Illegal alien woman demands citizenship, goes ballistic in Espanol: calls for end of ICE doing their job

In a bold stand for the sacred right to ignore the law for decades while expecting freebies, furious Americans took to social media to blast an illegal alien who has been present in the United States for 37 years after she demanded amnesty in a Spanish rant alongside top Democratic Party leaders.

"I ask that you be champions of a change in the immigration laws," said Margarita Cielo Balbuena, in Spanish, flanked by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Rep. Rob Menendez (D-NJ), through an interpreter earlier this week. 

"We need a path to citizenship for those of us that have been present for at least seven years in this country," she continued. "We need a stop to these raids that immigration is using to terrorize Dover [New Jersey]." 

Basically, Balbuena wants ICE to stop doing their damn job.

"It is not just that someone like me, who has been in this country since 1989, [and still doesn't speak English] who pays taxes, who is a homeowner, who is a business owner who gives work to others, someone who has children and grandchildren who are born in this country — that I have to suffer the psychological and physical abuse and that I also have to suffer the humiliation that is the violent arrest and detention in a detention center," said Cielo Balbuena.

By violent arrest, Balbuena is referring to being arrested without incident. No wounds, no blood, but somehow it's violent.

The foreign-born woman was detained in ICE's Elizabeth Detention Center for two months, and claimed that she was treated inhumanely, according to the New Jersey Globe. Apparently, being held for repeatedly violating U.S. immigration law after nearly four decades of freeloading off the system counts as "abuse" in the progressive dictionary.

Jeffries faces growing pressure as democratic socialist-backed candidates gain influence in New York, raising new questions about the party's ideological direction. But online opponents of illegal immigration were not sympathetic to Cielo Balbuena's call. 

Shockingly, some people still believe that entering and remaining in a country illegally for 37 years does not entitle you to a participation trophy and a passport. 

Among her most prominent and harshest critics was former U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) commander-at-large Gregory Bovino."You have lived in the United States since 1989. That is 37 years. You still need a translator," he said. "At a Democratic event you stood up and demanded a path to citizenship for anyone who has been here just 7 years," Bovino continued. "Notice the arrogance. Notice the entitlement." 

He went on to claim that Democrats' open borders policies allowed so many foreigners into the country so quickly that "assimilation is no longer required." 

"There can be no amnesty and there can be no exceptions. All illegals must go," the John Birch Society said on X in response to the video. 

"No English. No citizenship," said popular online personality Brigitte Gabriel. "No. Someone who wanted to be a citizen would care enough to learn the language. In any country," said another post that garnered over 1,000 likes.

"Immediate deportation," said actor Matthew Marsden. "A just country that cares about its citizens should defend it. That includes getting rid of people like this."

Rep. Jeffries spoke at the event, and demanded the closure of Delaney Hall, another ICE detention facility in New Jersey that was subject to intense protests and sometimes violent riots for months earlier this year. 

"Delaney Hall needs to be shut down," Jeffries said. "That will remain a high priority for us until it takes place. The behavior that ICE is engaging in is inconsistent with our values and what America should represent." [The values Jeffries refers to is the end to law and order, open borders, and defunding the police.]

The White House fired back in a statement to Fox News Digital, saying: "These types of smears by sanctuary politicians are contributing to our ICE law enforcement officers facing a more than 1,300% increase in assaults against them and an 8,000% increase in death threats. Our ICE officers are heroes who put their lives on the line to arrest murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members, and terrorists from American communities. Democrats must stop demonizing our officers for simply enforcing our nation’s laws," White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis said. 

At press time, Democrats were still searching for a way to explain how demanding citizenship after 37 years of lawbreaking while needing a translator somehow advances the cause of justice, fairness, and not turning America into a free-for-all.

Ya es hora de deportar a todos los extranjeros ilegales.

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

House Passes Bipartisan Resolution To Throw Rashida Tlaib's Latest Anti-Israel Tantrum In The Congressional Trash

WASHINGTON—In a development so shocking it briefly caused Capitol Hill to malfunction like a government website on tax day, the House of Representatives actually accomplished something useful Tuesday. Democrats and Republicans united in rare harmony to take the anti-Semitic Rep. Rashida Tlaib's latest anti-Israel performance art piece, escort it gently but firmly to the nearest legislative Port-o-Potty, and set it on fire.

Tlaib's war powers resolution, aimed at handcuffing U.S. military involvement in Lebanon, went down in a solid bipartisan 235-189 vote. Twenty-two Democrats bravely jumped ship from the Michigan congresswoman, joining nearly every Republican in opposition. 

In Washington terms, that's the equivalent of the entire room agreeing the fire alarm isn't just another progressive policy proposal.

The measure would have banned U.S. forces from any "hostilities" in Lebanon, a pressing issue if America were, you know, actually fighting there. But facts remain stubbornly uncooperative with Tlaib's worldview, i.e., that the Jewish state needs to be eliminated.

One lonely Republican dissenter was the execrable Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, whose foreign policy instincts continue to spin wildly like a compass next to an industrial magnet. Time to vote him out.

Michigan's premier anti-Israel activist cosplaying as a member of Congress tried to limit military authority in a nation where America isn't conducting combat operations. It's roughly as urgent as demanding emergency legislation to stop astronauts from invading Saskatchewan.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and most Democrats voted to tie President Donald Trump's hands on using force in Lebanon without congressional permission. Of course, Jeffries had opposed an earlier version of Tlaib's scheme, proving once again that consistency in the Democratic Party is treated like an optional accessory, right next to "supporting the troops."

The whole thing was a concurrent resolution, carrying all the legal weight of a strongly worded Facebook post. Even if it passed, it would never have reached President Trump's desk for a signature, veto, or well-deserved eye-roll.

Tlaib, Congress's only Palestinian American member and Israel's most dedicated congressional tormentor, has spent years accusing the Jewish state of "ethnic cleansing" in Gaza and Lebanon. Republicans correctly note that her laser focus on condemning Israel while giving Hezbollah a rhetorical free pass amounts to providing comfort to an Iranian-backed terrorist outfit.

Strangely missing from Tlaib's resolution was any condemnation of Hezbollah, the terror group that has spent years rocketing Israeli civilians and turning southern Lebanon into its personal launchpad. Apparently the actual people firing rockets at school buses deserve less congressional attention than the country daring to defend itself.

Earlier this month, Tlaib pushed an even broader version that critics said could have forced U.S. personnel guarding the American Embassy to abandon their posts and crippled aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces fighting actual terrorists. Even by Washington standards, siding against the non-terrorist side is a special kind of genius.

After that flop, she rolled out a revised version with polite exemptions for diplomatic security and training Lebanese troops. Nothing says "principled stand" like frantically editing your legislation after everyone reads the first draft and recoils in horror.

Republicans rightly wondered why Congress was wasting time stopping a war America isn't fighting.

"There are not U.S. combat forces conducting operations or engaged in hostilities in Lebanon," House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, (R-FL), said during debate. "They are training the Lebanese Armed Forces."

"Why are they training?" Mast continued. "Because there's probably at least 40,000, probably more, Hezbollah terrorists spread across the South of Lebanon that are actively engaged in targeting Israel and have been doing so for many years."

Brian Mast

Mast went further, correctly labeling supporters of the resolution as "proxies for Hezbollah," a remark unlikely to earn him a Christmas card from the Squad.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY), defended the pointless exercise by claiming it would prevent America from entering "another forever war that is not in our national interest."

A noble thought, if only the United States were actually in a war in Lebanon. Instead, Congress spent the afternoon solemnly debating how to stop a ghost from invading a house it never entered, while Hezbollah kept doing what it does best: trying to annihilate Israel and counting on enough useful idiots in Washington to stay distracted by imaginary American aggression. 

At least this time, sanity prevailed. Barely.

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.

Purple Heart recipient mocked by Nazi tattoo wearer Graham Platner

“I don’t understand the hatred toward veterans who served honorably"
Ted Daniels, Purple Heart Hero

The heroic Army veteran at the center of this latest Democrat clown show in Maine is finally speaking out, and he’s got a simple message for the party apparatchiks still clinging to their Senate hopeful Graham Platner: you people owe his kids an explanation.

According to the New York Post, Purple Heart recipient Ted Daniels unloaded on the top Democrats who are still circling the wagons for Platner even after his charming Reddit burner account comments resurfaced—where he mocked Daniels and said the man “didn’t deserve to live” after a brutal firefight in Afghanistan.

The whole mess has gone nuclear now that online sleuths also dug up images of the Democrat sporting what sure looks like a Nazi-linked tattoo. Shocking, I know. Democrats backing a guy with that rap sheet? In this economy?

Daniels, whose helmet-cam footage from a 2012 Taliban ambush went massively viral years ago, told the Post he doesn’t even want an apology from Platner anymore because it wouldn’t feel genuine.

Instead, he said he wants liberal lawmakers like Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, and Hakeem Jeffries to explain to his kids why they are backing a candidate who mocked the possibility of their father being killed in combat.

Daniels went viral years ago after helmet-cam footage showed him sprinting into open fire during a Taliban ambush while bullets ripped around him.

His team survived the onslaught, but not before Daniels, who drew the enemy fire away from his squad, was hit four times. He earned a Purple Heart for his actions.

Years later, Platner, now the presumptive Democratic Senate candidate in Maine, allegedly mocked Daniels on a burner Reddit account, calling him a “dumb motherf*cker” and saying he should not have survived.

Platner: an angry, vulgar, Nazi-loving, Democratic candidate

The New York Post reported that Platner has since deleted large portions of the account history.Daniels also criticized Platner over past comments targeting Chris Kyle and Vice President JD Vance over their military service.

“I don’t understand the hatred toward veterans who served honorably,” Daniels told the New York Post. “That part gets me.”

Platner has defended himself by pointing to his own military service, saying accusations that he disrespects veterans are “offensive” and “slanderous.” He just hates Jews, I guess. 

He has not apologized for the comments. Despite everything, Daniels said he is not attacking Platner’s military record and still considers him “a brother” because of his service.

But he also suggested it’s a lot easier to trash someone online than say those things face-to-face.

The controversy exploded even further after Dave Portnoy publicly torched Platner over the tattoo controversy while rejecting an apparent attempt by the campaign to get Barstool involved in an anti-private-equity Red Sox message push.

The "Totenkopf" tattoo (German for "death's head" or skull)

Portnoy blasted Platner in a private exchange. “Yeah I’d be happy to talk to him about that tattoo and him being a Nazi,” Portnoy wrote before later posting screenshots of the exchange online. Look, this is just another day in the Democrat fever swamp: a guy who allegedly trash-talked a wounded warrior from behind a keyboard, rocks questionable ink, and the party’s blue-check royalty still can’t find the spine to walk away. 

Shocker.

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

Jasmine 'I Was Like Yo' Crockett social media hypocrisy re: WHCD shooting

Rep. Jasmine Crockett, (D-TX) took to social media and delivered what can only be described as a master class in Democratic messaging schizophrenia about the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner over the weekend. 

In the chaos at the Washington Hilton in Washington, D.C., gunman Cole Tomas Allen of California blasted through a security checkpoint armed with guns and knives. One Secret Service agent took a round to the chest but walked away thanks to his bulletproof vest.

The Justice Department hit Allen with charges including attempting to assassinate the president, transporting a firearm and ammunition in interstate commerce with intent to commit a felony, and discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence. 

President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and a host of administration officials were there along with members of Congress and the media. Trump and the rest were hustled off the stage while the suspect got himself detained.Crockett, who just got bounced from her Democratic primary bid for U.S. Senate this year, cranked out multiple posts on the incident. Some of them condemned political violence. Others floated the usual conspiracy theory that assassination attempts on Trump are all staged productions.

On her official X and Threads accounts, she, along with her eyelashes said, "The political violence is unacceptable and must stop. I am grateful that everyone attending tonight’s WHCD is safe." 

But on her Jasmine For US campaign Threads account, she posted, "Has there ever been a president have this many close 'attempts' on their life?"

"Maybe it’s lax gun laws, maybe it’s lack of mental health funding, or maybe it’s fake . . . who knows," the post continued. Fox News Digital, who originally posted this story, reached out to Crockett's office for comment. A message was also left with the office of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, (D-NY) seeking comment accompanied by his bizarre hand gestures.

In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, the President pointed out that the whole mess proves the need for his proposed White House ballroom. Other administration officials and his allies in Congress jumped on the ballroom bandwagon right away. 

The dinner was hosted by the White House Correspondents' Association and not the White House, and it had more than twice as many guests as the proposed ballroom could hold. 

But the worst part was that both the President and Vice President were in the same room at the same time. I believe this is a huge mistake as the WHCD exposed. And wasn't it weird that when the shots were fired during the dinner, it was JD Vance who was first whisked out of the room while it took about 8 seconds more to get the President to safety? 

Anyway, back to the ballroom controversy.

A judge had, on multiple occasions, halted construction of the $400 million White House ballroom, ruling that it lacked congressional approval, while offering an exception for actions strictly necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House and its grounds.

It turns out that a basketball court, a la Obama; solar panels in 1979 by Jimmy Carter; a press briefing room that was converted a swimming pool of FDR's and also added a bowling alley by Richard Nixon; and an outdoor swimming pool added by Gerald Ford.

FDR in 1942 expanded the East Wing by adding a second story and bunker during WW2 [not WW Eleven as Ilhan Omar mentioned]. He was criticized by Congress but went ahead anyway citing wartime executive priorities.

But allowing President Donald Trump to build a large ballroom? Forget about it. He must have Congress' approval.

Final thought: have you noticed how Hakeem Jeffries, and many Democrats, are going a bit wild with their hand gestures when they speak publicly?

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. If you really want to help support my work here, please visit the sponsors on this page, or you can Buy Me A Coffee for any amount--it really helps. You can even subscribe to Brain Flushings--it's free.

Tweet

Billionaire pal kicks Swalwell out of mansion and wants his donations back after rape allegations

Stephen Cloobeck, that billionaire timeshare king and former California governor wannabe, just did what every sane person should have done months ago. He booted disgraced Democratic Rep. Eric 'Gasman' Swalwell out of his mansion and now wants his million dollars in campaign donations returned after a gaggle of women came forward accusing the congressman of sexual assault and misconduct.

Cloobeck used to call Swalwell his “little brother” in that March POLITICO interview. He even scoffed when the New York Post asked him about the lawmaker’s rumored creepy behavior with female staffers. But on Sunday the timeshare mogul sang a very different tune. He is cutting ties with Swalwell and the entire Democratic Party faster than you can say “hypocrite.”

“I am no longer supporting Eric,” the Diamond Resorts founder told the outlet. “F*cking tell everyone I’m a libertarian. F*ck you, Democrat Party. I’m a libertarian now.”

Classic. 

A complete 180 after Swalwell posted a video, reportedly filmed inside Cloobeck’s swanky Beverly Hills home, trying to defend himself against those rape and sexual harassment claims from former staffers and other women in Democrat politics.

Since four women went public in that CNN piece, more than fifty former Swalwell staffers have now demanded his resignation. On top of that, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office announced they are investigating because one of the alleged incidents happened in New York after Swalwell spoke at a gala there.

Even House Democrat leadership turned on him. House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Pete Aguilar, and House Minority Whip Rep. Katherine Clark put out a joint statement calling for Swalwell to drop his gubernatorial bid.

“Following the incredibly disturbing sexual assault accusations against Congressman Eric Swalwell, we call for a swift investigation into these incidents and for the Congressman to immediately end his campaign to be California’s next Governor,” the lawmakers wrote.

Swalwell officially suspended his campaign on Sunday. He claimed he is “deeply sorry for mistakes in judgment I’ve made in my past” while still insisting the allegations are “false.”“I will fight the serious, false allegations that have been made, but that’s my fight, not a campaign’s,” he said in a statement posted to social media.

Here is the kicker. Cloobeck had launched his own short-lived run for California governor, then dropped out and endorsed Swalwell. According to the New York Post he dumped more than a million dollars into the guy’s campaign and let him crash at his 9,700-square-foot mansion whenever he wanted.

“I have a lot of people who stay at my house,” Cloobeck told the outlet. “I built a gorgeous place, my dream home, I relish it, and I’m a very generous man. I’m very thoughtful and I’m very kind.” 

Generous and kind until the rape allegations dropped. Then suddenly Swalwell is no longer welcome. Cloobeck confirmed the congressman is out of the house but said he would have to talk to his lawyer about clawing back that donation money.

The billionaire, who admitted he had been a Democrat for about four decades, made it crystal clear he is finished with the party.

“I’m going to change my godd*mn party affiliation, because I cannot stand this Democratic Party at all,” he told the Post. “I am done. Finito.”

Welcome to sanity, sir.

When asked if he thought Swalwell had been honest with him, Cloobeck replied, “I’m gonna have to investigate that. I don’t know the answer to that.”

Oh, now he needs to investigate? After funding the guy, housing the guy, and calling him “little brother”? Give me a break. This is what happens when the mask slips on the Democrat Party’s favorite protected class. One set of rules for thee, another for the powerful donors who finally wake up. 

Welcome to libertarianism, Mr. Cloobeck. Better late than never.

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. If you really want to help support my work here, you can Buy Me A Coffee or click on the ads alongside this page--it really helps. You can even subscribe to Brain Flushings--it's free.

Tweet

‘Deeply Ashamed’ Larry Summers, Ex-Harvard Boss and Clinton/Obama Bigwig, Ducks Public Life as Epstein Ties Blow Up in His Face

Photo: Michael Euler showing his nose finger

Folks, the Jeffrey Epstein sewer just keeps bubbling over, and once again the Democrats are the ones getting splashed while they scream “But Trump!” at the top of their lungs. Funny how that works.

The latest casualty is none other than Lawrence H. Summers: former Harvard president, Clinton Treasury Secretary, Obama economic guru, and all-around Democratic elite insider who apparently couldn't quit Jeffrey Epstein even after the whole world knew the guy was a convicted child-sex predator. 

On Monday night, Summers announced he's crawling into a hole and stepping back from public life. The Harvard Crimson broke the news with this gem of a statement from the man himself:

"I am deeply ashamed of my actions and recognize the pain they have caused. I take full responsibility for my misguided decision to continue communicating with Mr. Epstein. While continuing to fulfill my teaching obligations, I will be stepping back from public commitments as one part of my broader effort to rebuild trust and repair relationships with the people closest to me."

"Rebuild trust." Sure, Larry. Good luck with that after the House Oversight Committee just dumped seven years of your cozy emails with Epstein, running clear through 2019, long after his 2008 plea deal for soliciting prostitution from a minor and long after the Miami Herald exposed his underage trafficking operation.

We're talking banter about dating advice, Summers actually asking the creep whether he should send a note to some woman he had the hots for. Cringe doesn't even begin to cover it. Meanwhile, the same Democrat clown car that’s been screeching "Trump is Epstein’s best buddy!" for years can't explain why their own delegate Stacey Plaskett was texting the guy during a 2019 congressional hearing, or why Hakeem Jeffries turns into a stuttering wreck every time someone asks him about it. Watching Chuck Schumer and Jeffries flail around trying to defend their team is peak comedy gold.

Harvard, that former shining beacon on the hill, that has been a nonstop embarrassment factory lately, just added another stain to the rug. Summers says he'll keep teaching (of course he will; tenure is forever), but he's vanishing from the public stage. If my kid were enrolled in one of his classes right now, I'd be on the phone with the registrar faster than you can say "drop-add period."

Look, Summers has survived scandals before: remember when he got run out of the Harvard presidency in 2006 after daring to suggest there might be biological reasons men dominate some STEM fields? [A lot of us thought that one got twisted way out of context, but whatever.] But this Epstein mess is a different animal entirely. This one sticks.

The left spent years trying to glue Trump to Epstein with zero evidence that actually matters, and every time they yank on that thread they end up clotheslining their own guys: Bill Clinton on the Lolita Express flight logs, now Larry Summers swapping rom-com tips with a monster. Keep swinging, Democrats. You'Mire doing a bang-up job taking out your own roster while Trump just sits back and watches the self-own parade roll by.

As the old Southwest Airlines ads used to say… Wanna get away, Larry? Yeah, we bet you do.

If you like Brain Flushings and want to Buy Me a Coffee, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work. Obviously, there is no pressure but I certainly wouldn't stop you.

Tweet

Communist NYC mayoral candidate wisked off stage to avoid reporter's questions

Communist mayoral nominee running on the Democrat ticket, Zohran Mamdani, the 33-year-old anti-Semite, was at an endorsement event when things went full-on sitcom. 

Picture this: he’s trying to field a reporter’s question, probably something about his latest socialist utopia pitch, when the band cranks up "When the Saints Go Marching In" like they’re auditioning for a Mardi Gras float. An aide, clearly done with the whole thing, grabs his arm and yanks him offstage like he’s Joe Biden at an Easter egg roll. "I think we’re done here. We’re going to go. Come on. We’re wrapping up, folks. Sorry folks. We’re wrapping up," the campaign staffers barked, as if they were herding cats at a vegan barbecue.

This glorious moment of chaos went down Monday at an event where Mamdani was basking in the glow of the American Federation of Musicians, Local 802’s endorsement. 

He was fielding questions about former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s stubborn refusal to exit the mayoral race as an independent (because nothing screams "I’m still relevant" like a third-party pipe dream from a guy who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of nursing home residents) and his upcoming sit-down with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. 

But 20 minutes in, the campaign crew decided it was time to pull the plug before Mamdani could wax poetic about what he's really planning: his democratic socialist vision. He stood there, grinning like a kid who just got caught sneaking candy, trying to hear the reporters over the band’s jazzy assault and his aides’ chorus of "let’s go already."

Mamdani’s been burning rubber on the campaign trail since clinching the Democratic nomination last month. He’s been racking up endorsements like they’re Pokémon cards: United Federation of Teachers, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, and, oh, look, a Wednesday shindig planned with everyone’s favorite progressive firebrand, Sandy Cortez, who’s been stumping for him since before his primary win. Because nothing says "New York City mayor" like a D.C. photo-op with AOC, right?

And then there’s this meeting with Jeffries, which Mamdani’s hyping like it’s the Super Bowl of Brooklyn pow-wows. "I’m looking forward to that meeting with Congressman Jeffries," he said, before tossing in, "I’m looking forward to being a partner to Congressman Jeffries in winning back the House and continuing to fight back against Donald Trump’s agenda, and in delivering, at the same time, for New Yorkers across the five boroughs." 

Yes, Jeffries is ready to sip the progressive Kool-Aid while pretending he can play nice with the establishment. By the way, he hasn’t endorsed him yet, probably because he’s still trying to figure out if Mamdani’s campaign is a revolution or a reality show.

So there you have it: Mamdani’s campaign is a whirlwind of endorsements, awkward Biden-like stage exits, and a band that knows how to drown out the press. 

Good luck, New York. You're going to need it.

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

Rep. Nancy Mace filed to remove Rep. LaMonica McIver after assault charge at ICE detention center protest

Rep. Nancy Mace

On Wednesday, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) dropped a resolution to boot Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) out of the House after the Democrat caught a federal assault charge for allegedly throwing elbows at law enforcement during a tantrum outside a Newark immigration detention center. Yes, you read that right—a sitting congresswoman is out here scrapping with feds like it’s a bar fight at a Jersey Shore dive.

“On May 9th, McIver didn’t just break the law, she attacked the very people who defend it,” Mace said, not mincing words. “Attacking Homeland Security and ICE agents isn’t just disgraceful, it’s assault.” Preach, Nancy. If you or I pulled that stunt, we’d be cooling our heels in a cell, not posting snarky X quips.

Speaking of, McIver, who’s been repping New Jersey’s 10th District since September 2024, decided to play the victim card faster than you can say “political persecution.” She called the charges “purely political” and blamed the feds for the dust-up at the ICE facility. 

Video footage from the Department of Homeland Security shows her swinging at an ICE agent and smacking a Homeland Security Investigations officer like she’s auditioning for UFC. McIver’s response to Mace’s resolution? A sassy “In the South I think they say, ‘bless her heart,’” on X.  

Interesting. Nothing says “I’m innocent” like a passive-aggressive Southern jab.

Mace, however, isn’t here for the games. “If any other American did what she did, they’d be in handcuffs,” she fired back. “McIver thinks being a Member of Congress puts her above the law. It doesn’t.” 

And she’s got receipts—legal ones. 

LaMonica McIver

Acting New Jersey US Attorney Alina Habba slapped McIver with two felony counts on Monday for using force to interfere with federal agents during a chaotic protest at Newark’s Delaney Hall detention center. If convicted, McIver’s looking at up to eight years in the slammer. That’s not exactly a “get out of jail free” card. But the chance of McIver actually serving any time in prison is highly unlikely. 

Mace’s resolution points out that Congress has a history of giving the boot to members who step in it before conviction. Remember George Santos, the Long Island fabulist? The House kicked him to the curb in December 2023 after a House Ethics Committee report painted him as a walking ethics violation and he faced a 23-count federal indictment. Santos later copped to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, earning himself a seven-year vacation in federal prison. 

But don’t hold your breath for McIver’s expulsion. Mace is sending her resolution to the House Ethics Committee—because, apparently, Congress needs a committee to figure out if assaulting federal agents is bad. The measure needs two-thirds of the House to pass, and with Democrats circling the wagons, it’s about as likely as a balanced budget. 

House Dems, led by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, are already crying foul, calling the charges “extreme,” “morally bankrupt,” and “a blatant attempt by the Trump administration to intimidate Congress.” Oh, please. Spare us the melodrama. The only thing being intimidated here is common sense.

Mace isn’t backing down. “Members of Congress swear an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this country—not to obstruct them,” she said. “This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. It’s about whether we’re going to hold Members of Congress to the same legal standards as every other American.” Mic drop.

Look, when public trust in government is lower than a snake’s belly, as Mace put it, letting a congresswoman skate on assault charges isn’t exactly a confidence booster. “The evidence is clear. The charges are serious. And the public deserves to know that criminal conduct in the halls of Congress has consequences.” Here’s hoping the House grows a spine and proves her right. But knowing D.C., I’m not betting the farm on it.

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, and coffee keeps me focused. No pressure, it's your call.

Tweet

Top Dems Pelosi, AOC and others, claim ignorance on alleged Nike Youth Transgender Athlete study

Well, well, well, here's Nike tripping over its own swoosh. About a month ago, OutKick dropped the bombshell that the sportswear behemoth allegedly bankrolled a study on “transgender” youth athletes—yep, kids, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, the whole nine yards. Since then? Crickets from Nike. Not a peep, not a press release, nada. You’d think a company that loves plastering “Just Do It” on everything would at least say something.

 
But Nike’s not the only one playing mute. The Democrats, those champions of “progress,” have also zipped their lips tighter than a pair of skinny jeans. When OutKick first broke the story, GOP heavyweights like Ted Cruz, Marsha Blackburn, and Tommy Tuberville didn’t hold back, roasting Nike for allegedly funding experiments on minors. But the Dems? OutKick reached out to the usual suspects—Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), and California’s golden boy Gov. Gavin Newsom—and got nothing. Zilch. It’s like they saw our emails and hit “delete” faster than you can say “woke.”

So, OutKick said, “Fine, we’ll do it the hard way.” We packed our bags and headed to the swamp—er, Washington, D.C.—to ask these Dems face-to-face about Nike’s sketchy study. Spoiler alert: they didn’t exactly roll out the red carpet.

They tracked down Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), AOC, Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Sarah McBride (D-DE), and Crockett. Let’s just say their responses were less “open dialogue” and more “run for the hills.” Pelosi, ever the master of evasion, claimed she “didn’t understand what [we] said.” Instead of, you know, asking for clarification like a normal human, she scurried off to some media-free zone like a kid dodging homework.
Jasmine Crockett? She wouldn’t even let them get a question out. Just a hard “nope” and she was gone.

 
Sarah McBride, the Dem who thinks he's a woman, gave the ol’ “running late” excuse after an aide chimed in with “we have to go back to the office.” McBride tossed in an “I’m sorry” as they bolted, but it felt about as genuine as a prostitute's climax.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries heard the question loud and clear but played dumb, saying he was “unfamiliar” with the Nike study. Unfamiliar? Sure, Hakeem. And I’m “unfamiliar” with pizza. Rather than ask what the deal was, he hightailed it to a restricted area faster than you can say “cover-up.”

Then there’s AOC, the queen of performative progressivism. OutKick caught her after an Energy & Commerce Committee meeting, patiently waiting while she snapped selfies with adoring fans in the hallway. When we finally got a chance to ask about the Nike study, she hit them with, “I haven’t heard anything about that and I don’t want to comment on anything I don’t have any background on.” Translation: “I’m not touching that with a ten-foot pole.”

They pushed a little further, asking her thoughts on biological males competing in women’s sports. Her response? “I’m on my way to vote.” Oh, how convenient. Funny how she had plenty of time to pose for pics but couldn’t spare ten seconds to answer a real question. Priorities, right?

While these Dems dodged harder than a linebacker avoiding a tackle, their offices screamed their allegiances loud and clear. Strolling through the Capitol, OutKick couldn’t help but notice the decor. GOP Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) had a giant Trump photo front and center, a nod to the assassination attempt in Pennsylvania last year. Nancy Mace (R-SC) rocked a banner touting her fight to protect women. Meanwhile, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) flew her pro-Israel flag high.

 
But the Dems? Oh, they were all-in on the rainbow. Transgender flags were proudly displayed outside the offices of AOC, Pelosi, and Ilhan Omar (D-MN). AOC and Omar’s doors were also covered in post-it notes—probably from their fan club—gushing with gems like “Keep being you,” “Thank you for everything,” and “Don’t stop fighting.” Fighting for what, exactly? Apparently not for answering questions about kids and medical experiment.

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, and coffee keeps me focused. No pressure, it's your call.

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

Weekend at Bernie's President gone from spending bill negotiations and the Dems don't care

Fun Fact: The nation's debt at last count is $36,167,604,149,955.61. If one were to count that high, saying each number one second apart without stopping, it would take about 1,146,079 YEARS! No joke. I'm serious, as Joe Biden would mumble.

And now as our nearly useless government is in the throes of yet another possible shutdown over negotiations with a spending bill, the Democrats are just fine with the absence of the so called President of the United States, Joseph Robinette Biden from the wheeling and dealings, according to a new report.

"Biden has remained conspicuously absent outside a brief statement issued by his press secretary — and for now, Democrats said there was little clamor for him to return," Politico reported Thursday, just a day after Elon Musk and President-elect  Trump scuttled the first bipartisan spending bill.

Despite the race to avert a government shutdown, as we see every Christmas season it seems, "no one seemed to be looking to Biden for answers — and the lame-duck president gave no indication he had any desire to provide them," the article read.

Well of course. Everyone knows and has known for several years, that Joe Biden is suffering from dementia. It took a debate with Trump to finally take it to a point where it could no longer be covered up by the Democratic Party and the media. 

In fact, the only people surprised by Biden's cognitive decline were the people on The View and their audience. The Dems along with Kamala Harris, knew Joe was like a head of broccoli but covered up for him and refused to use the 25th Amendment to remove him from office.

"I haven’t gotten any message from President Biden, or heard of anything that he’s saying," California Democratic Rep. Mark Takano told Politico, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries wouldn't say he's been in touch with Biden, only that he's been in "close contact with the administration."

As Politico put it, "Democrats appeared largely fine with Biden taking a back seat," which is what he's done this past year and prior.

And by the way, where is Kamala? Isn't she supposed to be the Vice President?

C'mon man.

Tweet

Finally, the GOP is starting to get it together: Mike Johnson gets the House gavel

Finally, with three weeks without a Speaker of the House, the GOP finally elected Mike Johnson (R-LA) to hold the gavel. Just the other day, I was starting to write about House Majority Whip, Tom Emmer, having received the nomination among a host of other hopefuls, and just like that, he bowed out of the election.

In the first House floor ballot Wednesday, Johnson defeated Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) who was nominated by his party. The vote tally was 220-209 in which a simple majority was needed for victory.

Finally, someone basically united the Republican conference with its minute House majority where the three prior nominees: House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA); House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN); and Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) failed to do so.

“A man of deep faith, Mike epitomizes what it means to be a servant leader. A deeply respected constitutional lawyer, Mike has dedicated his life to preserving America’s great principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” House Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY) said in her speech nominating Johnson on Wednesday.

Today is the day that House Republicans will humbly look in our hearts and elect @RepMikeJohnson as Speaker of the People's House.

A man of deep faith, Mike epitomizes what it means to be a servant leader. A deeply respected Constitutional lawyer, Mike has dedicated his life… pic.twitter.com/JJJBGf4dRS

— Rep. Elise Stefanik (@RepStefanik)

Meanwhile, not House Speaker Hakeem Jeffries, was dealing with a lot of dust in his eyes.

"Give me liberty of give me mcdeath Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) had been serving as speaker pro tempore during the past few weeks.

Johnson had called for the quick passing of a resolution to condemn Hamas after its barbaric terrorist attacks on Israel, whereas Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) called for Hamas' nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. [Not as farfetched as you might imagine.]

 Looking ahead to the 2024 appropriations process, Johnson included a provision for August that says, “DO NOT break for district work period unless all 12 appropriations bills have passed the House.” Another listed aim of Johnson’s was to expand the GOP majority with the 2024 elections.

Johnson, 51, is a “dedicated husband and father of four and an attorney who has devoted his life and career to fighting for the fundamental freedoms and traditional values that have always been a priority to the people of Louisiana,” according to his congressional biography page. He had also worked as a  constitutional law attorney a college professor, and a radio talk show host, before joining public office.

Once in Congress, Johnson voted for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and a healthcare bill that would repeal parts of Obamacare (aka Affordable Care Act).

He also introduced a a border security bill and legislation to make it a crime to transport a minor across state lines to get an abortion without “satisfying parental involvement law.”

The problems within the party aren't new, but they were exacerbated when Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) filed a “motion to vacate the chair” in which Speaker McCarthy sat, in early October after the GOP-controlled House passed a short-term spending bill to avert a government shutdown. Gaetz and seven other glory-hogging Republicans joined with Democrats. Yes, they joined Democrats and got some of us to believe they were right to do so. They ouster McCarthy in a simple majority 216-210 vote.

McCarthy and thankfully Gaetz, along with Scalise and Jordan, rallied in support of Johnson in the end. Former President Donald Trump, the GOP frontrunner in the 2024 presidential race, encouraged members to support Johnson on Wednesday after previously endorsing Jordan for speaker.

Democrats don't like Johnson's being the GOP nominee due to his support of the U.S. Constitution, Old Glory and life.

Tweet

Republican Jewish Coalition Demands Hakeem Jeffries Come Clean after Defending Jew-hating Uncle

The National Chairman and former Sen. Norm Coleman, and CEO Matt Brooks of Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) on Friday demanded House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) for lying and defending his crapweasel anti-Semitic uncle Lenny Jeffries along with Lenny's fellow crapweasel Nation of Islam Leader Louis Farrakhan. "Minority  Leader Hakeem Jeffries owes the Jewish community an explanation as to why he lied and attempted to cover up his defense of these revolting anti-Semites.”

They cited a recent CNN story detailing the minority leader’s use of race politics during his time in college, his defense of his uncle and Farrakhan in his college newspaper, and that he even invited his uncle to speak on campus.

House Minority Leader @RepJeffries owes the Jewish community an explanation as to why he lied and attempted to cover up his defense of his anti-Semite uncle and notorious bigoted POS Louis Farrakhan.

Full release: pic.twitter.com/Dct6jxuw3u

— RJC (@RJC) April 14, 2023

The CNN story revealed that Jeffries, who claimed he has a “vague recollection” of the controversy surrounding his anti-Semitic uncle, actually defended Leonard Jeffries, a black studies professor who lost his job after making anti-Semitic remarks and he also defended Farrakhan, in his college newspaper

In February 1992, he explained that the two pulled the race card saying they were unfairly targeted by “white media” for challenging “the longstanding distortion of history”:

"Do you think that a ruling elite would promote individuals who would seek to dismantle their vice like grip on power? Of course not. … Dr. Leonard Jeffries and Minister [yeah, a real holy pos] Louis Farrakhan have come under intense fire. Where do you think their interests lie? Dr. Jeffries has challenged the existing white supremist educational system and the long standing distortion of history. His reward has been a media lynching complete with character assassinations and inflammatory erroneous accusations."

It was also reported that Jeffries, during his time at Binghamton University and as a member of the executive board for the Black Student Union, had invited his uncle to speak on campus after he made inflammatory anti-Semitic and anti-white comments in the early 1990s.

Coleman and Brooks also noted in their statement that Leonard Jeffries’s “disgusting remarks” included:

[C]omparing Jews to “dogs” and “skunks”, saying that “rich Jews” financed the slave trade, and saying that Jewish Hollywood executives “planned and plotted and programmed” a conspiracy to denigrate Black Americans in films. At the time, these statements were widely condemned, including by the ADL, former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, and former New York City Mayor David Dinkins.

“Unfortunately, this is yet another disturbing data point of the Democratic Party embracing and promoting anti-Semites, from Leonard Jeffries and Louis Farrakhan to Ilhan Omar,” the two added.

But let's not forget that the entire 'squad' of ditsy Democrats, including Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Socialist-NY) have said a crap-load of anti-Israel statements which is akin to anti-Semitic rhetoric.

Tweet

Pelosi wants Trump defense team disbarred because they disagree with her

House Leader Nancy "Hands of Fury" Pelosi claims that President Trump "cannot be acquitted" because the Republicans in the Senate did not help her Party by calling witnesses the House did not call to appear.

On Thursday, when it became obvious that the Democrats had as much chance of impeaching the president as Joe Biden has at being able to keep his hands in his pockets, Speaker Pelosi made the bizarre claim, in words and flying hands, that President Trump "cannot be acquitted," because the Senate trial lacks the witness testimony and documents [the Democrats should have subpoenaed in the House].

The San Francisco [where homelessness is considered a status symbol] Democrat attacked President Trump's impeachment defense team. Because they did their jobs, Pelosi said they've "disgraced themselves." Technically, had they not done their jobs they would have disgraced their profession. But Speaker Pelosi even suggested that they deserve disbarment over their trial remarks.

The comments came hours before Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), said he would not back efforts by Democrats to have witnesses testify at the Senate trial – all but sealing an appropriate acquittal for Trump, who is his own worst legal client.

Pelosi, who appears to be showing signs of senile dementia, challenged whether that acquittal would be valid, in remarks that seemed a bid to undermine any Trump claim of victory.

If an acquittal is invalid, then so is the impeachment. You can't have it both ways, but that's how the Democrats operate.

"He will not be acquitted," Pelosi insanely said during her weekly news conference, according to Politico. “You cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial. You don’t have a trial if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and all of that. Does the president know right from wrong? I don't think so.”

A Poli Grip fail

Of course, you can be acquitted even if you don't have a trial--Nancy is trying to blow smoke up into the nether regions of her Party, because they tend to believe what they want to believe.

Democrats have been seeking to have former national security adviser John Bolton, and possibly others, testify at the trial. But they don't want Hunter Biden to testify because he is too relevant as the catalyst of this entire charade.

Bolton, who was fired in September, is reportedly willing to provide testimony that could bolster the Democrats’ arguments that Trump abused his power by seeking a quid-pro-quo deal with Ukraine.

It is probable that Trump did seek a quid pro quo with Ukraine but what he did was not impeachable--he just should have admitted it in the first place. He could have said, "Sure, I told Ukraine to investigate Burisma back in 2016. I was even concerned the Bidens were doing something untoward. At least I didn't hire someone to get fake information from Russia to hurt my chances in 2016 like Hillary did. Sue me."

Anyway, Pelosi and her kinetic dentures made combative comments about Trump’s legal team.

"I don't know how they can retain their lawyer status, in the comments that they're making," Pelosi, turning her back and reaching for her Poli Grip, told reporters. "I don't think they made the case. I think they disgraced themselves terribly in terms of their violation of what our Constitution is about and what a president's behavior should be."

Pelosi also accused other Trump allies of attempting “to dismantle the Constitution” in order to shield the president from conviction and removal from office over two articles of impeachment that the Democrat-controlled House approved in December.

Pelosi talking about the U.S. Constitution--as if the Democrats have been religiously abiding by it--is almost as funny as Eric Swalwell farting on camera with Chris Matthews and then pretending it was his coffee cup.

“Some of them are even lawyers,” Pelosi said. “Imagine that you would say — ever, of any president, no matter who he or she is or whatever party -- if the president thinks that his or her presidency ... is good for the country, then any action is justified — including encouraging a foreign government to have an impact on our elections."

She purposely misinterpreted Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz's explanation by suggesting that a president can break any law as long as he says it's for the good of the nation. He never said, nor implied that, he said this: “If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.” It does not imply that the "something" can be illegal, but the left would like you to believe that this is what he meant.

She and her frenetic hands and moving dentures went on and cited the Founders, as if they would have approved of the Democrats' political impeachment hoax.

When Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NJ) was asked whether or not Hillary Clinton would have been impeached if she had won the election, due to her using the Russian-generated Steele dossier to hurt Trump's chances, he claimed that it was not impeachable because she paid for it.

So if Trump gave Zelenski a dollar, all would be fine with the Democrats.

Yeah sure.

After Dershowitz was wrongfully attacked, he pushed back on Twitter:

“I did not say or imply that a candidate could do anything to reassure his reelection, only that seeking help in an election is not necessarily corrupt, citing the Lincoln and Obama examples. Critics have an obligation to respond to what I said, not to create straw men to attack.”

Dershowitz elaborated further during an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity.”

"The point I was making was about the senators," Dershowitz said on "Hannity." "What I said [was] if you have mixed motives if you are in the public interest and you're trying to help the public, but you're also trying to get re-elected, according to [Rep. Adam] Schiff and [Rep. Jerry] Nadler, that's a crime.

President Trump and other Republicans argued that Pelosi slowed down the impeachment process, at least in part, because she realized the Democrats’ chances of winning a conviction of Trump in the Senate to be weak because it was without merit.

But all is well in the nation today and by Wednesday, all should be even better when the acquittal is likely to be given.


Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings.





Tweet

Alexandra Occasional-Cortex wants to unseat a black man for personal reasons

She was told to look at the dead bird

Rep.-electAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Socialist-NY) beat Joe Crowley for his seat and now wants to replace a fellow Democrat possibly because she has a problem with the man. It turns out he's black, but that may or may not be the reason she wants him gone.

The fact that she has never held a political position, doesn't understand the structure of the U.S. government [she thinks the government is divided into three chambers, as opposed to branches, and those chambers are the House, the Senate and the President] and believes that she will be inaugurated on day one, shows just how incredibly audacious she is and not very bright. Of course, Democrats will never admit that.

Politico reports her next top objective is axing the new caucus chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.), possibly because he's pro-Israel and she's pro-BDS (Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel).

But the more probable reason is that he is not a socialist.

Occasional-Cortex has recruited an African-American woman to run against Jeffries in 2020, even before taking her seat in the House, according to a source familiar with the project. Her office denies it but they are lying like Stormy Daniels in a blue flick.

Taking Jeffries out is her "highest priority" target, according to the source, as he is perceived to be in opposition to the left wing of the party and its goals, which are to bring full-blown socialism into the country and ruin it like it does everywhere it's tried.

The Justice Democrats group [you know by the name that the only part that's true is that they're Democrats, and justice is merely how they choose to interpret it] that’s aligned with Ocasio-Cortez opposes Jeffries taking cash from corporate interests but also sees him as too cozy with banks and charter schools. 

[They also don't cotton to nobody that cottons to them Israelis, I reckon.]

But a personal part of the story is that Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D., Calif.) choice to donate to Ocasio-Cortez was used against her in the Democrats’ leadership vote, which Jeffries won narrowly.

"It’s personal for Ocasio," the source, who talked to Ocasio-Cortez and her team said about the project to oust Jeffries. "And she’s going to go all out to take him out." 

Not always a great idea from a new government employee, if you ask me.

Ocasio-Cortez spokesman Corbin Trent said the leadership election "disappointed" her team almost as much as the 2016 presidential election outcome.

"We’re disappointed in the way that the leadership elections went down, specifically that leadership election," Corbin Trent said. "We would have liked to have seen that be a more fair fight with less pressure."

Jeffries dismissed questions about his liberal credentials. His voting record is reliably liberal, and he has A-ratings from liberal groups such as the ACLU and NAACP.

Another New York Democrat, Rep. Gregory Meeks, said a primary challenge against Jeffries would be subject to ridicule, and rightly so.

"There is no one who knows their district better than Hakeem Jeffries," Meeks said. "Hakeem is and will continue to work the district, and he will continue to win by large margins, so, ultimately, whoever primaries him will be wasting their time and their money."

If an internecine fight broke out [aka: a circular firing squad] over Jeffries’ 2020 primary, Democrats would have a key conflict on their hands as they would also be looking for a presidential candidate to get behind.

Jeffries did not express any worry in his brief statement about possibly being challenged.

"It’s a free country and democracy is a beautiful thing," he said without truly believing it.

Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do. 

I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.

Tweet

Trump racists fire professor because of her skin color

(Photo: Heat Street)

They were racists so they had to be pro-Trump supporters. After all, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (Dummy-NY) said that "every racist in America voted for Donald Trump" therefore they voted for him.

But this was a black college in Missouri where a white professor was fired "because of the color of her skin," a state appeals court ruled.

And the evidence was clear. Beverly Wilkins was awarded nearly $5 million--including $3.5 million in punitive damages--based on her claim that she was discriminated against in favor of less senior black teachers.

Wilkins was hired as an adjunct professor in the Education Department at Harris-Stowe in St Louis, in 2001. But in 2010, after she successfully rose to full-time instructor as a non-tenure-track professor, she was unexpectedly fired from her position by the Board of Regents due to alleged "reductions in state funding."

Her 2015 lawsuit tells a different story. She claimed that two of her black colleagues having taught for less than time than her, were allowed to keep their jobs.

And she was replaced by a new and part-time instructor for a total of $23,000--more than she was getting paid in her position.

There's more, but suffice it to say, this is a clear-cut case of racial bias, or racism. Even the emails of the dean repeatedly spoke of her desire to make the education department "blacker."

So I guess they all voted for Donald Trump.

Tweet