Bombshell Memo Shows Biden Planned To Leave Trump With Even More Massive Immigration Crisis

In a shocking development that will stun only those who still believe the previous administration ever cared about borders or the word temporary, Sen. Eric Schmitt obtained a document showing the Biden White House planned protections for Guatemalans, Ecuadorians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans in a final desperate bid to hand President Trump an even bigger immigration clusterfrack.

The Supreme Court delivered a significant victory to President Trump's immigration policies ruling 6 to 3 that the administration can terminate Temporary Protected Status for Haitian and Syrian migrants. Fox News Legal Editor Kerri Urbahn highlights the majority opinion.

A newly uncovered Biden White House memo from the administration's final days revealed plans that could have expanded Temporary Protected Status to more than 3 million illegal aliens while acknowledging that previous court challenges had blocked many of President Donald Trump's efforts to end the protections.

TPS is meant for foreign populations experiencing crises like political unrest or natural disasters and while Trump has tried to end the temporary provisions for Haitians, Nepalese, Salvadorans, and Sudanese people lawsuits from pro migrant advocates have halted most attempts.

"My investigation uncovered that the Lame Duck Biden White House tried to keep millions of illegal aliens in our country by abusing the 'Temporary' Protected Status program," Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) who acquired the memo told Fox News Digital on Friday. "After the American people voted for President Trump’s promise to end the TPS scam, the Biden administration tried to subvert the will of the American people. This was mass amnesty-by-decree. America is for Americans, and it is our home—it is not a permanent refugee camp," he said.

The memo argued that "granting TPS will potentially protect many vulnerable people from President-elect Trump's planned mass deportations... They argue that these protections are likely to hold in court, and they are prepared to litigate efforts to terminate or slow down the implementation of TPS for specified nations by the Trump Administration."

In other words the outgoing team decided the best parting gift for the nation that just rejected them was to load up the country with millions more people and then dare the new president to try cleaning it up through years of activist court battles.

"[P]rior federal litigation brought by advocates during the first Trump administration was successful in halting [its] efforts to terminate TPS, though that was due in large part to [its] failure to produce a factual record in support of termination, which is something that could be rectified," the memo went on. Schmitt said he obtained the memo from Archivist of the United States Edward Forst through his authority as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution.

"Biden tried to turn TPS into a 3.1-million-person deportation shield, protect Tren de Aragua members, and trap President Trump in years of litigation," he said, adding the move directly betrayed the will of the people who ousted liberal Democrats from power the prior election."

The most disturbing part, Biden's ‘Senior Advisors’ recommended "he create 2.1 million NEW TPS designees in the last few weeks of his presidency, despite admitting TPS applications take 6 months," Schmitt added. "Luckily, that never happened and we have been deporting Ecuadorians and Guatemalans."

Schmitt noted that one week after the January 2025 memo which he said was erroneously dated 2024, Biden extended TPS protections for nearly 1 million noncitizens meaning its transmission still led to a concrete mass migration action. Because when the American people demand an end to the scam, if you're on the left, you simply ignore them and stamp another million temporary forever statuses just for good measure.

The memo reminded Biden he gave TPS protections to Afghans, Cameroonians ,Ethiopians, people from Burma, Lebanese, Ukrainians, and Venezuelan, nationals and repeatedly extended protections for Haitians. Apparently temporary means until the next Democrat is ready to extend it again.

"The previous Administration unsuccessfully attempted to terminate TPS designations for Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti, El Salvador, Nepal, and Honduras. Courts issued preliminary injunctions blocking the Trump Administration's actions," it read. "Your administration took actions to resolve this litigation by either re-designating Haiti or rescinding the terminations."

The memo noted that Trump had said during the 2024 campaign he intended to revoke TPS protections for Haitians and predicted his incoming administration would likely seek to rescind additional TPS designations. How dare Trump try to enforce the temporary part of Temporary Protected Status.

A chart in the memo estimated potential new TPS eligibility for roughly 1.5 million Guatemalans 600,000 Ecuadorians 464,000 Nicaraguans 455,000 Venezuelans and smaller populations from Ukraine Sudan and Afghanistan figures Schmitt said totaled more than 3.1 million people. Just a modest little expansion of the permanent temporary refugee program.

The memo said Biden’s senior team had also received requests for varying types of new TPS related actions before Trump would take office from Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Richard "Dick" Durbin (D-IL), Mazie Hirono (D-HA), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), and Alex Padilla (D CA).

"In addition, some stakeholders are requesting that your Administration designate nationals from new countries, most notably Ecuador and Guatemala, for TPS," it stated. While the proposals outlined in the memo were never fully implemented the document offers a rare glimpse into the immigration options Biden advisers presented as Trump prepared to return to the White House promising mass deportations. 

In classic fashion the outgoing team nearly succeeded in turning America into an even larger permanent refugee camp and then dared anyone to notice that temporary somehow always means forever. a shocking development that will stun only those who still believe the previous administration ever cared about borders or the word temporary.

Sen. Eric Schmitt obtained a document showing the Biden White House planned protections for Guatemalans, Ecuadorians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans in a final desperate bid to hand President Trump an even bigger immigration mess.

The Supreme Court delivered a significant victory to President Trump's immigration policies ruling 6 to 3 that the administration can terminate Temporary Protected Status for Haitian and Syrian migrants. A newly uncovered Biden White House memo from the administration's final days revealed plans that could have expanded Temporary Protected Status to more than 3 million noncitizens while acknowledging that previous court challenges had blocked many of President Donald Trump's efforts to end the protections.

TPS is meant for foreign populations experiencing crises like political unrest or natural disasters and while Trump has tried to end the temporary provisions for Haitians, Nepalese, Salvadorans, and Sudanese people lawsuits from pro migrant advocates have halted most attempts. Because nothing says temporary quite like inviting the entire third world to move in forever and then suing anyone who notices.

Corruption much?

I want to thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

Democrats livid over new plan to house illegal aliens in NJ, Indiana military bases

Spartacus unleashed!

The Democrats are at it again, poor dears, clutching their pearls and crying foul over the Trump administration’s latest move to house illegal immigrants at military bases in New Jersey and Indiana. Because apparently, using secure facilities to manage a border crisis is the height of "inhumane" behavior. 

According to Fox News Digital, the Defense Department, under Secretary Pete Hegseth, has decided to repurpose parts of Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey and Camp Atterbury in Indiana as "temporary soft-sided holding facilities" for illegal aliens. You know, the kind of common-sense move you make when you’re trying to get a handle on an immigration system that’s been a hot mess for years. But New Jersey Democrats, those champions of open borders, are positively apoplectic, claiming it "jeopardizes military preparedness" and is just so mean.

Cue the kazoos.

Here’s their melodramatic joint statement, signed by Reps. Herb Conaway, LaMonica McIver, Donald Norcross, Rob Menendez, Frank Pallone, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Josh Gottheimer, Nellie Pou, and Sens. Cory Booker and Andy Kim:

"This is an inappropriate use of our national defense system and militarizes a radical immigration policy that has resulted in the inhumane treatment of undocumented immigrants and unlawful deportation of U.S. citizens, including children, across the country. Using our country’s military to detain and hold undocumented immigrants kindizes military preparedness and paves the way for ICE immigration raids in every New Jersey community. We have the greatest military in the world and using it as a domestic political tool is unacceptable and shameful."

"Kindizes military preparedness"? Did they mean "jeopardizes"? Someone get these folks a proofreader. And let’s not miss the irony here: these are the same people who cheered when the Biden administration used these very bases to house thousands of Afghan refugees in 2021 after the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal. Back then, it was all humanitarian kumbaya. Now? It’s a war crime. Funny how the goalposts move when Trump’s in charge.

The Defense Department says it’s still working out when these facilities will open, depending on operational needs and coordination with Homeland Security. Hegseth, in a letter to Rep. Conaway, assured him the move won’t mess with military training or readiness. But don’t expect the Democrats to take his word for it—they’re too busy grandstanding about "inhumane treatment" while ignoring the fact that New Jersey already has privately run immigration detention centers like Delaney Hall and Elizabeth Detention Center. Oh, and speaking of Delaney Hall, let’s not forget when Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and Rep. LaMonica McIver got themselves arrested there in May for clashing with federal immigration officials. Real profiles in courage, those two.

Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, a massive 42,000-acre tri-service base, and Camp Atterbury, a 34,000-acre Army and Air National Guard facility, are apparently too sacred to be used for anything but progressive-approved causes. Never mind that they’re perfectly suited for secure, temporary housing while the government processes migrants for asylum hearings or deportation. Nope, to the Democrats, this is “militarizing” immigration policy. Meanwhile, they’re silent on the $150–$170 billion Big Beautiful Bill Trump signed two weeks ago, which includes $45 billion to expand detention facilities as part of the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. You’d think they’d have bigger fish to fry than whining about a couple of military bases.

And let’s not forget the cherry on top: the Trump administration’s new "Alligator Alcatraz" detention camp in the Florida Everglades, surrounded by—you guessed it—alligators. If that doesn’t scream “America’s back,” I don’t know what does. Naturally, the same Democrats throwing a tantrum over New Jersey and Indiana haven’t said a peep about that one. Probably too busy drafting their next sanctimonious press release.

So, here we are: Democrats are mad that the government is using secure, existing facilities to enforce immigration laws, but they’re fine with military bases being used for their pet projects. It’s almost like the outrage is selective. Shocker.

Hey amazing readers! If you enjoy my content, please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 

Tweet

Hakeem Jeffries' divisive rhetoric about Civil War and Republicans, who defeated the slave holders

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), during a ridiculous "sit-in" on the steps of the Capitol, where he wasted even more time since his 25-hour rambling, invoked Civil War-era rhetoric to portray Democrats as "patriots" and the Republican party as "traitors."

If we were to take his words as truth, then we would have to believe that Jeffries is in favor of slavery from which the Republican Party defeated the Democrat slave-holders in the Civil War. Of course he didn't mean that, which only shows that he's an idiot in a suit.

Jeffries' nonsensical comments came during a staged protest on the steps of Congress, where he was initially joined by Sen. Cory Spartacus Booker (D-NJ) and then accompanied by several other Democrats and their colleagues who were squandering their work hours to waste taxpayer money.

Rev. William Barber joined the exercise in futility. He discussed putting “principles over party," triggering Jeffries to recall an old quote by President Ulysses S. Grant at the onset of the Civil War.

“Reminds me of a letter that Ulysses Grant was said to have sent at the start of the Civil War,” Jeffries said.

"At that moment of great turmoil in the country, the country literally tearing itself apart," he set the scene before adding, "What Grant said is, 'There are but two parties in America right now - Patriots and traitors."

Grant led the Union Army to victory in the American Civil War. He was a Republican.

On April 12, 1861, as the Confederacy attacked Fort Sumter, Grant's reported quote was: “There are but two parties now: traitors and patriots. And I want hereafter to be ranked with the latter.”

Jeffires misses the point: the patriots were those in the party of Lincoln, the Republicans, who were fighting the Democrats in the South in order to end slavery. 

Facts are uncomfortable for the Left. For example, Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago has a plaque on one of their buildings that refers to Abraham Lincoln as a "Democrat." Everyone with a brain knows old Honest Abe was a Republican, but the plaque, written in 1905 on the Frank Lloyd Wright Building reads: "This building is dedicated to public service honoring the memory of Abraham Lincoln Democrat."

They need to steal the accomplishments from the GOP to make themselves sound viable.

Jeffries using a quote from a Republican who fought against the Democrats in the South that supported the institution of slavery to portray the modern GOP as "traitors" is a strange choice, but perhaps he was just trying to pull the wool over the eyes of ignorant constituents.

"Hakeem Jeffries isn't wrong," one man wrote. "He's just confused about which of these two parties he and his ilk belong to."

This isn't the first time Jeffries has tried to instigate violence since President Trump entered the Oval Office.

Ten days after the inauguration, the New York Democrat vowed they were "gonna fight" the President's agenda "in the streets."

Why is it that politicians are able to get away with calls for violence? The U.S. Constitution is quite clear about what is free speech, and this does not qualify as such.

If you enjoy my blog, feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee – it’s like a high-five with caffeine! No pressure, it's your call.

Tweet

Cory Spartacus Booker hit with ethics complaint for fundraising off his filibuster

New Jersey Democrat Senator Cory Spartacus Booker (NJ) bloviated for a record-breaking 25 hours last week, said nothing of value or interest, and now he tried to raise money from his speech, according to The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), an ethics watchdog group.

The group filed the complaint on Tuesday alleging that the senator used his speech to raise campaign money and the Senate Select Committee on Ethics received the allegations showing that Booker sent a series of campaign messages to his supporters during and after his bloviating on the Senate floor. This included messages asking followers to "stand with Cory" during his speech by signing up for his email list and others that solicited contributions for Booker and the DNC from anyone "inspired" by his historic showing.

This tactic is in violation of long-standing ethics rules prohibiting congress members from using their official position for campaign purposes, FACT wrote in its complaint. 

If Booker's violation goes unpunished, the group warned, the Senate floor "will increasingly be seen as a campaign venue and treated as such."

"It is clear that Senator Booker's Senate floor speech had a campaign purpose," FACT said in its complaint. "During his speech, he sent a series of emails that campaigned and sought valuable supporter information and campaign contributions based on his Senate floor speech. Immediately after his speech, Booker sent an email that requested donations for his campaign and the DNC if the recipient liked what they saw him do on the Senate floor. There is no more direct of a tie between an official action and campaign solicitation."

The Senate's ethics rules "do not allow what is clearly performance art on the Senate floor for future political gain, whether that be for list-building or fundraising," the watchdog's executive director Kendra Arnold told the Washington Free Beacon. "I hope the Senate Ethics Committee will take action on this case and others like it to discourage other senators from fundraising off official actions and to maintain citizens' confidence in Congress."

Booker received widespread praise from the press and Democrats for his 25-hour floor speech, not so much for what he said than for the length of time he spent on the Senate floor without taking a break to pee or otherwise. 

But who knows? Depends.

Political pollster Frank Luntz said that Booker "may have changed the course of political history" with his speech. He believes his performance makes him the top dog for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, but AOC and Jasmine Crockett disagree.

But Booker's speech wasn't a real filibuster in the traditional sense. It didn't obstruct any legislation and all he did was bash Trump's cuts to the federal workforce and yadda, yadda.

Mostly yadda, yadda.

"I pour my heart into these posts, and hopefully my writing has sparked something for you, I’d be thrilled and grateful if you’d treat me to a coffee over at Buy Me a Coffee – totally optional, of course!"

Tweet

The Squad, Reparations, and Insanity

The specter of reparations has once again haunted the halls of Congress, this time with a renewed vigor under President Donald Trump's second term. The idea, which one might generously call "progressive", has been resurrected by the far-left members of the legislative body, now that the original torchbearer, the late Sheila Jackson Lee, has passed on.

The mantle has been taken up by none other than Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), who has decided to push this agenda during Black History Month, no less. She claims it's a direct response to what she sees as an "unprecedented onslaught against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives from the Trump Administration." She's joined by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) in the Senate with the reintroduction of HR40, aiming to "establish a federal commission to examine the lasting legacy of slavery and develop reparations proposals for African American descendants of enslaved people."

Pressley's press release paints the bill as a counter-narrative to Trump's policies, suggesting it's "a powerful counterweight to the harmful actions taken by Donald Trump and a call to action for America to address the systemic oppression of Black people throughout its history."

One might wonder if these DEI practices aren't doing more harm than good by reducing individuals to mere categories of race or gender rather than recognizing merit.

Pressley doesn't shy away from attacking Trump, saying, "What we’re seeing from the Trump Administration and their allies in Congress and the courts is a coordinated, years-long effort to dismantle any policy that uplifts Black folks and addresses America’s shameful history of systemic racism. It is anti-Blackness on steroids and we’re not backing down in our pursuit of healing and reparatory justice."

She continues, "H.R. 40 is a powerful reminder of the work that remains and offers us a pathway toward truth, reconciliation, and accountability for the deep, structural injustices that continue to ravage Black communities to this day. I am grateful to Senator Booker for his ongoing partnership and I am deeply honored to follow in the footsteps of my mentor and friend, the late Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, in introducing this deeply necessary and overdue legislation."

The co-sponsor in the House, Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), another Squad member who managed to survive her primary unlike some of her colleagues, adds her voice to the chorus. Her statement could be straight out of the 1619 Project, claiming, "The America we know today was built on the brutal enslavement and trafficking of stolen Africans forced to build this country on their literal backs. Despite what Trump and his anti-diversity, anti-equity, and anti-inclusion cronies want you to believe, this is American history. Our government – no matter who is in power – has an obligation to right these wrongs. If we are to truly address the racial and economic injustices rooted in this country, Congress must pass HR 40."

At the press conference, Lee was unambiguous, "Our government – no matter who is in power – has an obligation to right these wrongs, to provide reparations for descendants of enslaved Africans, to eliminate the racial wealth gap, to uplift the black community." With Pressley nodding in agreement, she continued her critique of Trump and the Republicans, "White supremacy is rampant in this country. Just look at the current administration and our own legislative body. They have contributed to the social and economic harms, to the racial terror black folks have experienced in this country. Now, more than ever, we must acknowledge and repair those harms!"

The rhetoric is as fiery as ever, but one must ask, is this the path to healing, or merely another divisive political maneuver draped in the garb of social justice?

Tweet

Booker wants special debate treatment

Dubuque, Iowa -- Cory Booker once heard someone call him a master debater, and now he's bitter that, as a black man, he is being left out of the next Democratic debate just because people don't send him campaign donations or think that he, with his big, angry eyes can win against President Trump. 

The truth is, he may have misheard that person. 

Booker and his angry Mr. Potato Head Eyes is trying to fight his way into the next Democratic presidential debate and just ended an 800-mile, 12-county schlepp of Iowa. On Sunday, he attacked his own party for allowing "elites" and "money," which is evil, to decide who actually has a following and therefore should be on the debate stage.

Booker tried to hint [after pretending he was upset that Kamala Harris dropped out of the race] that there were no people of color [hint, hint] and that makes him very sad. Like his usual histrionic whining, the media wasn't buying it.

“Iowa never lets elites decide,” he lamented to a crowd at his campaign office in Cedar Rapids on Sunday. “Let’s let Iowa have another comeback story.”

Just six candidates are qualified for the Dec. 19 debate, and Booker, who remains black,  is not one of them. He’s met the threshold of donors required to qualify but he has yet to hit the polling qualifications — either 4% support in at least four polls or 6% support in two early-state polls. The deadline is Thursday, and he’s yet to hit the mark on a single poll.

The reason may be due to his lack of fresh ideas that wouldn't bankrupt the nation, but it's more probable that people see through his facade and would rather see someone else going up against the "bad orange man."

“I’m a little upset with the (Democratic National Committee) right now because they seem to be trying to make the decisions for you,” he told a mostly drunk afternoon crowd gathered in a Dubuque bar, hoping they would protest on his behalf and maybe even kick some butt.

Booker also noted the New Hampshire Democratic Party voted this weekend to send the DNC a statement urging the party to revisit the qualifying standards for the debate to ensure greater diversity and give voters “the greatest opportunity” to hear from the candidates and see the level of their melanin and the level of their "poverty" and basic intersectionality.

Xochitl Hinojosa, a spokeswoman for the DNC, called the party’s debate rules “inclusive” and said no candidate who has gone on to be the party’s nominee has polled lower than 4% at this point in past primaries. She refused to add that Booker and the other losers can go whistle for all she cares, and with a name like Xochitl Hinojosa, she can say anything she darn well pleases.

As Booker seeks momentum and a reason to exist, he’s sharing a message focused far more on thoughtless emotion than on intelligent policy and purity tests. He said his policy chops compare to any of his rivals, but it will take a leader who can help Americans see and care for each other to make progress on thorny issues like gun control and climate change. 

And like Kumbaya. 

Please consider following this blog and visit the ads on this page. 

Tweet

BREAKING: AG Barr indicts 8 for funneling foreign money to Adam Schiff et al

Attorney General Bill Barr has finally unmasked the Democrats as the hypocrites they are and has just broken up a massive scheme to illegally funnel foreign money into practically every Democratic political candidate and organization! [H/T Pamela Geller/Geller Report]

One of the main suspects indicted gave a million dollars to Priorities USA Action, an enormous Democrat SuperPAC and the usual media suspects are not giving this story any oxygen as they avoid it like being asked to stand behind Eric Swalwell after a cabbage soup entree.

The list of Democrat organizations pocketing this illegal cash is incredible and includes practically every Dem state organization and a host of super PACs, such as Priorities USA.

All top Democrats took in this booty including Adam Schiff, Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton, Ted Lieu and Jon Tester, and so on and so on. . . .

George Nader, a key witness in the Mueller investigation and a convicted child molester, is also charged, making Adam Schiff's eyes bulge even more than usual. It turns out that Nader works as a straw man for Middle East sheiks and he was tasked to influence Trump's team and the entire Democratic Party establishment.

From the Department of Justice:

Earlier today, an indictment was unsealed against the CEO of an online payment processing company, and seven others, charging them with conspiring to make and conceal conduit and excessive campaign contributions, and related offenses, during the U.S. presidential election in 2016 and thereafter. 

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Assistant Director in Charge Timothy R. Slater of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement. 

A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia indicted Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, 48, of Los Angeles, California, on Nov. 7, 2019, along with George Nader, Roy Boulos, Rudy Dekermenjian, Mohammad “Moe” Diab, Rani El-Saadi, Stevan Hill and Thayne Whipple. The 53 count indictment charges Khawaja with two counts of conspiracy, three counts of making conduit contributions, three counts of causing excessive contributions, 13 counts of making false statements, 13 counts of causing false records to be filed, and one count of obstruction of a federal grand jury investigation. Nader is charged with conspiring with Khawaja to make conduit campaign contributions, and related offenses. Boulos, Dekermenjian, Diab, El-Saadi, Hill, and Whipple are charged with conspiring with Khawaja and each other to make conduit campaign contributions and conceal excessive contributions, and related offenses. 

According to the indictment, from March 2016 through January 2017, Khawaja conspired with Nader to conceal the source of more than $3.5 million in campaign contributions, directed to political committees associated with a candidate for President of the United States in the 2016 election. By design, these contributions appeared to be in the names of Khawaja, his wife, and his company. In reality, they allegedly were funded by Nader. Khawaja and Nader allegedly made these contributions in an effort to gain influence with high-level political figures, including the candidate. As Khawaja and Nader arranged these payments, Nader allegedly reported to an official from a foreign government about his efforts to gain influence. 

The indictment also alleges that, from March 2016 through 2018, Khawaja conspired with Boulos, Dekermenjian, Diab, El-Saadi, Hill, and Whipple to conceal Khawaja’s excessive contributions, which totaled more than $1.8 million, to various political committees. Among other things, these contributions allegedly allowed Khawaja to host a private fundraiser for a presidential candidate in 2016 and a private fundraising dinner for an elected official in 2018. 

The indictment further alleges that, from June 2019 through July 2019, Khawaja obstructed a grand jury investigation of this matter in the District of Columbia. Knowing that a witness had been called to testify before the grand jury, Khawaja allegedly provided that witness with false information about Nader and his connection to Khawaja’s company. Boulos, Diab, Hill, and Whipple also are charged with obstructing the grand jury’s investigation by lying to the FBI.
Currently, Nader is in federal custody on other charges. 

An indictment is not a finding of guilt. It merely alleges that crimes have been committed. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The FBI’s Washington Field Office is investigating the case and Deputy Chief John D. Keller and Trial Attorneys James C. Mann and Michael J. Romano of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case.

You can see a list of all the donations here.

I can't wait to hear how MSNBC and CNN will spin this story to attack Bill Barr.

Please consider following this blog and visit the ads on this page.   You can also see my other blog on the Times of Israel.

Tweet

Beto and his f***ing dirty mouth

As a child, he may have had his dirty mouth washed out with soap by his mother, or punished for his vulgar language by a strict father, but now Robert Francis O'Rourke [who goes by "Beto" in order to secure the illegal immigrant vote] uses expletives like they were chocolates from Forrest Gump's momma. Hopefully, Democrats with young children, or even older children, will demand the kids leave the room when Beto and other Democrats speak on TV.

The edgy, arm-flapping, failed Senate candidate from Texas spoke about gun violence at a campaign stop in Roxbury, a Boston neighborhood. He spoke to the onlookers in English, although he is known to throw around some broken Espagnole.

When a supporter shouted, “This is f**ked up,” O'Rourke, not to be out-vulgared, immediately echoed the sentiment. “This is f**ked up,” he said. “That is the term of art for it.”

The phrase virtually has become a Beto campaign rallying cry on the subject, in the same vein as the Trump campaign's "build the wall" or the traditional "four more years." His team is even selling shirts emblazoned with the slogan: "America is F**ked Up!"

The obscene language is certainly not unique to Señor Beto. Democratic hopefuls seem to be engaged in a pissing contest over who has the dirtiest mouth, whether it's simply inter-party competition or a response to Trump. But they sound like staff at a whorehouse verbally attacking a group of sailors who refuse to pay full price.

Most likely, this is simply their way of getting attention and perhaps being thought of as edgy and cool. Yeah, they're about as edgy as a melted snowflake.

Beto tried to explain his use of gutter terms. “I mean s**t, I just tried to speak as f**king honestly as I can,” the skateboarding non-senator explained. “And the filthy language that my fellow Americans use when they're talking about s**t. You know, issues that are most important to them,” he added, revealing that what he means is that he needs to use tasteless verbiage becauses anyone who would vote for him has to be an a**h*** with a mouth like a Calcutta sewer and a brain like a 29-year-old Democratic Bronx congresswoman.

Other Democrats have also used coarse language. Communist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) used the term "damn legislation" and Sen. Cory "Crazy Eyes" Booker said "bulls**t" when speaking about gun violence.

Some political scientists believe Trump may have opened the damned floodgates for this kind of rhetoric back in 2016, using the "S" word several times at his campaign rallies.

“It’s intended to be jarring, I think part of the point of doing it is that it’s supposed to be alarmist and it’s supposed to be an awakening ... the candidates are trying to get your attention and it often works,” said University of Houston political science professor Brandon Rottinghaus.

Because people are more interested in the presentation of how you say it, than the utility, veracity and credibility of what is said.

So far, there hasn’t been much pushback to elevate campaign speech from the other candidates. The ‘you-do-you’ advice seems to be the most common response.

“I swore on Comedy Central this week. You know, look, people should be whoever they are,” Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) said, citing his rhetoric: "I don't give a cocky from the tooley what you think."


Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue. And you can also see my blog on the Times of Israel.






Tweet

WaPo gives Cory 'Mr. Potato Head; Booker 4 Pinocchios re: voter suppression lie

With angry eyes and leftist lies Sen. Cory "Mr. Potato Head" Booker (D-NJ) was the recipient of four pinocchios by the Washington Post for claiming that voter suppression was responsible for Democrats losing Michigan in 2016--not that Hillary Clinton was a suckworthy candidate who failed to put campaigning effort in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania because she arrogantly thought she had those states in the bag.

"We lost the state of Michigan because everybody from Republicans to Russians were targeting the suppression of African American voters," Booker said, lying through his plastic pop-on teeth, during the Democratic debate on Wednesday. The Post said that this claim is supported by zero evidence, but Booker feels strongly that it's true and that's what he has--feelings, nothing more than feelings

"Election experts say they see little or no evidence that the activities by the Russians and the Trump campaign actually swayed the election in Michigan," Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler writes.

Kessler notes that Russian propaganda efforts did make an effort to discourage African-American voters, but didn't appear to have much effect, and had nothing to do with President Trump, as stated clearly in the Mueller report, which, like the 2016 election, Democrats don't want to believe.

"There were Russian-linked Facebook ads that targeted African American voters and voiced opposition to Clinton, but there is not strong evidence that they influenced many voters," Matt Grossman, director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research at Michigan State University, told the left-leaning Post. "African American turnout in Michigan was down from 2012 to 2016, partially because it had previously risen for Barack Obama. Clinton also received a lower share of the African American vote than Obama."

Kessler also couldn't find any election laws that passed Michigan's Republican legislature between 2012 and 2016 targeting African-American turnout. "The most likely explanation for the loss was that Hillary Clinton, not Barack Obama, was on the ballot, so turnout by African American voters returned to pre-Obama levels," he concludes, leaving out the part where she sucks as a candidate.

Hillary Clinton also received four pinocchios from the Post for her claims of voter suppression in Georgia and Wisconsin. President Trump won Michigan by the closest margin of any state in his 2016 presidential election victory, winning by fewer than 11,000 votes, proving Lincoln's words about not fooling all of the people all of the time.


Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not.




Tweet

2020 Dem hopefuls don't allow a tragedy go to waste in their campaigns

The Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting Sunday in Gilroy, California left four dead including the shooter. Among the dead was a 6-year-old boy. Fifteen people were also injured, some critically, some less serious--let's pray for them.

The 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls, never letting a tragedy go to waste, jumped at the chance to respond to the shooting as they addressed the country's "gun violence epidemic."

Former Vice President weighed in on Twitter: "This violence is not normal," he said, contradicting himself and the other candidates who claim that gun violence is now a normal occurrence in America. "How many more families will have to lose  loved one before we fix our broken gun laws? We must take action, starting with real reform."

The gun laws in California are among the strictest in the nation. Aside from confiscating all legal guns, and making former gun owners defenseless, what will stricter gun laws do? 

Authorities in Gilroy along with officials from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reported that a single gunman, who may have had an accomplice, opened fire on the crowd. In under one minute he was engaged by police officers and killed by good guys with guns.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), the state’s former attorney general, took to Twitter to call the shooting “horrific.”

Gee, ya think?

“Our country has a gun violence epidemic that we cannot tolerate,” she tweeted, implying that she would ban all firearms leaving only the people who don't follow the law to have them.

Sen. Cory "Mr. Potato Head" Booker (D-NJ), said on Twitter that his "heart breaks" for the families involved in the shooting, and also pointed to the gun violence “epidemic.” But he was only acting when he said it and offered no solutions.

Robert Francis "Beto" O’Rourke, did not mention the Gilroy shooting in a Sunday tweet sent from his proctologist's office, but said he was “sending love to all who are hurting tonight—and all who are affected by the 40,000 gun deaths in America each year,” A significant number of them by suicide that he failed to clarify.

It is unclear how love can be sent via Twitter as it is a platform normally used to send hate and/or insults, but O'Rourke is a special character.

Gun control has been a key issue for Democrats and many have laid out plans on how they will approach the issue. Spartacus Booker unveiled a wide-ranging gun control proposal this week and showcased his call for federal licensing of firearms, which will bring in more money to the government but will not do a thing to curtail gun violence as it is a cultural problem. 

This is why it's a good idea not to mention the names of the perpetrators who do such things as they are often looking for notoriety and fame.

Harris said she would move quickly to curb gun violence if elected to the White House, vowing to use executive action if Congress didn’t act in her first 100 days.

She is likely to meet stiff opposition on this issue if elected, but is likely not to be elected in the first place.

Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not.

Tweet

Saddle up partners, Biden gaffes again, and again

As predicted by many, Joe Biden's best day as presidential hopeful was his first day after he announced. He gives a whole new meaning to the snack known as Fritos--his snack are his own Free Toes, because he cannot stop putting his foot in his mouth.

His latest gaffe came at a Pride weekend fundraiser in Seattle on Saturday where "Sleepy Joe" tried to show how far we've come in our treatment of the LGBT community. 

The slurring, whispering Biden claimed that merely five years ago, it would have been acceptable for a businessman to make “fun of a gay waiter,” the Washington Examiner reported. 

Sleepy Joe may have thought that if he could get away with talking about not being able to go into a Dunkin Donuts without hearing an Indian accent and still become Vice President, well then, no worries. He could say whatever came to mind.

Those at the fundraiser, which took place at the home of public relations executive and gay rights activist Roger Nyhus, made it clear that wasn't the way it was in Seattle back in the day people were making fun of gay folks.

“Not in Seattle!” people called out, claiming that homophobic comments would not have been condoned in 2014.

The point of Biden’s remarks, delivered as the gay, lesbian and mentally ill transgender community, along with their allies, celebrated Pride Weekend, was that the United States has made progress. He said the hypothetical businessman he spoke of “would not be invited back” today. In other words, he meant well, but expressed himself like an idiot in front of potential donors.

Biden also spoke about how he supported same-sex marriage when he was vice president, ["Sometimes I think Jill is really a guy."]

This gaffe came a microsecond after he tried to undo the Kamala Harris attack on him as being a racist with another gaffe. He was called out by Cory "Bug-Eyes" Booker (D-NJ). 

"That kid wearing a hoodie may very well be the next poet laureate and not a gangbanger," Biden said as if illuminating new information on the progress the black community has made, when it should have been obvious and unnecessary to point out.

Booker, using his best righteous indignation, was not satisfied with how Biden made his point.

"This isn’t about a hoodie. It’s about a culture that sees a problem with a kid wearing a hoodie in the first place," he tweeted on Friday. "Our nominee needs to have the language to talk about race in a far more constructive way."

Goodbye Joe--enjoy the rest of your free toes.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider following my blog, but even if you choose not to do so, please check out the sponsors on this page.

Tweet

Spartacus unhinged! A Cory Booker comedy

"Hey hey, hee hee, strange things are
happening to me"

Democratic presidential candidate and brave hero to boys and girls everywhere, Cory "Spartacus" Booker (D-NJ) seemed to suggest over the weekend that spending money on border security is like telling Jews at the time of the Holocaust that they cannot seek refuge here.

Almost exactly the same thing.

See, the immigrants were seeking asylum from the South American Nazis who were putting them in gas chambers or shooting them. It's really hard to tell the difference from the illegal aliens and the Jews.

What Booker is trying to do is shame us into believing that by not admitting future Democrats into the country, we're being immoral. He's conflating two unrelated events and that's shameful and immoral because it minimizes the Holocaust.

Spartacus, "defender of the downtrodden, redistributor of your money," made the foolish statement in Iowa while appearing on the Political Party Live podcast on Saturday where he spoke leftistly on a wide variety of issues that he knows little about.

"Do you know how much billions of dollars we've done to increase the numbers of Customs and Border Patrol agents, of people involved in immigration..." Booker began ungrammatically.

The wild-eyed Booker continued in the phony dramatic way he has by pontificating how important is is to know history and claimed [citing no evidence], that President Trump was trying to make people afraid of people coming across the southern border who have "brown skin."

"As much as he wants to make us afraid of people trying to come here escaping terror, not remembering like when we turned around other immigrants trying to escape terror," Booker continued. "There was a ship that came here during World War II with a bunch of folks trying to escape the Holocaust and we turned it around where they got killed in the Holocaust," he once more said ungrammatically.

While Booker's comparison might be wildly inaccurate, his historical claims are accurate as former Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his Democratic administration rejected thousands of Jewish refugees during the Holocaust because he was likely an anti-Semite based on what said in private about the Jews.

Later in the war, government whistleblowers spoke out against what Roosevelt's administration was doing, and, in 1944, the Treasury Department released a damning report by lawyer Randolph Pau, which in part stated:

“I am convinced on the basis of the information which is available to me that certain officials in our State Department, which is charged with carrying out this policy, have been guilty not only of gross procrastination and willful failure to act, but even of willful attempts to prevent action from being taken to rescue Jews from Hitler.”

Hitler is dead but the Democrats still have plenty of Jew-haters in their midst.


Please consider following Brain Flushings and also visit the ads on the pages. Follow me on Parler.com, my handle is @Heyrobo, or on Twitter--my handle there is: @RobHoey
Thanks



Tweet

"Spartacus" wins 3 Pinocchios saying toy guns more are regulated than firearms

Presidential candidate and wild-eyed leftist Cory Booker (Duh-NJ) made the claim that in the United States, there is "more federal regulation over toy guns than real ones."

The Washington Post‘s fact-checker, a left-leaning newspaper, awarded Booker three Pinocchios for his false claim [aka: bald-faced lie].

Polling in the proverbial toilet in the Democrat presidential primary, "Spartacus" recently rolled out a 14-point policy proposal to combat gun violence. So crazy was his proposal that even The New York Times, a former newspaper, described his nonsense as one of the "the most progressive gun-control measures suggested by a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for president."

The proposal included a variety of measures that would significantly alter how firearms are regulated in the United States, including a gun licensing program that would force individuals who want to purchase a firearm to "apply for a license in much the same way one applies for a passport," according to The Times.

After the Nazis confiscated guns from the Jews

Booker's campaign released a Medium post, detailing the lunatic's proposal, writing, "there is more regulation over toy guns than real ones. While medicine, children's toys, and any number of other consumer products are subject to regulation by the federal government, firearms are exempt. In other words, gun manufacturers have little incentive to make their products safer. Cory will work to close this loophole in federal oversight and allow the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ensure gun safety by making safety warnings and issuing recalls for faulty firearms."

Actually, there are more regulations regarding children not being permitted to watch an "R" rated movie than there are regarding children getting an abortion.

Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post‘s fact-checker, on Monday morning said, "Booker's comparison of the regulations of toy guns and real guns is specious," giving him three Pinocchios for the statements.

Analyzing Booker's wording, Kessler explained

"There are clearly many laws and regulations governing the sale, distribution and use of guns," including the ban against certain types of firearms and design features such as bump stocks which were banned by the ATF in 2018.

"Our industry is the most heavily regulated industry in the country," Mark Oliva, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told the Washington Post. "No other industry is regulated at the federal, state, and local level to the extent our industry is regulated, which include design and performance standards."

Rounding out his analysis of Booker's statement, Kessler wrote, "Firearms, at just about every level, are highly regulated in the United States. Booker is calling for another level of regulation, but he can't suggest toy guns are even more highly regulated."

But he can because he believes liberals are stupid. And in a way, when it comes to the Second Amendment and firearms, they are.


Please consider following Brain Flushings and also visit the ads on the pages. Follow me on Parler.com, my handle is @Heyrobo, or on Twitter--my handle there is: @RobHoey 
Thanks.



Tweet

AOC attacks Rick Scott and looks like a fool again

AOC's happy face

Rep. Alexandria Obviously-Comatose (Socialist-NY) once again came across as not the sharpest knife in the forest. She went after Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) attacking him on "critical thinking," a term she would do well to apply to herself. She was clueless to the fact that Scott was being sarcastic and her critical thinking was out to lunch.

Scott tweeted about 2020 presidential candidate Cory "Spartacus" Booker about his plan for a federal gun licensing system.

Scott tweeted:

"BREAKING: the latest terrible idea to come out of the Democrats' 2020 primary is a federal gun registry. If you want to buy a gun, @CoryBooker wants you to register with the federal government. This would be scary if Booker had any chance of becoming President."

Then he continued:

"What's next? Will we have to register sharp knives? Maybe @AOC will make us register every time we buy meat as part of her #GreenNewDeal. The Democrats are officially the @BernieSanders Party. They want America to be less prosperous and less free."

Obviously-Comatose responded by tweeting: 

"That a sitting US Senator can say something lacking so much critical thinking + honesty is embarrassing to the institution. If you were a female candidate, maybe you’d be called 'unlikeable,' 'crazy,' or 'uninformed.' But since you’re not, this inadequacy is accepted as normal."

Scott responded to the freshman socialist: 

"That a sitting Congresswoman doesn’t understand sarcasm would be embarrassing to the institution if you hadn’t embarrassed yours to the point of irrelevance already. America rejects socialism and will continue to."

Scott's statement that America rejects socialism is accurate according to a new Monmouth University Poll poll released Monday. It's quite possible, based on AOC's basic understanding of "stuff" that she doesn't understand socialism. Kind of like Bernie Sanders, who admitted that he cannot actually explain it in simple terms. Einstein said, [and I paraphrase] that if you cannot explain something that a child could understand, then you don't understand it yourself.

"A majority of Americans say socialism is incompatible with American values, and only 10% of voters in a new poll have a positive view of socialism," The Hill reported, adding that the poll found that "57% of voters believe that socialism is incompatible with American values.

It's also immoral.

Kindly consider following Brain Flushings and please visit the ads on these pages. Thank you.

Tweet

Cory Booker praises Obama's economic recovery--Larry Kudlow slams him

Larry Kudlow, the National Economic Council Director knows a thing or two about economics. Senator Cory "Spartacus" Booker (D-NJ) barely knows how to comb his hair [singular].

On Sunday, Spartacus said President Trump was "taking credit for a recovery that started under [former President Barack] Obama." He was referring to an anemic change in direction that was as wishy-washy for the economy as Obama was toward ISIS.

So everything good that happens under Trump, Obama gets the credit. Everything bad, well, you know.

"What Mr. Booker and some others are saying is simply not true factually," Kudlow told Fox News' "America's News HQ".

Kudlow spoke after the publication of Friday's  jobs report for April, which showed that the American economy added 263,000 jobs last month while the unemployment rate fell to 3.6 percent, the lowest since 1969, about a half century.

Despite the high numbers, Booker insisted that the boom's effects were not being felt across all economic levels, which indicates a lack of understanding in line with that of Bernie Sanders.

"You have people on my block – I'm the only presidential candidate that lives in a low-income inner-city neighborhood. [His self-imposed victimhood is supposed to be a badge of honor.] Talk to folks, and they'll tell you: 'I have to work two jobs just to try to keep myself in housing. And, by the way, that housing isn't reflected in any of my family,'" Booker said on CNN's "State of the Union."

 "Americans are struggling. Their wages are too low ... for the last four decades, I don't think they've budged that much ... We've got to make sure that this is a shared recovery, because, right now, it definitely is not."

Kudlow disagreed with the bug-eyed 2020 presidential candidate.

"I'm just gonna use the damn facts," he told Fox News' Leland Vittert, whose sister is also an economist. "On the wage front, average hourly earnings are rising 3.2 percent overall. The bottom [poorest] quarter [of workers], 4.4 percent increase, the top quarter, 3.5 percent [increase]."

"First of all, both are good and a rising tide is lifting all boats," Kudlow added. "But the point I'm making is, it's the blue collar people that have the fastest job expansion and it's the blue collar people that have the best wage growth."

Kudlow addressed the April jobs report in a video posted on the White House's Instagram page Friday afternoon.

"Wow! Low unemployment, high jobs, high wages, big consumer confidence, major productivity and no inflation," he said enthusiastically. "It's totally awesome. We're killing it on the economy."

"I don't know how I had the energy to do that," Kudlow said Sunday. "I just walked out and, I don't know, man, let her rip. These are blowout numbers. The economy is going great guns and POTUS'  policies, to be perfectly honest, his policies to rebuild this economy have entered us into a tremendous prosperity cycle. And I don't see any end to it right now."

It's beginning to look like Booker's chance of winning the Democratic nomination is about as good as an unborn baby at Planned Parenthood.


Kindly consider following Brain Flushings and please visit the ads on these pages. Thank you.

Tweet

Jussie Smollett: victim of 'media gang-bang' his lawyer claims

It's a strategy that often works: when you are caught lying, blame your accuser(s) of trying to smear your integrity and play the victim card.

A grand jury's decision to indict Jussie "Something Smells" Smollett  on 16 felony counts was "outrageous," the defense lawyer for the alleged hoaxer said.

Such charges have never before been filed on a "victim of a hate crime," attorney Mark Geragos told anchor Anderson Cooper on CNN's "AC360," proving they are probably long overdue and should have been filed against Brett Kavanaugh's accusers.

“What is happening here is, frankly, a media gang-bang of this guy of unprecedented proportions," Geragos said., using the word 'frankly' to sound serious. "And that’s the reason I got into this. I’ve never seen a media pendulum swing more quickly and viciously and rob somebody of their presumption of innocence like this case. It’s startling the way people assume that he’s guilty." But less startling in the Donald Trump case, the Brett Kavanaugh case and practically any case involving anyone not on the intersectional left.

The indictment released Friday details Smollett’s disorderly conduct charges for allegedly fabricating a hate crime on January 29th in Chicago.

Geragos criticized Chicago investigators, who he insisted did not speak to anyone at 20th Century Fox or from the "Empire" television series over Smollett’s supposed salary frustrations. The network had no comment Friday.

But investigators did speak to the two "white" men who were paid with a Jussie Smollett personal check to were allegedly hired by the gay actor/singer to fake an attack on him.

Smollett claimed he went out for a Subway sandwich at 2 a.m. during a polar vortex, when two white men in MAGA hats happened to be carrying a rope, some fluid and fought with him. Somehow they knew his sexual orientation as they allegedly shouted "This is MAGA country" and used racial and sexual slurs as brave Jussie fought them off and they simply left.

The actor then went back to his apartment, rope still around his neck, sandwich still intact [he bravely held onto his Subway sandwich] waited for 40 minutes before calling police, told them he was on the phone [at 2 a.m.] with his manager when the attack occurred, and refused to let Chicago PD see his phone when they requested it.

The alleged hoaxer's lawyer also slammed the Chicago PD over alleged leaks to the media, saying “all of the information that was being leaked was false.”

When Smollett's account of the attack first emerged, he had defenders coming out of the walls: in Hollywood, the media, and among Democrats seeking the presidency in 2020, including U.S. Sens. Kamala Harris of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey, both of whom called the alleged attack a “modern-day lynching,” before Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson, a black man with no ax to grind, went public with his investigators’ findings.

Smollett has reportedly been written off the final two episodes of the current season of “Empire.” It was unclear whether he will return next season.

It's unlikely that Smollett will actually serve any time in prison for his crime, in spite of the notion that if the police came up with two white men on video in the area at the time, that Smollett would have probably pointed the finger of guilt at them and let them go to jail.

But his lawyer is blaming everyone else, as lawyers must do, to take the focus off of the alleged hate hoaxer.

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet

Dems block 'born alive' bill that would provide care to babies of failed murder attempts

I honestly don't know how some people can live with themselves. One day society is going to look back at our history and see us as savages who would murder our own children. Most animals don't do that, particularly animals with a fully developed frontal cortex, but we do. At least the far-left does.

Senate Democrats on Monday blocked a Republican bill that would have called for prison time for abortion doctors who don't attempt life saving procedures of infants born alive during failed attempts at murdering them.

How is this appealing to leftist voters?

All prominent Democratic 2020 presidential animals in the Senate voted down the measure, including socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala "I Slept My Way On Up" Harris of California, Cory "Spartacus" Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten "I Go All Ways" Gillibrand of New York, Amy "Wash This" Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth "Dances With Bull" Warren of Massachusetts. The final vote was 53-44 to end Democratic delaying tactics -- seven votes short of the 60 needed.

Three Democrats supported the Republican bill -- Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Doug Jones or Alabama. Three Republicans did not vote, due to scheduling conflicts and plane flight delays: Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Tim Scott of South Carolina.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that "any health care practitioner present" at the time of a birth "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age."

It's a baby. A child is born and you don't stand there and allow he or she to die.

President Trump tweeted:

Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth.... 

....This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.

Yes, we're talking about innocent babies. There is simply no excuse for not passing this bill. None, because it isn't tied into another bill, it stands alone.

The bill, which exempted the mother involved in the birth from prosecution, also would have required practitioners to "ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital." 

The bill prescribed a possible term of imprisonment of up to five years for violations, not including penalties for first-degree murder that could have applied.

Aside from Trump, other Republicans also couldn't believe the Democrat's refusal to agree to these terms. "I want to ask each and every one of my colleagues whether or not we're OK with infanticide," said the bill's chief sponsor, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE).

Sasse spoke to Fox News' "The Story" after the vote, saying that he was "surprised" at each vote against the bill, and charged that opponents had lied "constantly" with "blatant nonsense" about the legislation -- specifically, by claiming the bill "would end abortion" entirely.

"This is about the most simple thing you can say, which is that a baby is a baby, and they have dignity and worth," Sasse said. "And it's not because they're powerful. It's because they're babies. Today is a sad day in the United States Senate."

Sasse added, "This shouldn't be about politics. ... This should be about having heart."

A panel of people who survived abortions

This should be about having even a modicum of morality.

Other pro-life activists called on the 44 senators who voted against Sasse's bill to resign immediately.

“Senators who could not bring themselves to vote to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act should reconsider whether or not they have what it takes to serve," March for Life President Jeanne Mancini said in an understatement. 

"Senator Sasse’s common sense bill would merely require doctors assist a newborn struggling to survive after a failed attempt on her life. Anyone who lacks the basic level of human compassion needed to vote in favor of this should quickly find another job. We look forward to a vote in the House of Representatives so that Chamber can get on record as well.”

Opponents, noting the rarity of such births and citing laws already making it a crime to kill newborn babies, said the bill was unnecessary. But they still refused to sign it anyway.

They said it was part of a push by abortion opponents to curb access to the procedure and intimidate doctors who perform it, and said late-term abortions generally occur when the infant is considered incapable of surviving after birth.

“This bill is just another line of attack in the ongoing war on women’s health,” New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said on the Senate floor.

Women's health? How? That's nonsense and a lie.

Sasse introduced the legislation after Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, (D) endorsed post-birth abortions while discussing The Repeal Act, a state bill which sought to repeal restrictions on third-trimester abortions. Northam made headlines when his medical school yearbook had a photo of him in either blackface of a KKK outfit, which he apologized for then later denied.

Virginia Democratic Del. Kathy Tran, a cold blooded sponsor of that post-birth abortion bill, was asked at a hearing if a woman about to give birth and dilating could still request an abortion.

"My bill would allow that, yes,” Tran said. Northam, in a later interview with a radio station, backed up Tran. Both Northam and Tran clearly have the morals of mother crabs which eats their babies.

"When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of, obviously, the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way," Northam said, referring to abortion doctors who get paid to kill babies. "And, it's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable." 

Or just for the hell of it.

Northam continued: "So, in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So, I think this was really blown out of proportion."

It's so thoughtful to keep the INFANT comfortable before you kill it.

If you don't think this is evil, then I am at a loss for words.

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet