…pulled no punches. His bold actions had the desired effect. Leaders feel better and are better when they do the right thing.

The President’s style is exactly what’s needed today in many instances. Some are rising to the challenges he’s put forth and then thanking him. In this case our European allies are better prepared to defend themselves and their allies, as agreed.

A good thing all around.

Posted in Foreign policy and affairs, Military, Morals and Ethics, Western Values | 3 Comments

Who Said That? What Will Happen Next?

Posted by Tina

A politician was walking in a poor neighborhood…remarks were captured on video…

“What the hell? We should just take all this sh*t down,” … clearly overwhelmed by the scene. … “Whoa, you can smell the rats.”… “Whew, Jesus. Oh, my God, you can smell the dead animals…”

Who would say such boorish things? I mean people are calling this person out for being offensive and out of touch!

Probably some right winger…could even be Trump, right?

Well it could be Trump. He tells it like it is. He doesn’t mince words but shoots from the gut. His detractors just hate it. They call him all kinds of hateful names…ah, well.

But in this instance, the person caught saying insensitive things is Mayor Catherine Pugh (Dem) of Baltimore, Maryland.

Really?

I say good for her! It’s ridiculous to pretend conditions are anything other that what they are.

Question is, what will she do about it?

Will she have the courage to “tear it down” as she suggested should happen? Will she work with the President and take steps to attract good jobs to the community, enrich the citizens lives, and expand the tax base? Will she adopt a “no broken windows” policy in the neighborhood and support the police force…and ICE? Will she work wit Ben Carson to improve living conditions? Will she stand up to the teachers union and work with Betsey Vos to create better schools for young people? Will she encourage attendance in vocational schools?

Or will she fold like a lounge chair, apologize profusely, and make the same empty promises of free stuff? What will she do for the people counting on her to run their city well?

I say, go with your gut and let your detractors whine, gripe, and protest as you get things done!

Posted in Business and Industry, Education, Homeless and Indigent, Morals and Ethics, Police, politics | 3 Comments

Clear Pattern of Leftist Hate and Violence

Note:   The following article is about free speech and violence.  It’s a rough subject, but I’m hoping you wait until the end to judge it.   Then I would like to hear your thoughts.

 

by Jack

There is such a clear, consistent, and growing pattern of hate and violence coming from the left that it is undeniable.  It is totally unmatched by anything in our history, short of the Civil War in 1861. 

This wide-spread, reprehensible conduct by the far left is so dramatically destructive that it is completely and utterly indefensible.   Liberals may try… calling their acts as self-defense and their expression of free speech.  A sort of  tit for tat, but their moral equivalency argument falls woefully short of the reality we are witnessing.  

It’s around-the-clock hate speech.  Hate the right, oust Trump, use any means necessary, kick them (conservative supporters) out of restaurants, gas stations and wherever you find them; this is the new leftist mantra.  

Many radical leaders are pointedly calling for violence!  They are no longer trying to hide their hate behind political sarcasm or mockery.  This is full on in your face hate.  

It’s coming from the late night talk shows, Hollywood celebs,  in our colleges, from democrat legislators and more.  The left has become so unhinged they would be laughable, if they were not so dangerous.  

The rise of the Neo Brown Shirts: Antifa protestors clad in masks shut down college campuses, destroy property and indiscriminately attack those they disagree with, whether women or the elderly. Meanwhile, CNN fires Kathy Griffin for taking photos with a bloody replica of the president’s decapitated head.

Amid this backdrop, The Huffington Post ran an article calling for the execution of Trump and “everyone assisting his agenda. “…Jason Fuller’s piece contained rhetoric and imagery that seems tasteless, particularly after Wednesday’s events. Fuller boldly declares in the title that “Trump must be prosecuted — if convicted in a court of law — executed.” Fuller doesn’t stop there, however, as he insists that “impeachment isn’t enough” to “drain the swamp,” and to do so means doling out the “ultimate punishment [execution]” in order to fully restore the moral compass of the U.S.

Fuller’s “ultimate punishment” is not only reserved for the president, but also for “everyone assisting in his agenda,” including Republican Reps. Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan and White House strategist Steve Bannon. Fuller claims that “all must face justice” by being tried, convicted and ultimately executed for treason.

This tone comes from a man who self-describes as “critical” of “bullying and extremism.” Fuller uses the term “execution” twice and “ultimate punishment” twice more thereafter as a euphemism for execution, in a piece claiming that those he disagrees with committed “treason.”

THE BALL PARK INCIDENT:   Shots ring out as a man gorged on media hysteria attempts to slaughter Republican congressmen while they practice for a charity baseball game in Washington, D.C.

There have been so many attacks on Trump supports it’s difficult to find them all unless they made into the headlines.  Here are but a few examples of what should wake up every law abiding, patriotic American.  

June 2016: 

Protesters jumped on cars, stole hats, fought with and threw eggs at Trump supporters outside a Trump rally in downtown San Jose, Calif. Trump supporters sued San Jose over the violence.

July 2016:

-A Hillary Clinton supporter lights a flag on fire and attacks a Trump supporter in Pittsburgh.

August 2016:

-Anti-Trump protesters attacked pushed, spit on and verbally harassed attendees forced to walk a “gauntlet” as they left a Trump fundraiser in Minneapolis, Minn., and beat an elderly man. Protesters also attacked Trump’s motorcade.

A Tennessee man was assaulted at a garage sale for being a Trump supporter.

-A Trump supporter in New Jersey was attacked with a crowbar on the street.

September 2016:

-Protesters in El Cajon, Calif., chased and beat up a Trump supporter.

October 2016:

-A GOP office in North Carolina was firebombed and spray painted with ”Nazi Republicans get out of town or else.”

November 2016:

-A high school student was attacked after she wrote that she supported Trump on social media. The perpetrator ripped her glasses off and punched her in the face.

-The president of Cornell University’s College Republicans was assaulted the night after Trump won the election.

-Students protesting Trump punched and kicked a Maryland high school student wearing a Make America Great Again hat.

-A high school student was arrested in Florida after he punched a classmate for carrying a Trump sign at school.

-A group of black men in Chicago attacked a white man while raging against Trump.

-Maryland high school students punched a student who was demonstrating in support of Trump, and then kicked him repeatedly while he was on the ground.

-“You support Trump. You hate Mexicans,” a California high school student yelled at a Trump supporter, before viciously beating the girl.

-An anti-bullying ambassador was arrested for shoving a 74-year-old man to the ground in a fight outside Trump tower where people upset over his win had gathered. The woman tied to Black Lives Matter caused the man to hit his head on the sidewalk.

-A Texas elementary school student was beaten by his classmates for voting for Trump in a mock election.

-Two men punched and kicked a Connecticut man who was standing with an American flag and a Trump sign.

December 2016:

-A Trump supporter was beaten and dragged by a car.

January 2017:

-A Trump supporter was knocked unconscious after airport protesters repeatedly beat him on the head.

-A Trump supporter was attacked after putting out a fire started by anti-Trump protesters.

-When Trump protesters encountered a driver with a pro-Trump flag on his car, they surrounded the vehicle, ripped off and began burning the flag, and pounded the car. They also punctured the tires.

February 2017:

-California GOP Rep. Tom McClintock had to be escorted to his car after a town hall because of angry protesters. The tires of at least four vehicles were slashed.

-Protestors knocked a 71-year-old female staffer for California GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher unconscious during a protest outside the representative’s office.

-Milo Yiannopoulos speech at the University of California-Berkeley was cancelled after rioters set the campus on fire and threw rocks through windows. Milo tweeted that one of his supporters wearing a Trump hat was thrown to the ground and kicked.

March 2017:

-Masked protesters at Middlebury College rushed AEI scholar and political scientist Charles Murray and professor Allison Stranger, pushing and shoving Murray and grabbing Stranger by her hair and twisting her neck as they were leaving a campus building. Stranger suffered a concussion. Protesters then surrounded the car they got into, rocking it back and forth and jumping on the hood.

April 2017:

-A parade in Portland, Ore.,was canceled after threats of violence were made against a Republican organization.

-Fears of violent protests shut down Ann Coulter’s UC Berkeley speech. Campus police had gathered intel on protesters who were planning to commit violence.

May 2017:

Republican Rep. Tom Garrett, his family and his dog were targeted by a series of repeated death threats deemed credible by authorities.

-FBI agents arrested a person for threatening to shoot Republican Rep. Martha McSally over her support for Trump.

-Police in Tennessee charged a woman for allegedly trying to run Republican Rep. David Kustoff off the road.

-Police in North Dakota ejected a man after he became physical with Republican Rep. Kevin Cramer at a town hall.

-A former professor was arrested after police said they identified him on video beating Trump supporters with a U-shaped bike lock, leaving three people with “significant injuries.”

June 2017:

-James Hodgkinson opened fire on a congressional GOP baseball practice, injuring five, including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

-Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney received an email threat that read, “One down, 216 to go,” shortly after the shooting at the Republican congressional baseball practice.

-A man driving a white Malibu reportedly fired several shots at a man driving a truck displaying a “Make America Great Again” flag in Indiana.

-Police in Tennessee charged a woman for allegedly trying to run Republican Rep. David Kustoff off the road.

-Police in North Dakota ejected a man after he became physical with Republican Rep. Kevin Cramer at a town hall.

-A former professor was arrested after police said they identified him on video beating Trump supporters with a U-shaped bike lock, leaving three people with “significant injuries.”

June 2017:

-James Hodgkinson opened fire on a congressional GOP baseball practice, injuring five, including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

-Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney received an email threat that read, “One down, 216 to go,” shortly after the shooting at the Republican congressional baseball practice.

-A man driving a white Malibu reportedly fired several shots at a man driving a truck displaying a “Make America Great Again” flag in Indiana.

September 2017:

Billings, Montana.  A teacher kicks two students out of her classroom for wearing a “Make America Great Again” tee shirt.  A high school teacher at River Ridge High School in Georgia was filmed kicking two students out of class for wearing “Make America Great Again” shirts, which she compared to wearing a swastika.  “You Can’t Wear A Swastika To School”  This goes on more than you can imagine in our public schools.  This is so dangerous, because we’ve labeled a whole group of young people fair game for hate and violence, for no other reason than exercising their right to free speech.  Can you believe this is happening in America?

July 2018:

Judicial Watch filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) over her recent speech that encouraged the harassment of Trump administration officials in public.

In a hand-delivered letter to the chairman and co-chairman of the House Office of Congressional Ethics, Judicial Watch asked for an investigation into whether the California Democrat “violated House ethics rules by encouraging violence against Trump administration Cabinet members.”

Mark J. Bird, who has worked at the College of Southern Nevada as a sociology professor since 1993, is now facing felony gun charges for discharging the firearm on campus, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports.The incident began on Aug. 28 when Bird brought a .22 pistol to the school and shot himself in the arm inside a bathroom in the Charleston campus K building.And now this from Northern California. . .

Posted in National Security, Protest and Agitation, Terrorism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 19 Comments

Page and Strzok “Media Leak Strategy” Exposed

Posted by Tina

Another batch of emails and documents, released by the Justice Department, further suggest a plot from within the FBI and DOJ and in collusion with certain journalists to undermine Trump prior to the election and destroy his presidency after his election. See letter from Rep. Mark Meadows to DAG Rod Rosenstein posted by Sara Carter. Carter, who’s actually been committing the traditional journalistic practice of investigation, reports:

A number of new text messages reveal that two former FBI lovers appeared to have close communication with members of the media and attempted to frame arguments about Russian interference several months before the 2016 presidential election, according to text messages obtained by SaraACarter.com. The revelations raise “serious concerns” with lawmakers, who question the pairs motives, as well as the bureau’s investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump’s campaign.

Former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and his paramour former FBI attorney Lisa Page exchanged text messages several months before the 2016 election that suggest the pair were writing an op-ed together and that the FBI seemingly “authorized” a Washington Post story on potential Russian interference during the November elections.

On Sept. 2, 2016, Page texts Strzok about writing an op-ed: “Got it. But we are still writing the op-ed, yes?”

Strzok replies, “Yes, ish. He said too much data would be good to identify the key pieces of data and frame it in an argument, but not to spend ‘too much time on the opening or closing.’ I told him we were too much of perfectionists to not do all of it.”

On September 5, 2016, Page sends Strzok a link to the Washington Post article titled, U.S. investigating potential covert Russian plan to disrupt November elections.

Strzok replies, “This is the one (redacted) was talking about I think.”

Page then says, “Yup. It is very well sourced. 100% authorized.”

Strzok then tells Page, “Just read the article. We say a lot of the same things. I guess that’s O.K.”

Page writes back “Yeah, but that’s why ours is going to need to be more folksy. So it’s not like a news article.”

The Washington Post story refers to the Harry Reid briefing, stating, “After Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-NV) ended a secure 30-minute phone briefing given by a top intelligence official recently, he was “deeply shaken,” according to an aide who was with Reid when he left the secure room at the FBI’s Las Vegas office.”

Strzok also suggested in a text to Page on the same day, “I have really no faith the administration will deal with it effectively,” regarding the administration officials cited in the story that said they were still weighing their response to Russia.

However, the texts between the two do not disclose what article they were writing, or for whom they were writing the opinion piece, or if it was ever published. Congressional officials say the onslaught of text messages between the two reveal troubling signs that the FBI was running a partisan and biased investigation.

If an unverified, unsubstantiated and salacious dossier can induce an 18 month plus investigation in search of a crime I’d say this information, which suggests criminal activity, should warrant a full investigation. The American people should have confidence in it’s law enforcement agencies. This unprofessional and likely criminal activity cannot be tolerated.

Apparently the same strategy was used to push Obama’s Iran Deal. See article at Real Clear Investigations:

The Obama administration, according to Obama himself, was the most transparent in history. Total bunk. The administration was secretive and criminal. Un-elected government employees, acting as operatives, continue to serve the same partisan cause within the government today and they’ve gotten away with it because irresponsible journalists and news outlets practice partisan activism rather than journalism.

17 Comments

Left Activists Engaging in Threats, Intimidation, and Violence Against the GOP

by Tina

Trump has been accused of dividing the country and inciting violence by the losing party. What a crock, as Bruce Sessions used to say. The community organizer president (Obama) ran on and governed by the politics of division and used rhetoric that incited violence before and while he was in office. Organizations that support Democrats are tolerated, included, and encourage as they use intimidation, threats and violence against opponents and their supporters. The SEIU, the New Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, and the SPLC are just a few such organizations.

Trump supporters were attacked at Trump rallies even before he was elected. protesters at a rally in San Jose was particularly vicious. One woman was trapped in front of locked doors and threatened as trash was thrown at her. A young man was chased down and accosted in the street. Local police allowed it to happen.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family were accosted in a restaurant. She has received credible death threats, prompting the need for a secret service detail. Sanders is the first press secretary ever to require a security detail. Maxine Waters jumped on the event to suggest Dem supporters should accost Republicans wherever they are seen and let them know “they are not welcome.” Other members of the Trump administration have been threatened and accosted as well.

The shooter that targeted Republicans at a baseball practice in DC, ending in several being wounded and Steve Scalise severely wounded and near death, comes back to mind s the mid-term elections heat up…this blue wave of intimidation and violence has been accelerating toward tsunami. Consider:

A man in Castro Valley, CA pulled a switch-blade and attempted to stab Republican congressional candidate Randy Peters at a local festival. He failed i his violent mission only because his weapon of choice failed. The attacker, 35-year-old Castro Valley resident Farzad Fazeli, “approached Peters at his booth in an aggressive manner and made disparaging, profanity-laced remarks about the Republican party and President Donald Trump.”

A pressure campaign against Maine Senator Susan Collins threatens to give over a million dollars to any future opponent unless she votes against confirming Brett Kavanaugh. Creating a go-fund-me style Pac of intimidation was only the beginning, she’s also receiving abusive vulgar phone calls and shipments of wire hangers. This type of “politicking” is reminiscent of the MOB!

Pro-life TownHall and FOX News contributor Denise McAllister has gone into hiding after receiving death threats: “They are threats outside of Twitter, stating they know where I live,” McAllister said. “Threats of rape and strangling. I spoke to the police. I am on home watch.” Denise is a rape survivor.

The Daily Mail reports today that DC police are investigating after an anonymous Democratic Socialist on Twitter threatened to shoot up a Trump rally in the Trump International Hotel: “am coming with a gun and i expect to get numerous bloodstained MAGA hats as trophies,” the account wrote, referencing MAGA.

Even in a low population state like Wyoming Republicans are fair game…a newly opened GOP office fire is considered an act of arson and will be investigated by the FBI. A “Make America Great” sign was hanging in a window that was broken during the incident.

Violence and intimidation began in this country long before Trump entered politics. It escalated during the last administration and has only gotten worse since Trump defeated Hillary Clinton. The bottom line is that we, Republicans or supporters of President Trump, will be allowed to live in peace as long as we remain silent, as long as we keep our opinions and thoughts to ourselves, as long as we get our minds right and vote along the Democrat/Socialist Party line…the bottom line is that the Democrat Party machine will intimidate, threaten, and assault their opponents as a means of enforcing their will…”if they bring a knife we bring a gun.” – candidate Barack Obama.

Intimidation and threats are practiced by radical Islamic terrorists. This is same the attitude that’s been used by every tyrant in history to establish absolute control. look at many of the nations South of our border. Look at all of the nations established by communists. This is not the American way…but it is the way of many of the nations whose residence now seek to live in America and it is apparently the way of Americans who refer socialism. We cannot let them change our culture.

The media and the fundamentally transformed Democrat Party actively engage in pointing fingers for verbal contention and violence at Donald Trump…but Trump is responding to the firestorm of violence and intimidation pointed at him, his administration and his supporters. This is a well know strategy. It’s often used to deflect attention away from the bad behavior of the accusers. This attitude…this strategy…must be exposed and roundly defeated if ever we are going to reclaim the right to free speech, civility, and equality in our country.

Posted in Civil Rights, Constitution & The Law, Liberty, Morals and Ethics, politics, Protest and Agitation | 11 Comments