no,...that's your job dog. keeping your nose right in Don/Con's asshole.

and i will say you're doing a fantastic job.

go now and lick your self DOG,...or trump,...which ever you prefer.

MicroBots Can Now be Released by the Military During Natural Disasters
Markab Algedi
Jul 29, 20181



You’re probably familiar with the mad science division of the Pentagon, DARPA. They have spearheaded efforts and made research grants toward such things as self guided smart bullets, robots of war, weaponized artificial intelligence, and just about everything in-between.

Now, they have created yet another technology with an immense potential for abuse: small robots that could be deployed by the government in a time of disaster, supposedly to help clean something up or perform some innocuous task. People who know what the government does might be a bit more skeptical.

Given the title “SHRIMP,” or “Short-Range Independent Microrobotic Platforms,” DARPA claims the reason it wants to develop tiny robots for the US military is some altruistic, natural disaster-solving mission to preserve the safety of humanity.

It sounds just like an episode of Ghost in the Shell. In one episode, Japan used micromachines to clean radiation from the air after a planned bombing.

The robots developed by DARPA aren’t that small, they can fit on a person’s finger like this. These are the components of one of the tiny robots.



The “disaster robots” were justified in a press release from DARPA, in which they claimed that the micro-robots would be useful in, for instance, the event of an earthquake which would cause the destruction of buildings and structures.

DARPA has a Microsystems Technology Office, or MTO. Its program manager for this project, Dr. Ronald Polcawich said:

“Whether in a natural disaster scenario, a search and rescue mission, a hazardous environment, or other critical relief situation, robots have the potential to provide much-needed aid and support.”

“However, there are a number of environments that are inaccessible for larger robotic platforms. Smaller robotics systems could provide significant aide, but shrinking down these platforms requires significant advancement of the underlying technology.”



Articles about this awkwardly tried to reassure the reader that the goal of this technology was “noble.” According to a science website called Edgy Labs:

“These goals remain noble, but the technology to get micro and milli robotics lags behind.

Besides the goal to have SHRIMP robots help in disasters, DARPA wants the program to improve overall understanding of actuator technologies.”

A few distinct factors were considered in the development of such robotics, and they were listed as:

– dexterity
– robotic platform mobility
– strength-to-weight ratio
– load-bearing capacity
– force generation
– overall efficiency
– max work density

Naturally, the development of ultra-tiny robots must be dependent on this strength to weight ratio, and Polcawich emphasized that its a huge factor on the overall endurance and load-bearing capabilities of any sized robot that is “actuator-based.”

Articles about this are emphasizing that “actuator improvements” are a new, important development in the field or robotics, and that DARPA is using their nearly bottomless US military funding to get into it.

It was specifids that different types of actuators are applied to specific kinds of robots. Hydraulic actuators for example have a requirement for incompressible fluid. In contrast, a pneumatic actuator is reliant on pneumatics, or the principle of pressurized air/gas.

Actuating materials may even be used to create artificial robotic muscles. If you understand how cars can be propped up with hydraulic tools, you could imagine how that technology may be used to make robotic muscles.



But see, the last people on Earth you’d want to trust with all this is the US military, and their entity DARPA likes to hold competitions to persuade people to feed them their ingeniuty and intelligence, so the military can harvest it and use it for their purposes. Continuing from Edgy Labs:

“In the spirit of innovation, DARPA introduced a competitive element to their SHRIMP platform research. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will evaluate each project at their Robotics Test Facility.


These evaluations will determine a disaster robot’s potential field functionality through a series of tests involving mobility, speed, load-bearing capabilities, and more.

Perhaps these research projects will affect nanobot technology in the future, as well.”

https://themindunleashed.com/2018/07/microbots-can-now-be-released-by-the-military-during-natural-disasters.html

conix,..are you really that STUPID ?

if this is your real perception,...

you have some major,major issues in life.

JimLur,...this is why YOU and Orange Hair are attracted to each other.

you mimic each other.

YOU and Orange Hair are one in the same.

this is what YOU and your IMBECILE master do.

first,..you don't learn from your past mistakes,...you just keep repeating them,...you make up lies,...you don't apologize when caught in the lie,...you then come back and make up another lie,...which you are also caught for,...you don't learn because you think you are smarter and better than others,...and, because you can't help your self (no mature adult is functioning in you, like trump) you repeat another lie and get caught,...you don't apologize for any of your actions because you think that you are above it all and in your little mind you think that apologizing is a sign of weakness.

the bullshit Trump is attracted the bullshit JimLur is.

right ;^) . you're busted. you've even admitted that you are a poor speller.

so your new piece of bullshit smells like it's coming from the same source,...YOU <===



I do it on purpose to see dogs like you chase their tail.

Hacking the US mid-terms? It's child's play
Dave Lee
North America technology reporter
11 August 2018


GO TO THIS LINK TO WATCH....AMAZING !

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45154903

"I'm going to try to change the votes for Donald Trump"
Bianca Lewis, 11, has many hobbies. She likes Barbie, video games, fencing, singing… and hacking the infrastructure behind the world’s most powerful democracy.

“I’m going to try and change the votes for Donald Trump,” she tells me.

“I’m going to try to give him less votes. Maybe even delete him off of the whole thing.”

Fortunately for the President, Bianca is attacking a replica website, not the real deal.

She’s taking part in a competition organised by R00tz Asylum, a non-profit organisation that promotes “hacking for good”.

Its aim is to send out a dire warning: the voting systems that will be used across America for the mid-term vote in November are, in many cases, so insecure a young child can learn to hack them with just a few minute’s coaching.

Bianca Lewis, 11, believes election technology needs to be made more secure.
"These are the websites that are very important because they report the election results to the public,” explained Nico Sell, the founder of R00tz Asylum.

“They also tell the public where to go to vote. You could imagine if either of these two things were changed, the chaos that would ensue.”

Hacking the real websites would be illegal. So instead, Ms Sell’s team created 13 sites that mimicked the real websites, gaping vulnerabilities and all, for 13 so-called “battleground" states - parts of the country where the vote is expected to be tight.

Over the course of a day, 39 kids aged between 8 and 17 took the challenge - 35 of them succeeded in bypassing the trivial security. Pranks ensued. At one time the site told us 12 billion votes had been cast. Later, we were told that candidate “Bob Da Builder” was the victor.

Eager children

The first competitor to break in was 11-year-old Audrey Jones. It took her 10 minutes.

“The bugs in the code makes us [able] to do whatever we want,” she tells me.

"We call somebody our own name if we want to, make it look like we won the election!”


The contest was part of the kids' zone at Def Con, the annual hacking conference in Las Vegas. This year it was attended by more than 300 eager children, trying everything from lock picking to soldering. At one table I meet two-year-old Catherine Sabonis, happily picking apart a debit card reader. Organisers tell me around half of the attendees are girls.

This year is the first time election hacking has been a theme, one which was inspired by similar hacks being carried about by adult attendees at 2017’s show.

While the hacks learnt here wouldn’t change actual vote counts - even if carried out for real - they could alter how the vote results were displayed on official websites. It doesn’t take much imagination to picture the furore that would be caused were an official election website to declare the wrong candidate the winner.

The fallibility of these systems has been of concern since 2016’s presidential election, and in some cases well before that. Each state in the US is able to come up with its own system, and with budgets tight, many are relying on poorly secured databases and voting machines that run software that’s well over a decade old.

‘Our democracy is at risk'

Last month, Congress voted along party lines and rejected an amendment put forward by the Democrats. It would have injected $380m into boosting voting security during 2019, renewing a grant of the same amount approved in a previous budget.

A heated session culminated in supporters of the amendment chanting “USA! USA!” in the House - but it wasn’t enough to win over Republican votes.

“We need to take this threat really seriously,” says Ms Sell. “The Secretary of State websites should not be this vulnerable. These are known vulnerabilities. It’s something that we as a society need to gather together and fix, because our democracy is at risk.”

Taking a brief break from hacking, Bianca hands me a sticker with her social media persona on it. I promised I’d give it a plug. I ask her if she’s worried about the lack of security on the websites she’d been attacking, with great success, throughout the day.

“We should have it way [more] secure,” she says. “Russians are out there, people."

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45154903

Monsanto’s Court Ruling Marks a Turning Point for Cancer-Causing WeedKiller
by Kristin Houser
August 13, 2018
Health & Medicine

DAMAGING DAMAGES. What started as a $289 million fine just had an even bigger financial effect on pharmaceutical and life sciences company Bayer. It’s now down $14 billion.

On Friday, a state court in San Francisco, California, ruled that Monsanto — an agritech company Bayer acquired in June — owed California school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson $289 million in damages. The reason: the company’s weedkillers Roundup and Ranger Pro gave him terminal cancer and weren’t adequately labeled to detail those risks.

Monsanto announced plans to appeal the court’s decision, but that couldn’t stop Bayer’s shares from plunging 12 percent on Monday, the equivalent of roughly $14 billion in value.


BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH? For years, health- and environmentally-focused agencies have debated whether or not glyphosate, the key chemical in both Roundup and Ranger Pro, actually causes cancer. In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an agency within the World Health Organization (WHO), determined it is “probably carcinogenic in humans.”

However, in December 2017, a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analysis of numerous studies led to the conclusion that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans — the data suggested the relationship wasn’t there (of course, the $120 million Monsanto and Bayer spent on U.S. government lobbying in the decade prior to that decision could have had some influence on it).

BAD FOR THE BOTTOM LINE. Carcinogenic or not, Monsanto’s glyphosate-containing products are still widely available, and that might not be in Bayer’s best interest if it loses its appeal of the California case. Johnson’s lawsuit is one of about 5,000 like it, and they could just keep coming as long as Monsanto’s glyphosate products are on the market.

If each of those existing lawsuits returns the same verdict as Johnson’s, Bayer could owe a whopping $1.45 trillion in damages — more than enough to bankrupt a company with a market cap around $104 billion.


But if just a single ruling in favor of the plaintiff was enough to cut Bayer’s value by 12 percent, Bayer may not need 5,000 verdicts to see some pretty substantial damage. Similar effects in the stock market from any future verdicts might mean that Bayer seriously regrets acquiring Monsanto — assuming it survives the aftermath.

https://futurism.com/glyphosate-bayer-monsanto/

Omarosa says she will provide Mueller with tapes if he needs them as she claims Trump knew in advance that Wikileaks was publishing Hillary Clinton's emails
By GEOFF EARLE, DEPUTY U.S. POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
14 August 2018 | UPDATED: 17:57 EDT, 14 August 2018

Omarosa Manigault Newsman spoke to MSNBC as she promotes her new book 'Unhinged'

- She called on President Trump to 'come clean' with the American people

- Claims he 'absolutely' knew about hacked emails in advance but would provide no details

- Said she would 'participate' if special counsel Mueller needs her

- Has already spoken to special counsel investigators


Omarosa Manigault Newman claimed Tuesday that President Trump 'absolutely' knew about hacked Hillary Clinton emails in advance of publication during the 2016 presidential campaign, and vows she will further assist the Mueller probe if asked.

The former White House official, campaign aide, and reality TV star made the claim, without providing any details, in an interview Tuesday with MSNBC amid a furor over her new book, 'Unhinged.'

'There is a lot of corruption that went on both in the campaign and in the White House and I'm going to blow the whistle on all of it,' vowed the former Trump protege turned self-styled whistleblower.

Host Katy Tur pressed Omarosa on whether Trump knew about Hillary Clinton emails in advance of publication by WikiLeaks – a topic at the heart of the Mueller Russia probe.

'Absolutely. Yes. Yes,' she responded. But Manigault Newman, who confirmed she has spoken to Mueller's investigators, provided no corroborating information.

Asked if Trump should be afraid of more tapes in her possession,' she didn't give a direct answer. 'I think he should be afraid of being exposed as the misogynist, the bigot and the racist that he is.'

She also wouldn't comment on whether she had more tapes of the president, or if she planned to release more of them.

When Tur asked if Trump really had a 'back channel' to WikiLeaks, she responded: 'I didn't say that, you did. But I will say that I am going to expose the corruption that went on in the campaign and int he White House.'

'There is a lot of corruption that went on both in the campaign and in the White House and I'm going to blow the whistle on all of it,' said Omarosa Manigault Newman in her latest TV interview +4
'There is a lot of corruption that went on both in the campaign and in the White House and I'm going to blow the whistle on all of it,' said Omarosa Manigault Newman in her latest TV interview

When pressed for details, including whether she spoke to a federal grand jury and what kind of questions she got asked by investigators, Omarosa begged off, and said she was glad to talk about her new book.

'I feel like my hands are tied,' she said. 'Unfortunately, I can't elaborate,' she said.

'I'd be happy to talk bout "Unhinged," my book that's out today,' she said at one point.

She declined to characterize how many tapes she had, after the release of three explosive snippets, including one Tuesday of staff aides discussing an unverified tape of Trump allegedly using the 'N' word – which he and other aides deny exists.

She said she was willing to turn over tapes if Mueller asks, or help in other ways. 'If he calls me I certainly will participate with anything that he needs. I'll provide him with what he needs,' she said.

She called the president she served for a year inside the White House 'unfit' for office.

'I think that he should come clean with the American people,' she said of Trump.

She was more forthcoming about the number of tapes with MSNBC's Chris Mathews in a previous 'Hardball' interview.

'Oh, I have plenty,' she told him.

'Anything Mueller would like to see? Robert Mueller?' the host asked.

'If he, if his office calls again, anything they want I'll share,' she told him.

Trump ramped up his slash-and-burn campaign, calling Manigault-Newman 'that dog' and a 'crazed, lying lowlife'
Trump ramped up his slash-and-burn campaign, calling Manigault-Newman 'that dog' and a 'crazed, lying lowlife'

Video playing bottom right...
Asked if she would be a good witness, she said: 'Absolutely. Anything they want, I will certainly corroborate.'

Manigault Newman, who was fired and who released a tape of chief of staff John Kelly delivering the news, also said she thinks Trump should be impeached.

Trump's re-election campaign organization filed papers in New York on Tuesday demanding damages from Omarosa Manigault-Newman for violating the terms of a secrecy agreement she signed in 2016.

The legal filing claims the onetime campaign adviser and former West Wing aide disparaged Trump in her unauthorized tell-all book 'Unhinged,' breaking a written promise to refrain from denigrating him publicly 'during the term of your service and at all times thereafter.'

A campaign official said Tuesday in a statement that 'Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. has filed an arbitration against Manigault-Newman with the American Arbitration Association in New York City, for breach of her 2016 confidentiality agreement with the Trump Campaign.'

'President Trump is well known for giving people opportunities to advance in their careers and lives over the decades, but wrong is wrong, and a direct violation of an agreement must be addressed and the violator must be held accountable.'

Manigault-Newman will have two weeks to respond to the arbitration demand, according to a campaign source.

Trump had launched his most personal attack yet against Manigault-Newman on Tuesday morning, just hours after her spicy memoir about working in the West Wing for 11 months went on sale.

'When you give a crazed, crying lowlife a break, and give her a job at the White House, I guess it just didn’t work out. Good work by General Kelly for quickly firing that dog! ' the president tweeted.

The war of words concerns the former Trump aide's claims that the president was caught on a hot mic uttering the 'n-word' racial slur during a taping of 'The Apprentice' years ago.

See ya in court: President Donald Trump's campaign organization filed legal papers on Tuesday against Omarosa Manigault-Newman, demanding that an arbitrator make her pay for violating a 2016 secrecy agreement that it says is still in force.

(extensive article continues here;)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6060473/Omarosa-claims-Trump-knew-advance-Wikileaks-publishing-Hillary-Clintons-emails.html

thanks for the clarity. i did not know that about what Gen Patton did.

i agree with you.



General Patton lined them up and made them march thru the "death camps" to see what was done in there name. That will be the only way some Trump Heads will see for themselves what Trump is all about.

i'm clueless ? ROTFLMAO. you can't even spell correctly.

Your,...no.

You are = You're

clueless DOG you are.

yo,...brain dead one. it took me 2 minutes and 32 seconds to find this,...

why did you not bother to authenicate the story ?

answer,...because you're an asshole that is why.

and if you found it false it would really make you look bad after posting a story that is literally an article filled with hate (and lies).



Does a ‘Muslim Migrant’ with Four Wives, 23 Children Receive $390,000 a Year in Benefits?

Reports that a Syrian refugee was receiving close to $400,000 annually were based on incomplete information.

What's True

A refugee from Syria with nearly two dozen children and four wives resettled in Germany.

What's False

We found no confirmation supporting the claim that he receives the equivalent of $390,000 annually in benefits.



https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/muslim-migrant-benefits/

doesn't bother me one bit. not one bit.

why are you so pissed off ?

you're so transparent. you are attempting to transfer your pissed off-ness on to others.

claim it for your self. be a man. be something other than a whining little bitch.


don't you have the balls to state before you post "This really pisses me off !"

no you can't because then that would make you human.

you're soooooo racist and filled with fear. sad little boy.

fuck off lowlife scum. i guess you're as brain dead as your master. remember always give your finest hitler salute to your master...and remember to be on your knees for the special happy moment he will give you.

it's difficult for you eh dog !

fuck off asshole.

wouldn't that be schweeeet !!! sue the living hell out of her.

at least she had the sense to call it what it was. a big freakin' LIE. aka,..."I made a terrible error in judgment",...ger gosh,...you do have some active firing neurons.

of course what choice did she have with no real power to assert her LIE...like Don/Con does.

it's about time that these liars and criminals are taken to task. i'm hoping Miami U takes,...her,...down.

hookrider,...elaborate please. TIA.

It will go down when some General makes them line up and go past the " death camps".

,...On Tuesday, comedian and magician Penn Jillette also seemed to back up Manigault-Newman's claims in an interview with Vulture.

He claims that during his time as a contestant on “The Apprentice” in 2013, he heard Trump “say racially insensitive things that made him (Penn Jillette) uncomfortable.”

During the interview Jillette was asked directly “Does Mark Burnett have tapes of President Trump saying damaging things during Celebrity Apprentice?” Jillette responded, “Yeah, I was in the room”

However, when asked about the specifics of what Trump said Jillette refused to disclose more information. “If Donald Trump had not become president, I would tell you all the stories,” he said. “But the stakes are now high and I am an unreliable narrator.”

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/08/new-omarosa-tape-reveals-trump-campaign-staff-deba.html

(the Vulture interview)

In Conversation: Penn Jillette Talking magic, truth, and Trump’s alleged Apprentice Tapes.

http://www.vulture.com/2018/08/penn-jillette-in-conversation.html

i think you are exactly correct Peg. it takes maturity to admit that they choose and voted wrongly !

and by not admitting their err they become part of the problem and an accomplice supporting the BIG LIE(S) the con man has spewed on the fabric of common sense morality by remaining silent.

i have hope,...we all err,...but i sense that this entire blight will not go down well.

thanks for posting this Peg. IF anyone cannot see the racism the potus is in possession of then they are totally deceiving themselves and there are other issues only therapy can potentially solve.


this sentence from the article ; ",... the morning tweet about Ms. Manigault Newman was a remarkably crude use of the presidential bully pulpit to disparage a minority woman who once served at the highest levels in his White House."


so IF Omarosa is now a "dog" what does that say about Don/Con's ability to choose a good candidate for the job ? we all know he snagged her up b/c he thought he had her undying support. now,...the "dog" bit back at his lies and racism.

what a pathetic little boy this shadow of a man is.


then this; "In recent weeks, Mr. Trump has called Don Lemon, the black CNN anchor, “the dumbest man on television.” He questioned the intelligence of LeBron James, the star basketball player for the Los Angeles Lakers. He has repeatedly said Maxine Waters, an African-American member of Congress, has a “low I.Q.” He called LaVar Ball, the African-American father of another famous Lakers player, a “poor man’s version of Don King.”"

all this from a potus that has the reading level of a 4th grader and doesn't even read more than a few sentences at a time.


Don/Con Orange Hair is a racist, liar, narcissistic, kleptocrat, a punk ass nobody in my book.

IF that is true,....

"It turned out that he lied about the incident. False accusation. "

then that African-American cadet is the racist,...

and as the Lt. Gen stated,...."If you are racist, you need to get out."

it applies to all.


again,...IF that is accurate that it was a false accusation.


either way,...the speech was dead on target addressing these immature human actions of racism.

what an entitled, callus, ignorant, arrogant, uncaring punk ass you are.

you are part of the problem this country has.


YOU GO TALK to a DISABLED VET and see how they feel about the potential of getting their disability monthly government benefits go from $35k to $13k.

YOU walk up and ask them how they feel after fighting for this country they come back to a potus that is now cutting their benefits so he can pump up the MIC.


YOU GO TALK to DISABLED VETERANS,...

if you have the balls to actually walk up and inquire.


you won't .,...you're all talk,...and bullshit sitting in your protected little life that these DISABLED VETERANS allowed you to receive comfort from.

this is the kind of bullshit laced with NO FACTS or TRUTH one iota !

why, why, why do you types post this falsehoods ? you're gonna get busted for the bullshit person you are, that posts bullshit content.


is it just so you can feel better about the abortion of a potus that you elected ?

it does not matter that he's not accomplished these tasks, of course it doesn't matter whether if it's true or not,..whats important is that you feel good about your inept life choices of electing this imbecile of a potus?

hey dumbass,...see if your pea brain can get this simple math,...

your asshole potus TOOK from the veterans to pump up the MIC by 56% of the federal budget.

from a reasonable $35k to $13k for 100% disabled veterans.

and that is just okey dokey with you ?

if so,you're a much a evil person as Don/Con Orange Hair is. drink more of that kool-aid !!

do ya get that ?

NEWS FLASH,...your potus does not give a shit about veterans based on his actions.

there is power in clarity. that is, there is power when a person experiences clarity. they are not being pulled in multiple directions. they are lasered and focused.

lack of clarity produces constant questioning regarding what we believe.

not knowing what we believe creates more lack of clarity.

my sense of you is that you have too many masters at the helm. which is the only logical conclusion i can come to when i read your, at times but not always, incoherent sentences. you might think you are being clear,...but you are not. maybe what was in your head was clear but didn't make it's entrance to your words/posts.

most of what you post doesn't ring the bell of truth. not that you don't possess truth,..it just doesn't make its way in a readable fashion.

JMHO,...8^)

Air Force General Gives A POWERFUL Speech Against Trump-Supporting Cadets, "RACISTS Need to Get Out"

his explanations after his speech are just as powerful !

"THEY LIE!"

(not that Bernie is without fault. he is. and maybe he needs to listen back to his own speech to others and include himself. nevertheless this is a great talk educating the uneducated of accepting LIES. ` nlightn)

Bernie Sanders' BRILLIANT Takedown of Trump & the Establishment's Illegal Foreign Policy

this is the exact hypocrisy that i am addressing. we have an administration of "I can but You can't" mentality.

it's almost as if they want to hide how they came into power and make up some fabricated story that will slide easily on the ears of the gullible public.

Stephen Miller,...absolute human garbage !!!!

this was written by a family member,....DUH ! wake up Amerika.

Stephen Miller is a product of “chain migration,” his uncle says
Emily Stewart
msn.com
Aug 13, 2018

Stephen Miller, the senior policy adviser to the president and one of the ideologues pushing the administration’s hardline immigration policies, is a product of the so-called “chain migration” he and President Donald Trump often deride. That’s according to his uncle, who penned an essay in Politico outlining Miller’s family’s immigration story on Monday.

David Glosser, a retired neuropsychologist and Miller’s uncle on his mother’s side, detailed the story of how the family came to live in the United States. Miller’s great-great-grandfather Wolf-Leib Glosser left the village of Antopol in what is now Belarus amid “violent anti-Jewish pogroms” there and came to the US. He landed on Ellis Island in 1903 and, over time, was able to bring over the rest of his family.

Through that generation and the next, the family built a chain of supermarkets and discount department stores run by Miller’s great-grandfather and his grandfather Izzy. The family eventually became American citizens. It’s the type of “chain migration” — or family-based migration — that immigration hardliners, including Miller, say they hate.

“I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, who is an educated man and well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this country,” Glosser wrote.

The essay is in part a rejection of the immigration policies his nephew supports and at the same time a plea for him to reconsider:

I shudder at the thought of what would have become of the Glossers had the same policies Stephen so coolly espouses — the travel ban, the radical decrease in refugees, the separation of children from their parents, and even talk of limiting citizenship for legal immigrants — been in effect when Wolf-Leib made his desperate bid for freedom. The Glossers came to the US just a few years before the fear and prejudice of the “America First” nativists of the day closed U.S. borders to Jewish refugees. Had Wolf-Leib waited, his family would likely have been murdered by the Nazis along with all but seven of the 2,000 Jews who remained in Antopol. I would encourage Stephen to ask himself if the chanting, torch-bearing Nazis of Charlottesville, whose support his boss seems to court so cavalierly, do not envision a similar fate for him.

Miller, 32, is a fierce proponent of restricting both legal and illegal immigration to the United States.

As Vox’s Jane Coaston writes, he was passionate about the subject even in high school and bonded with his former boss, then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, over the matter. Miller designed the initial version of Trump’s travel ban and agreed with former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon when in a March 2016 radio interview Bannon complained that the number of immigrants in the country is a “massive problem.”

In his Politico essay, Glosser wrote that perhaps Miller and Trump “have become numb to the resultant human tragedy and blind to the hypocrisy of their policy decisions” after spending so much time “in the theater of right wing politics.” But he also noted that Miller isn’t the only family with chain immigration in Trump’s orbit: Trump’s grandfather is reportedly a German migrant, his mother fled Scotland for the US, and, of course, first lady Melania Trump’s parents became citizens just last week.

“No matter what opinion is held about immigration, any government that specifically enacts law or policy on that basis [of ethnicity, country of origin, or religion] must be recognized as a threat to all of us. Laws bereft of justice are the gateway to tyranny,” Glosser wrote. “Today others may be the target, but tomorrow it might just as easily be you or me.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/stephen-miller-is-a-product-of-“chain-migration”-his-uncle-says/ar-BBLSpO0?ocid=se

this is where things get fuzzy. bottom line is everyone has the sovereign right to free speech. that is a common law, commonsense, god-given right that cannot be revoked by ANY form of government.

now,..what has been occurring is we have an administration that is headed by one of the most intentionally dishonest, manipulating and self important potus's that this nation has ever experienced. Trump has major problems with free speech,..especially if it does not align with his kleptocrat needs.

so when we have a potus that actually supports being dishonest as a way of getting his way,...after a while the adults in the room are going to catch on that this man is full of bullshit !,...and they will begin to view him something similar to the boy who cried wolf or the dam is breaking. lie, lies, more lies !

i don't think that its a case of "intimidate college administrators to withdraw the invitation to speak are not FOR FREE SPEECH."

i think it's more the case of if this hatred (via a speech) is allowed to seep into the fabric of the public narrative these people (protesters) are doing what they think will bring the peace. just like the individual desiring to make the hate speech think they have the right to reach their following.

so whats the answer to this dilemma ?

to build up compassion and practice tolerance of each and every individual and their right to express their inner thoughts. we don't all have to "like" what the "other person" is stating. we can hear it and either align with it or throw it in the circular file.

it's when the line gets crossed that people are hurt and killed for a point of view that will most likely change in 1-5 years as if it never existed.

everyone needs to grow up. EVERYONE.

conix,..what it it you agree with ? 'm not positive what youare responding to. clarify please.

LOL,...it's only an obvious rationalization to you. everyone else gets it ! time to catch up little one.




“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” ? Benjamin Franklin

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The First Amendment affirms the right of the people to speak freely, worship freely, peaceably assemble, petition the government for a redress of grievances, and have a free press.

Nowhere in the First Amendment does it permit the government to limit speech in order to avoid causing offense, hurting someone’s feelings, safeguarding government secrets, protecting government officials, insulating judges from undue influence, discouraging bullying, penalizing hateful ideas and actions, eliminating terrorism, combatting prejudice and intolerance, and the like.

MONSANTO WAS JUST FINED $289 MILLION BY SAN FRANCISCO JURY FOR FAILING TO WARN OF KNOWN CANCER RISK
Alex Pietrowski, Staff Writer
Waking Times
August 10, 2018

In an incredible victory for plaintiff Dwayne Johnson, a San Francisco jury just found agrochemical and seed giant Monsanto guilty of failing to adequately warn that it’s products Roundup and Ranger may cause cancer when used in a reasonable and expectable manner.



From 2012 to 2015 Johnson was a school groundskeeper for the Benicia unified school district in California where he regularly applied Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup to the property. In 2014 he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and claimed that Monsanto knowingly hid the carcinogenic effects of the product from consumers.

“Johnson said he took meticulous care at work, following product label instructions and wearing protective gear while spraying weed-killer. There is nothing on Roundup or RangerPro labels warning of a cancer risk, something that the lawsuit charges was so negligent it amounted to Monsanto putting profit over people’s health.

Johnson twice was drenched with RangerPro when spraying gear malfunctioned. Attorney Brent Wisner argued in court that chemicals in the mix enabled glyphosate to penetrate Johnson’s protective suit and soak his skin, causing or exacerbating the cancer.” [Source]

In May of 2018, The Guardian reported on the case, noting:

“The lawsuits challenge Monsanto’s position that its herbicides are proven safe and assert that the company has known about the dangers and hidden them from regulators and the public. The litigants cite an assortment of research studies indicating that the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicides, a chemical called glyphosate, can lead to NHL and other ailments. They also cite research showing glyphosate formulations in its commercial-end products are more toxic than glyphosate alone. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in 2015.


…He was healthy and active before he got the cancer diagnosis in August 2014. In a January deposition, Johnson’s treating physician testified that more than 80% of his body was covered by lesions, and that he probably had but a few months to live. ” ~The Guardian

Today, August 10th, 2018, the San Francisco jury awarded Johnson $289.2 million dollars in economic and non-economic damages, which is a landmark decision for thousands of others who are suing Monsanto for the same reasons. As reported by journalist Catherine Frompovich:

The Media Relations personnel of the law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, PC emailed me at 6:20 PM Friday, August 10th, the verdict rendered by the jury in the 8-week trial whereby “the jury found unanimously that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused Mr. Johnson to develop NHL, and that Monsanto failed to warn of this severe health hazard. Importantly, the jury also found that Monsanto acted with malice, oppression or fraud and should be punished for its conduct.” [Source]

The case has revealed a number of Monsanto internal documents which demonstrate that the corporation was aware of both insufficient research into the link between glyphosate (Roundup) and cancer, and that it also knew the link was likely provable. As noted by Frompovich, attorneys for the plaintiff’s law firm, Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, PC, were able to prove intentional malice in the case:

“Many of these confidential Monsanto documents were unsealed for the first time,” said co-lead counsel David Dickens. “They show that Monsanto knew that its testing was insufficient and that there was a synergistic effect when glyphosate is combined with surfactants which help the glyphosate penetrate both plant and animal cell walls.” [Source]

This case will certainly prove influential in the future as more plaintiff’s sue Monsanto for covering up the fact that their products kill people.

The judge’s reading of the verdict along with Johnson reaction can be seen below:

(link to video)

g'morning Peg. yes, i agree with you. it's going to be a tough battle. but ,...this will either break this movement or make it even stronger.

i am hopeful that their intelligence and ability to communicate will attract the young adults to change the course...and the way to do it is get out and register to vote and then go vote.

unfortunately Florida (Parkland specifically) is not moving on protective measures of any gravity. outraged parents are rallying to get the present school board fired and get people in there that actually care about the community.

time will reveal,...

Evangelical Purity Culture Taught Me to Rationalize My Sexual Assault
Then I discovered #ChurchToo.
Becca Andrews
SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2018 ISSUE


It didn’t hit me right away what had happened. It was an upsetting moment, but it was, in many ways, an upsetting relationship. After losing someone close to me, I was questioning my place in the world and what had previously been a steadfast devotion to Christian beliefs. He was battling his own demons.



One February afternoon, we were arguing in his college-boy room, with dirty clothes strewn across the beige carpet and a big computer rig perched atop a beat-up desk, exhaling heat. I was tired of the on-again, off-again, and just a few months stood between me and graduation and dreams of a faraway move and a fresh start. I turned to leave, and he blurted out, “I love you.” It was the first time he’d said it. We got caught up, one thing led to another, and then both our clothes were on the floor. I stopped him at one point, looking into his eyes: “Don’t.”

Shock ripped through me when he did anyway.

I think he may have apologized, something about not meaning to, but the next thing I remember clearly is staring at my hazy reflection in a mirror flecked with old toothpaste in his dimly lit bathroom—mascara smudged, hair tangled, choking back bile. I was shaking. Whatever had just happened felt wrong. I washed my face over and over with the coldest water the tap would produce, rinsed my mouth out a few times, and went back into his room, where I found him asleep.

In the years since, I’ve replayed that afternoon in my head even when I would prefer to leave it behind and let time fade it into something I can no longer conjure. I knew it was significant. I registered that something had been taken from me, but I couldn’t identify it—maybe I didn’t want to.

I realized my own past was deeply intertwined with this evangelical reckoning.

That finally changed last November, when I started tracking #ChurchToo on Twitter for an article about the burgeoning movement to address an epidemic of sexual abuse in evangelical churches. Many Christian women, particularly white evangelicals, are taught from an early age the importance of remaining “pure”—for God, their future husbands, and their families.

To do otherwise would be to invite paralyzing shame and a sense of failure. For evangelicals, all sin is bad, but sexual sin carries a special weight, as though it’s a harder thing for God to forgive. Only in recent decades did that preoccupation become a moral panic, brought on by the sexual revolution, the AIDS epidemic, and an uptick in certain sexually transmitted infections.

That’s when “purity culture” began to congeal into a lucrative industry. Encouraged by evangelicals, the administration of President Ronald Reagan funneled millions of tax dollars into school abstinence programs. Faith-based organizations developed purity curricula and devised ways to reach teens and young adults outside the church’s grasp. Groups like Silver Ring Thing and True Love Waits launched an empire of rallies, concerts, and events—complete with merch—to attract impressionable adolescents, many of whom went home wearing silver “purity rings.”

But something unexpected happened this past year. Even as large swaths of evangelicals were starting to question their religious instruction on sex and gender, the #MeToo movement threw the wheels off and #ChurchToo was born: Powerful, male evangelical leaders began to fall as women who had historically recoiled from the “feminist” label began writing about assaults they had suffered within their church communities, and how the abusers had masked their guilt under a shroud of piety. Reading those stories and talking to their authors brought into focus what had lingered around the edges of my memory, and I realized my own past was deeply intertwined with this evangelical reckoning.

I met the boy through Cru—formerly known as Campus Crusade for Christ—­a college ministry in which I was heavily involved for three-plus years at a Tennessee university. The bulk of my experience with purity culture came through Cru. I was raised Methodist, in a tiny rural church about as Southern as they come. (We joked that any hymn composed after the Civil War was “contemporary” music.) I don’t recall much talk of virginity or sexuality there, although between my evangelical upbringing and my abstinence education in a public school that featured pretty flagrant Christian overtones, I knew from a young age how “good Christian women” behaved.

As a Cru woman, I understood my role: I was a sexual gatekeeper.
For a taste of purity culture, consider the opening scene from one of its most seminal texts, Joshua Harris’ I Kissed Dating Goodbye: A bride and a groom stand at the altar, ready to exchange vows, when suddenly a line of women holding hands forms behind them. The closest woman reaches for the groom’s hand. The bride is outraged—“Is this some kind of joke?”—but there’s a reasonable explanation: Because he had previously dated other women, they’d all had a piece of him, and so they would be present in the marriage. This parable introduces Harris’ core argument, that “courtship” is the godliest way to find a spouse. The gist is that modern dating is shallow and haphazard. But courtship focuses on the intent of marriage, signified by rituals such as the man first asking for the parents’ permission to date their daughter and then chastely “pursuing” her. Couples truly dedicated to courtship don’t even kiss before they tie the knot. One of my friends got married at 21, still in college, in part because he and his fiancée (now his ex-wife) felt the temptation to have sex was too great. If they were that attracted to each other, marriage was the logical move. God would take things from there. Marriage—heterosexual, of course—was the ultimate aspiration.

As a Cru woman, I understood my role: I was a sexual gatekeeper. Men, we were taught, are burdened by God with insatiable lust. Women, of course, are not, so it makes sense that we are expected to create the boundaries. We are responsible for what we wear, but more broadly, we are tasked with defining consent, as thorny as that may seem. It’s been several years since I last talked to the boy who assaulted me, but I think the church’s failure to give us guidance on what constitutes a “yes” hurt him, too.

The stakes are high in purity culture. Every slipup is a strike against any hope of a successful marriage. My body was not my own, not really. It belonged to God and to some featureless specter of a future husband. My Cru mentor, the woman “discipling” me and a few other newbies, made it clear that if we failed in finding a godly husband, we should simply “date Jesus.” On the organization’s website, meanwhile, an unnamed blogger declared that “the core need of a woman is to be wanted and pursued, as opposed to men, whose core need is for respect.” Steeped in this atmosphere, is it any wonder I didn’t register what happened to me as an assault?

Jamie Lee Finch, a Nashville-based holistic health coach who specializes in helping people recover from purity culture, was sympathetic but not surprised when I told her about my experience. Sex always comes up with her clients—many cannot connect sexually with themselves or a partner, or they struggle to get aroused. “That sexual dysfunction piece is very significant, and I think it might be one of the most tragic, because the ethic within evangelical Christianity is this lie that you’re supposed to not engage with or know yourself at all sexually,” she says. “And then the moment you get married, the whole world is open to you and it’s supposed to be perfect and wonderful and great.”

I cannot count on the culture that enabled my assault to change in a way that satisfies me, but maybe if I scream loud enough I can use my pain to protect others.

Making matters worse, Finch points out, are the passivity and submission that church doctrine ingrains deeply in evangelical women. The culture teaches us not to speak up and say, “I like that,” or “I don’t like that”—or to confront a man who crosses a serious line.

This dynamic is finally starting to shift. Women who have long been told to keep quiet are shouting for reform and creating an open online community under the #ChurchToo hashtag. Evangelicals and exvangelicals—those who no longer identify with their religious pasts—are organizing to expose the ways purity culture creates a toxic environment that enables abuse and assault.

Even the culture’s strongest advocates are having doubts: In an upcoming documentary, I Survived I Kissed Dating Goodbye, Joshua Harris grapples with the realization that his ideas are hurting people. In the same film, prominent evangelical Dannah Gresh—whose philos­ophy about modesty begot an empire of speaking engagements, books, and “truth or bare” quizzes—says she is reconsidering her use of the word “pure” and henceforth will only deploy it to describe a state of mind, as opposed to a physical state of being that, once tarnished, can never be restored. While neither revelation is particularly profound or even close to progressive, both would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

But now that I am outside the church and no longer embrace its beliefs on sex and marriage, these mea culpas feel like too little, too late. It’s progress of sorts, but I am skeptical it will halt the cycle of confusion and shame. It certainly does nothing to erase or ameliorate what happened to me and others like me. Maybe that’s why I feel compelled to finally contribute my personal narrative to this ongoing story. I cannot count on the culture that enabled my assault to change in a way that satisfies me, but maybe if I scream loud enough I can use my pain to protect others.

Several months ago, after a long day at work, I left the office with two colleagues. We began swapping tales of dumb things we did in relationships when we were younger and less aware of our power and our identities. As we laughed at our foolish former selves, I retold the rest of the story of that day at the boy’s apartment—how, after I composed myself, roused him, and got dressed, his roommates came home and knocked on the door to see if he wanted to go to dinner. “Now, you won’t believe this one,” I said. He literally asked me to hide under his bed, wait five minutes, and sneak out after they all left, and “don’t forget to lock the door behind you.” Then I delivered the punchline—“and I did it!”—and waited for the laughter. My friends were silent. “I can’t imagine a version of you that wouldn’t tell him to go to hell,” one finally said.

I couldn’t shake her reaction. It tugged at me, nagging me that something had gone horribly wrong, that this was more than a silly anecdote that would elicit laughter and eye rolls from my female friends. This exchange took place not long after the #MeToo stories had begun to circulate, and it was an early hint that I had been working to rationalize—and minimize—what had happened to me.

Part of me was embarrassed to have let myself be treated like a secret that had to remain hidden, not a person who deserved to be heard and respected. But more than anything, I reveled in the realization that I had become a woman known for her power, for her ability to take up space, rather than for her willingness to make herself small.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/08/evangelical-purity-culture-taught-me-to-rationalize-my-sexual-assault/

The Parkland generation has huge plans for this fall
axios.com
Aug. 13, 2018


Six months after the school shooting in Parkland, Fla., some of the surviving students are only becoming more organized and more ambitious — ringleaders of a vocal, demanding, tech-savvy strata of their generation.

Former Marjory Stoneman Douglas students Emma Gonzalez and David Hogg, in Newtown, Conn., yesterday. Photo: Steve LeVine/Axios

Why they matter:

This looks a lot like the '60s. The students aren't much younger — and some are the same age — as the Kent State shooting victims of 1970. They're smart, snarky in a witty way, and — like the Woodstock generation — wise for their age. But they seem a lot less self-destructive.

What's happening:

I traveled this weekend with a group of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School alumni, who finished a summer-long bus tour yesterday in Newtown, Conn., home of Sandy Hook Elementary School.
The Parkland activists are aware of the sheer spectacle of many baby boomers and millennial adults throwing up their hands over gun laws — and placing their hope for change in high school students.
The student-led uprising is one of the most dramatic dimensions of an escalating, two-year run of U.S. activism that includes a record number of women running for public office, and teacher strikes in a half-dozen states.

An anti-establishment strain runs through it. On right and left, those in the streets are feeding massive energy into the midterms, and could be decisive in both local and national races.
When 17 of their classmates and teachers were killed on Feb. 14, the Parkland students collectively shouted: "Never again." But 12 more schoolhouse killings followed around the country.

With the summer, the school violence stopped. On Wednesday, classes resume at Stoneman Douglas, and at countless other U.S. schools in the subsequent days and weeks.

"It's going to take a cultural shift" before U.S. gun laws change significantly, Jaclyn Corin, president of the incoming senior class at Stoneman Douglas, told Axios at a raucous gathering yesterday in Newtown.

"And a cultural shift always takes a generation or two."
The shooting's aftermath made web and TV stars of seniors Emma Gonzalez and David Hogg (pictured above). But now there's a deep bench:

A group of Parkland classmates, following this spring's March for Our Lives, pulled off a 59-day summer bus campaign.

They hit some 80 cities and towns in two dozen states, working to register young new voters who might help defeat political leaders supported by the National Rifle Association, their main target. (The Parkland students say they're not anti-Second Amendment. Here are their stated demands). https://marchforourlives.com/policy/

In New York on Friday, the group had swelled into a band of powerful high school orators from around the nation — Chicago, St. Louis, L.A.

This fall, the students plan something even bigger: a get-out-the-vote drive that will leverage their vaunted influence on social media, especially Twitter.

But at event after event, apart from the traveling students themselves, there appeared to be far more adults than their 18-and-older intended audience.

Registration of voters 18-29 this year has barely budged from the pre-Parkland average, according to a Washington Post analysis.

Be smart: The young organizers are going all-in on a strategy of not changing votes, but turning non-voters into voters.

On Nov. 6, we'll know whether their audacious strategy worked.

https://www.axios.com/2018-midterm-elections-parkland-shooting-students-march-for-our-lives-0dd8cef9-30d9-431d-8c09-cefed56e5bdf.html

The Most Vulnerable Trump Clone in Congress
motherjones.com
Dan Spinelliaug
Aug. 9, 2018

A guide to the Trumpiest lawmakers in Washington—and how likely they are to lose.

If a blue wave floods Capitol Hill in November, dozens of Republican lawmakers could lose their seats, potentially handing control of one or both houses of Congress to Democrats. Many of the Republicans sent packing would likely hail from the more moderate wing of the party—swing district representatives who, on occasion, have attempted to stand up to President Donald Trump. Some of the Republicans most willing to—at least rhetorically—distance themselves from the president have already abandoned ship, opting not to run for reelection. Others have been cast overboard by GOP primary challengers who are more loyal to Trump.

But what about Trump’s biggest supporters in Washington? On issues ranging from Obamacare to immigration to Russia, right-wing lawmakers have lashed their political fortunes to the unpopular president. Here’s a look at 13 of the “Trumpiest” House members and how likely they are to be swept away in November—in (rough) order from least vulnerable to most endangered.

13. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.)
Who is he? The leader of the rabble-rousing, ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus and the man behind a whole range of House controversies, from the federal government shutdown in 2013 to Rep. John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) decision to resign from the speakership. More recently, Meadows has become one of Trump’s favorite attack dogs on the Hill because of his rabid defense of the president’s agenda and spirited critiques of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Meadows’ most recent stunt? Filing articles of impeachment in an attempt to oust Rod Rosenstein, who in his role as deputy attorney general made the decision last year to appoint Mueller as special counsel and now oversees the investigation. Only 11 Republicans signed on to the attempt, and a move to force a Housewide vote on the matter was shelved.

Trumpiest moments: During a 2016 Trump rally, Meadows fired up the crowd with the infamous “Lock her up” chant. Like Trump, Meadows has trafficked in conspiracy theories about former President Barack Obama’s place of birth. A few months before the 2012 election, he said, “We’re going to send Mr. Obama home to Kenya or wherever it is.” But his defining act of loyalty to Trump came after the Washington Post released a tape of the then-Republican presidential nominee bragging about groping women. Not only did Meadows stick by Trump at a time when many Republicans called for him to drop out, but his wife—along with the wife of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)—boarded a “women for Trump” bus to tour the South “to rally support for him,” according to Politico.

Will he be reelected? The Cook Political Report predicts a breezy reelection for Meadows in North Carolina’s deep-red 11th District, where he will face Democrat Phillip Price.

12. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)
Who is he? A freshman congressman from the Florida panhandle. He is one of Trump’s most passionate boosters, often appearing on Fox News to defend the president. Politico once called him Trump’s “best buddy in Congress,” and GQ dubbed him “the Trumpiest congressman in Trump’s Washington.”

Trumpiest moment: He invited Chuck Johnson—yes, that Chuck Johnson—to be his guest at Trump’s State of the Union address. Johnson is a notorious online troll who has been banned from Twitter. Johnson once disputed the historical fact that 6 million Jewish people died in the Holocaust, instead suggesting that 250,000 died “from typhus” in concentration camps. Confronted about Johnson’s statements, Gaetz did not denounce him, telling Fox Business that Johnson was “not a Holocaust denier.” (For his part, Johnson responded to the controversy by apologizing for his past writings and stating that he does in fact believe that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust.) On more substantive issues, Gaetz has introduced a bill that would abolish the Environmental Protection Agency and, like many of his conservative colleagues, has called for Mueller to resign. Trump has returned the love: In December, he held a rally in Gaetz’s district.

Will he be reelected? Once Gaetz makes it past a three-way primary August 28, he should be in good shape to secure a second term in one of the most conservative districts in Florida. At least one enthusiastic backer has already voiced his support:


Donald J. Trump
?
@realDonaldTrump
Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida is one of the finest and most talented people in Congress. Strong on Crime, the Border, Illegal Immigration, the 2nd Amendment, our great Military & Vets, Matt worked tirelessly on helping to get our Massive Tax Cuts. He has my Full Endorsement!

2:02 AM - Jul 13, 2018
92K
37.8K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
11. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa)
Is he the one who said…? Whatever you are wondering, the answer is almost certainly “yes.” The three-term congressman from northwest Iowa has made all sorts of controversial public statements. Among his most notable: saying the US government should spy on mosques; describing children who would be granted legal status under the DREAM Act as having “calves the size of cantaloupes“ because of all the marijuana they are supposedly smuggling across the border; describing illegal immigration as a “slow-motion Holocaust“; and, last March, saying on CNN that he’d “like to see an America that’s just so homogenous that we look a lot the same, from that perspective.”

Trumpiest quality: Like the commander-in-chief, King has a habit of retweeting some unsavory accounts. A post in which he praised the views of far-right Dutch political figure Geert Wilders drew strong outrage from the left and even some (mild) condemnation from King’s GOP peers. In the tweet, which is still online, King wrote, “Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.” In June, King retweeted a self-proclaimed Nazi sympathizer’s post about a Breitbart poll that detailed Italian opposition to accepting migrants and added, “Europe is waking up…Will America…in time?” The congressman refused to delete the tweet and later said he doesn’t “feel guilty one bit” about keeping the tweet up.

Will he be reelected? Probably. Former baseball player J.D. Scholten could give King the closest reelection race he has had since an 8-point victory in 2012. Iowa’s 4th Congressional District is not easy terrain for a Democrat to conquer, but Scholten has swung for the fences, so to speak, outraising King by more than $200,000 as of June.

10. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)
Who is he? A reliably right-wing congressman from East Texas who has opined on all sorts of conservative flashpoint issues, from the legitimacy of Mueller’s investigation to global warming—the latter of which Gohmert has alternately denied is actually happening and praised as good for the planet because it leads to “more plants.”

Greatest hits: Gohmert once claimed that terrorists would send young women to the United States to have babies born as US citizens who could then freely come back to terrorize Americans after years of being radicalized overseas. He has said gender confirmation surgery, which three-fourths of transgender respondents in one survey said “significantly” improved their quality of life, would cause more US veterans to commit suicide. Gohmert has also suggested that the existence of trans soldiers indicates “we we are headed into a new period of the Dark Ages” and speculated that the Justice Department might be “spying” on him. Gohmert has long had Trump’s back following even the most controversial of the president’s statements. Remember when Trump characterized Haiti, El Salvador, and all of Africa as “shithole” countries? “I’m not going to defend his language, but I will defend his frustration,” Gohmert said soon after on Fox News.

Trumpiest moments: As you may have expected, Gohmert is a huge fan of Trump’s.


Louie Gohmert
?
@replouiegohmert
GOD BLESS DONALD TRUMP!

Donald J. Trump
?
@realDonaldTrump
Our Justice Department must not let Awan & Debbie Wasserman Schultz off the hook. The Democrat I.T. scandal is a key to much of the corruption we see today. They want to make a “plea deal” to hide what is on their Server. Where is Server? Really bad!

10:20 AM - Jun 7, 2018
21.2K
8,168 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Like Meadows and Gaetz, Gohmert has not hesitated to fight Trump’s battles on Capitol Hill. Last month, he tussled with top Trump target Peter Strzok in an explosive exchange during a hearing that enraged Republicans and Democrats alike. Strzok, the former FBI agent dubbed “lover boy” by Trump for his extramarital relationship with former FBI attorney Lisa Page, was bounced from Mueller’s team after a Justice Department internal probe uncovered text messages between Strzok and Page that mocked Trump during the presidential campaign. Referencing Strzok’s affair directly, Gohmert said: “I can’t help but wonder, when I see you looking there with a little smirk, how many times did you look so innocent into your wife’s eye and lie to her about Lisa Page?”

Will he be reelected? The congressman will have to make it past former US Army nurse Shirley McKellar in November to secure an eighth term. Unseating Gohmert in one of the most conservative districts in the country will be no easy task—the Cook Political Report rates the race as “solid Republican.” But if McKellar’s enthusiasm on Twitter is any indication, she is ready to give it a shot.


Shirley McKellar
?
@Vote4McKellar
RETWEET if you want my opponent Louie Gohmert @replouiegohmert and I to Debate. I will let him choose the place. We will talk about issues and concerns of East Texas. RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET RETWEET

4:58 PM - Jul 19, 2018
2,361
3,463 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
9. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.)
Who is he? A dentist who rode the Tea Party wave to Congress in 2010 and has represented a rural area of Arizona for the past eight years.

Random factoid: Gosar is not just a dentist, he’s a member of the Arizona Dental Association’s Hall of Fame. And, as a former dentist, he can “read body language very, very well”—to the point where he could apparently divine Strzok’s level of bias during that recent hearing.

Greatest hits: Gosar has argued that the Charlottesville white supremacist rally was a false flag operation engineered by Democrats, called for attorneys who provide legal advice to undocumented immigrants to be prosecuted, and described Native Americans as “wards of the federal government.”

Trumpiest moment: He was the only member of Congress to boycott Pope Francis’ 2015 visit to Capitol Hill because, he said, the pontiff acts like a “leftist politician.” Trump famously also got into a tiff with the leader of the Catholic Church during the presidential campaign after Francis suggested that someone who builds walls “is not Christian.” Trump suggested in response that Mexican officials were responsible for the pope’s statement and called him a “very political person.”

Will he be reelected? Two Democratic candidates have thrown their hats into the ring in an attempt to oust Gosar: David Brill and Delina DiSanto. (A third, Ana Maria Perez, is competing as a write-in candidate.) The challenger who escapes Arizona’s August 28 primary will have an uphill battle against Gosar in a reliably red district that Trump won by 40 points.

8. Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.)
Who is he? A family doctor and four-term lawmaker whom Politico once dubbed “the biggest hypocrite in Congress.”

Trumpiest quality: DesJarlais channels Trump in one key area: his utter shamelessness. He brags about his pro-life voting record and backed a late-term abortion ban despite allegedly advising his ex-wife to have two abortions and pressuring a patient he had been having an affair with to get one, too. The same person who described himself as a “consistent supporter of pro-life values” also broke American Medical Association guidelines by sleeping with several patients, earning DesJarlais a fine from the Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners. “God has forgiven me,” he said. The bulk of this information became public in 2012 after a Tennessee court unsealed documents from an ethics complaint filed against DesJarlais. Like Trump, who barely missed a step when several women accused him of sexual misconduct during the presidential campaign, DesJarlais won reelection in 2012, 2014, and 2016.

Will he be reelected? DesJarlais has survived close races before. In 2014, four years after his first election to Congress, he squeaked past a GOP primary challenger by just 38 votes. He survived another primary challenge last week, so his fifth general election in the red 4th District shouldn’t be too difficult.

7. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)
Who is he? Co-founder of the Freedom Caucus and one of the most vocal members of the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees.

Claim to fame: He was dubbed a “legislative terrorist” by Boehner, whom Jordan famously tried to oust from his role as speaker of the House. More recently, several Ohio State wrestlers Jordan coached decades ago accused him of ignoring sexual abuse allegedly perpetrated by a team doctor. The ensuing bad press—Trevor Noah called him a “scumbag” and “Joe Paterno, part two”—has not stopped Jordan from mounting his own bid for the speakership. He’s already earned the backing of some of the country’s most prominent Trump loyalists, including Fox News host Sean Hannity and Gaetz. Jordan has said the “timing” of the Ohio State scandal is “suspect,” suggesting the accusations against him are somehow related to the speaker’s race or his criticism of the Russia probe.

Trumpiest moments: In a made-for-cable-news moment during a congressional hearing in June, Jordan squared off with Rosenstein.



Jordan and his GOP colleagues have demanded more than a million sensitive DOJ documents related to the probe, and they’ve reacted with fury when the department hasn’t fully complied with their requests at the speed they want. Flare-ups like the one with Rosenstein have won Jordan favor with the president, who reportedly called him a “warrior for me” in a closed-door meeting with Republicans last month. With Meadows, Jordan led last month’s unsuccessful push to impeach Rosenstein.

Will he be reelected? Probably. Unless a major shoe drops in the ever-worsening Ohio State scandal, Jordan is widely expected to keep his seat in Ohio’s conservative 4th District. Janet Garrett, a former teacher and union leader, is hoping that the third time running against Jordan will be the charm. She previously lost to him by more than 30 points in 2014 and 2016.

6. Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.)
Who is he? Chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee and perhaps Trump’s top congressional field general in his war on the Russia probe. Trump was actually a big fan of Nunes long before the congressman became one of his leading attack dogs. During the presidential campaign, Trump made an unexpected stop in Nunes’ district to raise money and, after securing the presidency, named the California lawmaker to a leading role on his transition team.

Claim to fame: Nunes recused himself last April from the intel committee’s probe into Russian election interference after disclosing information from classified reports he apparently viewed at the White House. Despite promising to hand off the investigation to Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), Nunes continued to review classified material related to the case and, in May, issued three subpoenas to intelligence officials over unfounded claims that Trump associates were improperly “unmasked” following American surveillance of foreign operatives. The House Ethics Committee ultimately cleared Nunes of any wrongdoing in December.


Devin Nunes
?
@DevinNunes
Seeing a lot of fake news from media elites and others who have no interest in violations of Americans' civil liberties via unmaskings.

1:24 PM - Jun 1, 2017
7,160
12.1K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Trumpiest moments: Remember #ReleaseTheMemo? That brief social media campaign—trumpeted on Twitter by no less than the president himself—led to a party-line committee vote to release a memo drafted by Nunes and his staff that blasted federal law enforcement officials’ handling of the Russia investigation. In true Trumpian fashion, Nunes didn’t let facts get in the way of a compelling narrative. The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, called the memo “rife with factual inaccuracies” and later released a blistering Democratic rebuttal disproving one of Nunes’ central claims.

Will he be reelected? Probably. For the past decade, Nunes has sailed to reelection in the conservative 22nd District, where Democrats have tended to only run candidates of the “sacrificial lamb variety,” Fresno State political science professor Tom Holyoke told Mother Jones in February. Enter 34-year-old Andrew Janz, a Fresno prosecutor whose nearly $2.9 million fundraising haul and viral campaign ads may give Nunes his closest fight to date. Democrats shouldn’t expect any miracles though: Nunes beat Janz by more than 30,000 votes in the state’s so-called “jungle primary” in June, and the Cook Political Report still rates the district as “solid Republican.”

5. Rep. Greg Gianforte (R-Mont.)
Is he the one that…? Yes, Gianforte famously body-slammed a reporter shortly before winning a special election for Montana’s sole seat in the House. Gianforte pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge the next month and was ordered to attend anger management classes and perform 40 hours of community service.

Weird factoid: In Montana, where the right to fish freely is paramount, Gianforte caught flak during an ultimately unsuccessful gubernatorial bid when a blog uncovered evidence that he and his wife attempted to close a fishing access site near his property in Bozeman. That’s a big no-no for Montana’s anglers, who depend on liberal public access laws to fish.

Will he be reelected? Republicans have held Montana’s at-large congressional seat for more than two decades, but Gianforte may be in for a tight race against Democratic challenger Kathleen Williams. A June poll showed Williams with a 6-point lead, though the Cook Political Report still rates the Montana race as leaning Republican.

4. Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.)
Who is he? Four years before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dethroned the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House, a little-known economics professor named Dave Brat was cementing the Tea Party revolution with a shocking GOP primary win over House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the 2014 primary. Brat’s win spelled trouble for establishment Republicans like Cantor: A year later, Trump would enter the presidential race.

Trumpiest moment: In his campaign against Cantor, Brat was outspent by nearly 10-to-1, and polls had Cantor winning up until Election Day. But Brat rocketed into Washington on the backs of high-profile supporters like conservative media personality Laura Ingraham and Breitbart, the latter of which was once called “platform for the alt-right” by former chairman Steve Bannon. Two years after the Republican National Committee’s so-called “autopsy report” urged the party to expand minority outreach and embrace comprehensive immigration reform—generally understood to mean legalization for undocumented immigrants—Ingraham and Breitbart backed conservatives like Brat who would hold the line against any attempt to soften the party’s stance on immigration. Cantor represented the party establishment, the same GOP bigwigs who signed off on the “Gang of 8” immigration bill that cleared the Senate during Obama’s second term but died in the House. It’s no coincidence that Ingraham, Bannon, and the writers at Breitbart became some of Trump’s staunchest supporters in 2016.

Will he be reelected? Democrats certainly hope not. After staying mostly under the radar since his shocking victory, Brat now finds himself in a toss-up race against former CIA operative Abigail Spanberger. Virginia’s 7th District went for Trump in 2016, but Dems are betting that its suburban voters will reject Brat in the same way many of them appear to be turning on Trump.

3. Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.)
Who is he? A three-term congressman from upstate New York, the first sitting lawmaker to endorse Trump for president, and, as of August 8, a defendant in a federal case accusing him of insider trading.

What is he accused of doing? As a board member of an Australia-based pharmaceutical company, Collins allegedly informed his son of the results of a failed drug trial that eventually caused the company’s stock to plummet by 92 percent. According to prosecutors, this nonpublic information allowed Collins’ son and others to trade away stock in a manner that helped the defendants and their associates avoid more than $768,000 in potential losses. Collins’ attorneys said in a statement that they “are confident he will be completely vindicated and exonerated.”

His other greatest hits: As a local official, Collins had already been pegged by the New York Daily News as having a case of “foot-in-mouth disease.” Among his more eyebrow-raising statements: comparing New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to Adolf Hitler and the Antichrist and allegedly telling a woman during former Gov. David Paterson’s crowded State of the State address that she could find a place to sit if she offered “someone a lap dance.”

Will he be reelected? Who knows? After the news of Collins’ arrest broke, the Cook Political Report changed Collins’ ruby-red district from “solid” to “likely” Republican. His Democratic challenger, Nate McMurray, has urged supporters to “FIGHT LIKE HELL.”

2. Rep. Jason Lewis (R-Minn.)
Who is he? A freshman congressman from Minnesota once described as “mini Trump.” He was previously a political commentator and radio host—more on that in a second.

Most notable quotes: On his syndicated radio show, Lewis described the “vast majority of young single women” as “nonthinking” and “simply ignorant of the important issues in life.” That’s not all. A CNN report recently disclosed that during one broadcast he also said, “It used to be that women were held to a little bit of a higher standard. We required modesty from women. Now, are we beyond those days where a woman can behave as a slut, but you can’t call her a slut?”

Will he be reelected? It could be close. Lewis is considered one of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents after eking out a victory in 2016 over returning Democratic challenger Angie Craig. This time around, Craig hopes for a different result. With the support of EMILY’s List and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, she has outraised Lewis and turned the 2nd District race into a nail-biter.

1. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.)
Who is he? A 15-term congressman from California, former speechwriter to former President Ronald Reagan, and reportedly “so valuable” to Russian intelligence that the Kremlin gave him a code name. Rohrabacher’s passionate defenses of Russia were so widely known that House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) once said privately, “There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump.” (After a recording of the comment surfaced, a McCarthy spokesman said it was a joke.)

Does it concern him that he is seen as so close to Russia? Apparently not. Just last week, Rohrabacher told Mother Jones that anyone in “this town” would have done what Donald Trump, Jr. did—that is, accept a meeting with a Russian emissary promising dirt on a political opponent. Despite his past history as an ardent cold warrior, Rohrabacher has used his recent tenure as chairman of the House Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats to trumpet his pro-Russia views.

What else is he known for? Rohrabacher has used his perch on the House science committee to describe global warming as a “fraud.” In a state where wildfires have become a routine, destructive occurrence in the summer, Rohrabacher has pushed back on the connection between worsening fires and climate change. “This exemplifies the tactics—the scare tactics—of those who’ve been pushing this global warming fraud on us,” he said during a spate of fires in August 2013. “They’ll take something that is dramatic, like a fire, and try and use that, or a tornado, or a hurricane, and say, ‘See, people are being hurt.'”

Will he be reelected? Once considered to be in a safely Republican district, Rohrabacher’s seat is now listed as a “toss-up” by the Cook Political Report. A July Monmouth University poll found Democratic challenger Harley Rouda with a slight edge over the longtime congressman.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/08/trumpiest-members-congress-jim-jordan-devin-nunes-chris-collins-dana-rohrabacher/

arizona, this is one of the scary parts of the article,...

This is Florida, after all. If you go to her Facebook page, it’s clear that her voters don’t care.

Who are Floridians going to believe? Fake News? Or Howard’s statement that she’s a “good, honest person”?


and that is exactly what "Floridans" will do,....witness the proof that she lied but give her a prize for having the cajones to actually carry through with a lie.


now,...can Miami U sue her for false claims and using the university to fabricate her lie ?

wouldn't that be schweet !

this is great ! hoping something will really come of this coordinated response to the constant bashing. it's obvious that some content must be getting too close of comfort for the Con,...even extra strength hairspray can't hold that helmet down when the winds of truth begin to blow.


Don/Con is just using one of the Hitler warplays from 'My New Order'.

this is one of the first matters Don/Con is to take care of. get rid of ANY dissenting voices/newspapers/cable news/commentary/opinions that neutralize his agendas and goals for control.

The Con is taking on a mission. destroy it all so an old elite system can remain in place.

who the Con's master is is still unclear. obvious a Putin connection,...

what i want to discern is; who is controlling Putin ? who ever is controlling Putin,Trump is also under that thumb pressure.

is it the uber billionaires in Russia who are loosing billions because of the sanctions ? they have to very pissed.

follow the money and,... who gains ?

a bigot,...thank you. that would be a compliment coming from you.

why a compliment ?,...(thanks for asking) mainly because you really don't possess any clear perspectives on life, real life that is,...so because of that you are not to be relied upon for unbiased information. you are a trumpeteer...liars and denial runs deep in these white men.

it's then fair to assume,... your perceptions about most matters are inaccurate and off base. you've been had by Don/Con,...he's had his way with you. you need assistance asap.

after all,...if this was a test in analyzing a person accurately,...you will FAIL miserably.

oh,...you can post publicly whatever it is you desire. but,...i get to challenge it also publicly.

have an awesome day !

ah,...reality. no lies, no fake news,...just a dose of the reality. a perfect example of who and what the Repub's really are.

Most posters here claimed.


That you were a jerk AND an asshole.


I admonished them.


I then corrected them.


I told them that you were just an asshole.


Hard to believe you are that transparent !

i'll go out on a limb here and state,...the entire Space Force th'ang is just another way $8 Billion dollars can be siphoned and wasted.

i wonder if they, trump and his kleptocrat friends, will launder the money through Deustch Bank or some other criminal banking organization ?


what the fuck does Don/Con care,...he doesn't. what he doesn't even cognize is the MIC is soooooo using his wimp ass to suck up more money. DOn/Con thinks it's his idea. stupid dumb potus.


the MIC already has 54% ($564 billion) of the federal budget going to them,...then it increases going into 2023 at 65% ($726 billion)

Trump Budget Request Takes Military Share of Spending to Historic Levels


Feb. 15, 2018



https://www.nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2018/trump-budget-request-takes-military-share-spending-historic-levels/