Nikki Haley: No love? No money!

Nikki Haley issued a global warning to those countries that hate us: the Trump administration will no longer fund you if you hate us.

Think about it--why would anyone reward anyone else who hates them? Why give countries like Iran, who wants "Death to America" and to our ally, Israel, money to fund their ambitions?

A bigger question is: why is Trump the first president of the United States to think this way when it seems to be a fairly logical conclusion?

This is a promise Trump made on the Trump stump when he vowed to cut funding to countries that hate us.

U.N. Ambassador Haley appeared on the Brett Baier Fox News' "Special Report" on Wednesday. She spoke of the Trump foreign policy perspective in that blunt Haley way she is known for saying, "We are no longer going to give money to people who are against the U.S., or say, 'Death to America,' or do anything that would be anti-U.S."

Freaking Bravo! It's about time.

She began by speaking of the change in world attitude engendered by the foreign policy initiatives of President Trump:

"I think he's actually done a lot on foreign policy but in different ways. If you look at what he's done with North Korea, it's really led the international community to isolate North Korea to where they decide, they realize they have a decision to make. He led on the fact that he pulled out of the Iran deal. He's forcing the entire world to admit the fact that Iran was not behaving properly. He's led in Syria to make sure that chemical weapons are not being used and he's warned against them being used again."

Haley then discussed the president's attitude toward South American countries that are anti-American:

"I think that if you look in the Western Hemisphere, which we've spent the last two weeks focused on, whether it is Venezuela or Nicaragua, the messages are being sent that we are not going to support dictators."

She used that sentiment to globalize the new policies:

"We are now going to strategically start to work with our friends, and we are no longer going to be giving handouts for those who go against us."

Can I get an Amen.


Click the "Follow Posts" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.



Tweet

Trey Gowdy: Samantha Power claims others unmasked in her name

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power testified that the hundreds of unmasking requests made in her name, were made by other people. This was discovered by House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and revealed in an interview with Fox News' Bret Baier on "Special Report with Bret Baier,"

"Her testimony is they may be under my name, but I did not make those requests," Gowdy said of Power. She is one among those in the Obama administration who made requests to identify Americans whose names surfaced in foreign intelligence reports, known as unmasking.

 It was reported by Fox News last month that Power was unmasking at an incredibly rapid pace in the final months of Obama's leftist presidency. She averaged over one request for every working day last year and even went so far as to seek information in the days leading to Trump's inauguration.

Gowdy told Bret Baier, "I think if she were on your show, she would say those requests to unmask may have been attributed to her, but they greatly exceed by an exponential factor the requests she actually made. So, that's her testimony, and she was pretty emphatic about it."

Then he added, "So we've go to get to the bottom of that. If there is someone else making requests on behalf of a principal in the intelligence community, we need to know that because we're getting ready to reauthorize a program that's really important to the country, but also has a masking component to it."

Power was interviewed Friday for a closed-door session with House Intelligence Committee investigators looking into the 'unmasking' of Trump associates under the Obama crowd.

So who's to blame for allowing someone else to use her name to violate the rights to privacy of U.S. citizens? And if it was done with such frequency, why wasn't Powers directly questioned by the judicial authority that grants such requests?


Tweet

Not So Fine Stein and the CIA

When a nation is attacked, the people demand that their government provide them with safety--no matter what it takes. On September 12, 2001 nobody warned the CIA and FBI to go easy on those who killed 3000 Americans. 

Most countries act the same way when they're attacked. People want results: they either want the terrorists captured or killed, and those captured must be made to talk if future danger is to be avoided. "Just get results; we don't care how you do it."

There are no more patriotic people in the world than those who work for the CIA. And to call them out on "torture" after all this time since 911 is disingenuous, and as Jonah Goldberg said on Fox News'  "Special Report with Bret Baier" today, it is "nakedly, intellectually dishonest."

But I see this dishonesty coming from the left in other cases, like Benghazi. We have actual witnesses who were there, fighting, dying, and trying to defend the compound where four Americans were killed on a different 911. The left didn't want to hear it because it made their leaders look as ineffectual, which of course they actually are.

With the CIA report, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) attacked the interrogation methods used to protect our nation, but didn't have anyone from the CIA there to defend the agency. This is a person who on one hand, says she is for strict gun control, but packs her own heat.

When the riots took place in Ferguson, MO, Obama put down the police, not just there, but in America. Perhaps he learned to distrust them at a time marijuana use would have gotten him tossed in prison, like a common drug-user. Then when our so-called president had a "sit down" with community leaders, along with that race-baiting Al Sharpton, he didn't have the police department of Ferguson represented at the meeting to discuss strategies. It was a message that cops are the problem, not the thugs who rob stores, disobey the law, disrupt traffic and refuse to comply with a police officer.

Do you see a pattern here?

I put up a photo out on Twitter today of three cops, each holding up a sign which, when read together said: "Cops Are People Too."

A liberal twit responded to me by writing: "No they aren't."

I simply sent him a photo of a saying: "If you've voted for Obama twice, you're too dumb to argue with." I was surprised nobody else attacked me for being racist--it's all they have to make themselves sound like they take the moral high road.

But this is what America is becoming--the home of the anarchists and thankfully patriots, people with conservative values who don't say "holiday" for "Christmas," and don't think it's terrible if their child chews a cookie into the shape of a gun. The left loves guns in their movies, and carry guns for their personal protection, but they don't want you having a gun.

Listen to me . . . I'm really rambling tonight.

Thanks for reading this. 


Tweet