Evidently, after Hillary’s use of private email discussing an Iranian nuclear scientist as friendly to America, Iran hung the scientist for treason.
Anyone care to guess how Iran’s brutal leaders discovered that?
The first priority of a Nation is the safety and security of its citizenry.
Contrary to the media narrative, nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it say that immigration law must follow a narrowly secular path.
So, if someone proposes that laws be tightened to protect against, for instance, the type of terror acts so popular with Islamists, they are not unconstitutional proposals.
Our Constitution is not a suicide pact; if a particular religion goes off the rails, and prescribes committing terrorist acts against others, we can’t just look the other way.
Obama says Trump is ‘unfit’, ‘woefully unprepared’ to be president.
One was a community activist, the other built a multi-billion dollar enterprise.
Quick – which one do you think should make a better leader?
Any questions why the American economic recovery is the weakest since 1949, or why the Middle East and Europe are going up in terror flames?
(Developing)
The Wikileaks group that hacked Democrat National Committee emails is at it again, and hints a release of thousands of Hillary’s Benghazi-related emails.
Since the September-2012 Benghazi attack, gun-running was suggested for the reason Americans were in the Libya cesspits – these emails supposedly confirm it.
An Islamist expert, Andrew McCarthy, has insight into this Wikileaks bombshell.
If gun-running is uncovered, that strengthened ISIS, how will the media spin it?
(Question: in keeping with the Democrat one-act-indicts-all philosophy, if Obama’s Democrat administration under Hillary’s purview were running guns to terrorists…
…then aren’t ALL Democrats, by that philosophy…terrorist gun-runners?)
Democrats and media lapdogs are working overtime to manufacture outrage over a supposed slight to a Muslim family whose U.S. Army son died while serving in Iraq.
They claim Trump’s call for tighter U.S. controls in allowing foreign Muslims into the U.S. during these troubled times with Islamic terrorism is an attack against their son.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Almost daily we hear of terror attacks somewhere in the world, followed by stories of radical Islamists using lax immigration policy to infiltrate and commit the acts.
Trump merely points out that our Constitution requires Americans be protected from such heinous terror acts, and caution on immigration policy is a logical method.
Calling for such policy here, in 2016’s terror climate, has no link with the death of Mr. Khan’s son in 2004, as a Captain serving with the U.S. Army in Iraq…
…unless you’re a Democrat puppeteer, or one of their mindless, useful puppets.
Claiming Khan’s son was insulted by a call for more effective immigration control is like claiming every air traveler is insulted by an airport baggage-scan for weapons.
Your choice – be manipulated by the ‘outrage machine’…or use common sense.
Ironic, isn’t it, considering how fast Democrats will tar-brush an entire group over the actions of one or two, yet so quickly accuse others of that same tactic?
Almost as if they feel a proprietary ownership of that methodology. But then, when it comes to tar and feathers (or lynchings, for that matter)…
…as the Party of the KKK...Democrats have a lock on such tactics.
(Besides, what else can they do, when they can’t run on their record?)