Ocasio-Cortez compares migrant caravan to Jews fleeing Nazi Germany

Alexandria Virginia  Overrated-Cortex, the new brain trust of the Democratic Party and congresswoman-elect, is not only the youngest person to be elected to Congress, she is also the dumbest.

Seriously.

The Bronx native compared migrants in the caravan [who clashed with law enforcement on the US-Mexico border] to Jewish folks fleeing Nazi Germany and other targets of genocide. The biggest difference between them is that the Jews didn't carry Nazi flags like the Central Americans who proudly waved flags of the homeland from where they were "escaping "

Another big difference is that the migrants weren't targeted for mass extermination by their governments based on their religion. But that doesn't matter, it's coming from a leftist politician where facts are inconvenient truths.

Overrated-Cortex has been elected by quite a large number of very low-information New Yorkers for the 14th Congressional District. In spite of her new job as a lawmaker, she tweeted over the weekend in support of the lawbreakers who are trying to cross the US-Mexico border illegally. And she actually compared them to those who escaped Nazi Germany, Rwanda and Syria.

She tweeted on Sunday:

"Asking to be considered a refugee& applying for status isn't a crime. It wasn't for Jewish families fleeing Germany. It wasn't for targeted families fleeing Rwanda. It wasn't for communities fleeing war-torn Syria. And it isn't for those fleeing violence in Central America,"

But the migrants are not coming to the border applying for status. They are bum-rushing the border and are trying to gain entry without going through the proper procedure. But worse, they as refugees are supposed to seek asylum in the first country they arrive at--Mexico, in this case--not go nation shopping.

Also, Mexico has an obligation to accept and make a judgment about the migrants' claims to asylum because they, like the U.S. and EU, are a signatory to the U.N. Convention whereby refugees must seek safe haven in the first country they come to.

Consider the fact that San Diego ports of entry are on the far west coast of the continent whereas Honduras sits considerably to the east and south. The journey the migrants made was unnecessarily longer than it should have been and there was plenty of opportunities for the hordes of migrants to seek asylum in Mexico, yet they chose not to, which is quite notable.

Still, over the weekend, hundreds of migrants from the Central American caravan rushed the border at the port of entry in San Ysidro, California causing the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents (CBP) to protect themselves from the rock-throwing that went under reported by the mainstream media by using several shots of tear gas.

This was the same method used by the Obama administration when they had similar problems, but this too went under the media's radar.

 CBP said some demonstrators “attempted to illegally enter the U.S. through both the northbound and southbound vehicle lanes at the port of entry itself. Those persons were stopped and turned back to Mexico.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement that some migrants "attempted to breach legacy fence infrastructure along the border and sought to harm CBP personnel by throwing projectiles at them."

She continued: "As I have continually stated, DHS will not tolerate this type of lawlessness and will not hesitate to shut down ports of entry for security and public safety reasons. We will also seek to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law anyone who destroys federal property, endangers our frontline operators, or violates our nation’s sovereignty."

As of Monday morning, about 50 migrants had been detained after illegally crossing the border. 

In Mexico, Tijuana’s municipal government announced it arrested more than three-dozen migrants for disturbing the peace and other charges related to the crossing attempt.

These are nothing like the Jews fleeing the Nazis, Alexandria. Nor are they like families fleeing Rwanda or Syria. 

Get your head out of your nether regions.


Hello fellow conservatives. Please click the "Follow" button in the margin 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

Tensions increase as hundreds of migrants push on toward U.S.-Mexican border

Tijuana, Mexico -- It's getting tense out there as hundreds of self-described entitled Central American migrants congregating at a Mexican border town headed on Thursday for a bridge crossing that links the United States. President Trump has also renewed his statement to repel them from entering illegally.

US choppers hovered overhead as a group, made up primarily of young, working-age men, headed out from the shelter where they had been staying gratis last week, to the El Chaparral bridge about a half mile from Tijuana, across the border from San Diego, California.

On Thursday the president threatened to close the border altogether, having previously deployed nearly 6,000 troops to set up concrete barriers and razor-wire fences to deter what he has called an "invasion," a term the residents of Tijuana agree with once they received the freeloaders.

"If we find that it gets to a level where we are going to lose control or where people are going to start getting hurt, we will close entry into the country for a period of time until we can get it under control," Trump told the media, before sending a warning to Mexico.

"The whole border. I mean the whole border," he said, then taking the moral high-ground by adding "Mexico will not be able to sell their cars into the United States."

Tensions rose at the border when a local official and a human rights activist tried convincing the migrants of the benefits of remaining in Mexico, and submitting their US asylum requests through official channels.

"We don't want to!" shouted a number of migrants before continuing on to the bridge in the pursuit of welfare, health care and even for some, jobs.

"Let us cross now, we're already desperate, we've left family in Honduras, we need to work," said a man called Wilson, who not only refused to wait his turn at US residency, but couldn't even wait until being told he could cross the bridge.

Authorities in Tijuana set up a job fair attempting to recruit skilled workers among the migrants for the benefit of local companies, while Mexico's migration agency has offered them temporary residency papers.

No way, Jose--they wanted the American dream and to escape the violence they claim cause them to leave, as per the Soros team's coaching.

Some have taken advantage of the offers but others are simply determined to reach the US because they feel entitled and don't care about laws and national sovereignty.

Since setting out more than a month ago, mostly from from Honduras, thousands of migrants -- including many women and children -- have covered about 4,400, either walking, hitchhiking or being offered free rides before the first groups began reaching Tijuana at the end of last week.

And they really want free rides, believe me.

But there have been tensions since they started arriving at the border town, particularly in the shelter housing around 4,500 Central Americans many of whom have the audacity to complain about the free food.

The migrants say they are mostly fleeing poverty and unrest in Central America's "Northern Triangle" -- El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, where gang violence has fueled some of the highest murder rates in the world.

But rather than taking refuge in the first country they arrive at [Mexico], they want to come to the United States, where leftists, who think America is a terrible place, care so much about these migrants that they welcome them with open arms.

And there's the rub. If they care so much about the plight of these poor migrants, why would they want them settling in such a horrible country?


Hello fellow conservatives. Please click the "Follow" button in the margin 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

Lindsay Lohan 'clocked' after accusing refugees of trafficking and trying to take their kids

In an attempt to virtue signal to the world, Lindsay Lohan videoed herself accusing Syrian refugee parents of human trafficking and she tried to take their children from them. She got exactly what she deserved: cold-cocked by the mother.

It went down in Moscow on Friday night. The recovering drug addict and former child actress shared the bizarre "trafficking" scene and shared it on her Instagram Live account.

According to TMZ, Lohan starts off in the video saying, "Hey everyone, I just want to show you a family I met, a Syrian refugee family. I'm going to introduce you to them."

That's about when things turned to crap. Lohan, 32, accuses the family of human trafficking of their two young sons.

"Guys, you're going the wrong way, my car is here, come," she yells at the kids, but they continue to follow their parents, so the idiot Lohan chases them down the street.

"They're trafficking children, I won't leave until I take you, now I know who you are, don't f**k with me," she hollers, as her virtue measurement scale climbs.

As she continues to attempt at getting the kid's attention, the mentally ill actress shouts Arabic phrases in a Middle Eastern accent. [See how cool I am? I even speak their language.]

"You're ruining Arabic culture by doing this. You're taking these children they want to go," she yells and then yells at the boys, "I'm with you. Don't worry, the whole world is seeing this right now, I will walk forever, I stay with you, don't worry," she shouts, fully believing the whole world watches her on Instagram Live.

Next Lohan makes her power move. She tries to physically snatch one of the boys and says, "give me your hand." That's when the child's mother did the motherly thing--she punched Lohan right in the snot-locker.

After the punch the video ends with the actress crying and going like all "I'm like in shock right now; I'm just like so scared." Like.

And because she is a woman, she cannot like be like lying.


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.



Tweet

Starbucks CEO on politics sours company image

Starbucks Corporation has vowed to hire a boatload (or wall load) of refugees rather than Americans to spite our President's first executive order that temporarily bans travel from seven terrorist-spawning countries. 

Customers who believe in national security and personal safety are not happy with the pretentiously overpriced burnt coffee tasting sellers. And you don't have to be a rabid Trump supporter to be turned off by this anti-American sentiment.

The company's Chief Executive Howard Schultz promised to hire 10,000 refugees, most of whom will probably refused to sell you a BLT because of the "B", in countries where Starbucks overcharges.

Schultz wrote in a letter addressed to his mochadellafrappachino jockeys that the American Dream was "being called into question" and that "the civility and human rights we have all taken for granted for so long are under attack."

Yes, Starbucks is the same company that refused to write "Trump" on a man's cup who told them that is his name. But they are okay preaching politics with every Double Ristretto Venti Half-Soy Nonfat Decaf Organic Chocolate Brownie Iced Vanilla Double-Shot Gingerbread Frappucchino Extra Hot with Foam Whipped Cream Upside Down Double Blended order. (Seriously, that's a real order, unlike the first one above.)

YouGov BrandIndex, a company that tracks consumer's sentiment toward companies and their willingness to purchase from those brands, noted that attitudes toward the company have gone south.

After they made the announcement about refugee hiring, the YouGov BrandIndex Buzz score fell by two-thirds between January 29th and February 13th. They have still not recovered.

Prior to Schultz's comments, 30 percent of consumers said they'd consider buy from Starbucks the next time they bought coffee, but that feel to a low of 24 percent and is now at 26 percent. 

One possible reason for the decline is that the product isn't worth the cost.

"Consumer perception dropped almost immediately," YouGov BrandIndex's CEO Ted Marzilli said. He added that the statistically significant drop in purchase consideration data indicated consumers became less likely to buy from Starbucks.

"That would indicate the announcement has had a negative impact on Starbucks, and might indicate a negative impact on sales in the near terms," he said, also noting that their holiday "red cup" controversy from November 2015 corresponded with an even larger drop in perception, but no real impact on purchase consideration scores. 

The controversy had to do with the removal of Christmas symbols from their red cups during the season.

Conservatives and others are supporting a boycott of the leftist chain and urge like-minded friends to support Dunkin' Donuts, which actually has the best donuts in America, whereas Starbucks has high caloric muffins that cause progressive stupidity.

If I want politics with my coffee, I'll go to the White House Press Corps room where Tom Hanks just bought the media a new coffee/espresso machine.


Tweet

Obama keeping lawmakers in the dark over secret refugee deal

Almost 2,500 refugees and terrorists from Islamic terrorism hot spots around the world are coming to the U.S. because Australia is smart enough not to take them. They just don't want any trouble, as it were.

But our top lawmakers are not being told about who these people are, and you can bet that among them will be people who are not taken kindly to infidels.

In a sneaky, unprecedented move of audacious proportions, the U.S. State Department has made a secret deal with Australia to resettle 2,465 unvetted refugees currently held in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called the deal a "one-off."

Don Barnett of the Center for Immigration Studies said "This is a backroom deal, wheeling and dealing with another country's refugee problem. I don't believe for a moment it's a one-time deal. That's for public consumption."

The shady move has raised a red flag among Congressional oversight members whose job it is to review, monitor and supervise federal agencies, programs, activities and policy implementation. When you keep the oversight committee in the dark, then you are probably doing something the public you work for doesn't want you to do.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) dispatched a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John "Lurch" Kerry complaining of a lack of transparency.

The letter read in part, "This situation is concerning for many reasons . . . your departments negotiated an international agreement regarding refugees without consulting or notifying Congress."

And the Obama administration is upset that Trump spoke on the phone to the President of Taiwan?

U.S. Customs and Immigration Services will be sending screeners to the Pacific Islands next month to begin the magic vetting process. They will ask such questions as:

1. Did you pack your bags yourself?2. Do you know what's in them?3. Are you a terrorist?

Those who initially probed the number of possible terrorists and others being considered for resettlement were told that it was "classified," in spite of the fact that refugee admissions are traditionally public. Officials did, however, confirm the countries of origin to be Iran (great going Obama), Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq and Sudan. Some are also deemed as "stateless." 

Iran, Sudan and Syria are on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, while the others are working hard to make the list. Those listed as "stateless" are the most likely to go off half-cocked because we know the least about them. 

Speaking about the "stateless" refugees, Barnett said, "These could be Burmese Muslims, who have posed assimilation issues for every nation which has taken them. It's a dangerous precedent which says, 'We'll take any ethnic group with which you don't get along."

It also says "Give me your tired, your poor, your suicide bombers, yearning to kill me, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the stateless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp in surrender beside the golden door!"

Australia has a long-standing policy that prevents people seeking asylum from entering their country before being fully vetted. The U.S.? Not so much.

The Grassley-Goodlatte letter asked why Australia and other nations refused to take in these refugees. We are all waiting with baited breath (which smells like worms, I guess) for an answer.

"If they've been vetted and deemed inadmissible, the U.S. can't say, 'You don't want them, so we'll take them,'" Barnett said.

At a November 14 press conference, Turnbull said, "Nobody is taking any more refugees, but what the Americans are doing is assisting these individuals on Nauru and Manus by bringing them in within their existing quota."

Obama increased the quota for the 12-month period that began in October. Last year it was 85,000 refugees; this year it's 110,000!

PM Turnbull's announcement that Australia would be "taking more refugees from Central America" as part of "commitments at President Obama's Refugee Summit" has lawmakers speculating that the deal is a trade of dangerous refugees for Central America refugees that Australia would be getting. 

It's kind of like the Iran nuclear deal but with human "nukes" instead of actual nukes.

The Grassley-Goodlatte committee representatives will receive a classified briefing in the Australian refugee deal next week. There will be plenty of questions that we'll never get the answers to--the cost, timing, how it will benefit tue U.S. and why the heck was the deal done in secret by "the most transparent administration in the history of the United States."


Tweet

Afghan refugee killed in jihadist attack in Germany

Germany -- An Afghan teenage refugee went all jihad and injured many people as he went on a slashing spree with an axe and knife aboard a train in southern Germany Monday night. He was shot to death by police before he could do more violence.

The Wuerzburg police posted on their Facebook page that 3 of the victims suffered serious injuries and one was slightly injured. Thankfully, the young jihadist didn't know where to find the vital organs on his victims and none were killed outright. An additional 14 people who were on scene were being treated for shock.

Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann, a top security official, told ARD TV that the attacker was a 17-year-old Afghan refugee, and the initial information on the jihadist was that he came to Germany as an unaccompanied minor and lived in the Wuerzburg area, initially at a refugee facility in Ochsenfurt. He more recently moved in with a foster family who, I bet, aren't happy about the situation.

Herrmann said authorities were still investigating the motive for the attack (like we don't have a clue) and there were reports that the attacker was yelling something (that rhymed with Al Lou Go Bragh!) during the attack. 

The train was coming from the Bavarian town of Treuchtlingen heading to Wuerzburg, about 60 miles northwest of Nuremberg, where the famous Nuremberg trials were held between November 20, 1945 and October 1, 1946 in which military tribunals were held by allied forces. The purpose was to prosecute leadership members of Nazi Germany.

Now we are cursed with another form of Nazi, the Islamic jihadist. The similarity is that they hate the Jews as vehemently as Hitler's Nazis, but the difference is that they hate the rest of the non-Islamic world as well.

Germany registered over 1 million refugees entering the country last year. Of these, over 150,000 are Afghans. However, it isn't yet known if the suspect was from that group or had been in Germany longer.

What is clear is that if we accept immigrants the  carte blanche way Germany has, we will experience similar attacks from Islamic jihadists.

It's what they do.


Tweet

How to vet a refugee

It now appears that Tashfeen Malik, the wife of Syed Farook, was radicalized before she ever stepped on American soil. Farook too was probably radicalized by the time the loving couple entered the USA as husband and wife.

Malik, originally from Pakistan (not Pahkeestahhn, as Obama calls it) gave authorities a non-existent address when she came here. Nobody apparently checked on her information.

One thing is obvious: we need a better vetting process for immigrants and refugees because the process we are using now is as effective on terrorism as the Obama administration.

I believe that a face-to-face interview can glean the sensitive information that can distinguish an Islamic terrorist from a moderate Muslim. The questions I would pose are suited for Muslims and are not appropriate for other religious fanatics. I have graciously provided answers to these questions.

Question: You are about to shoot up a Christmas party when you realize there are Muslims in attendance among the infidels. Who would you kill first?
Answer: First the Jews, then the Christians. You save the Muslims for last in case they have a change of heart and join your jihad.

Question: A dog, a cat and a camel walk into a bar. Who doesn't belong there?
Answer: You. What are you doing in a bar, infidel pig?

Question: Mohammad (peace be upon him) comes down to earth from Paradise and tells you he wants to have sex with your wife. Which wife would you give him?
Answer: The 9-year-old. He really goes for the young chicks.

After you have asked these three key questions and obtained the correct answers that assure you the refugee is Islamic, you should close the interview thusly:
"I am going to draw Mohammad, (peace be upon him). What color should I draw his beard?"

If the refugee fails to attack you, allow him entry into the country in spite of the answers he/she gave. After all, it's going to happen under Obama's watch anyway.

Tweet