If every federal agency started their cuts by dismissing the last 8 years of hiring, the Democrat-friendly leakers in each organization would be the first out the door.

Our U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact, or a death warrant.

While it does call for freedom of the press, it does not mean that such freedom will be inviolable even if it means jeopardizing America’s national security.

Violating federal law – especially where national security is involved – is serious.

The ‘senior U.S. gov’t official/s’ involved in leaking national security communications willfully broke the law (18 U.S.C. 798)…as did the media that willingly published it.

The law is there for a reason…failure to properly prosecute in its enforcement would be a clear message to all that national security is no longer an important issue.

(On top of that, our allies will not trust often critical cross-agency cooperation if we’re not able to demonstrate our intelligence agencies are under control.)

Besides, we’ve had enough of a previous administration trampling rule-of-law.

And the law doesn’t differentiate between leakers, or those who publish leaks.

Publishers of such classified material who refuse to identify leakers aid and abet such unlawful activity, and as such, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

As Fox News’s Jarrett points out “…the statute itself clearly criminalizes the publishing of classified material…” but then says prosecuting the publisher is wrong.

We disagree. Federal laws in place to protect our national security shouldn’t be toyed with, and as noted above, the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact.

After all, would publishers of secret American troop movements be protected? What about names of covert intelligence operatives, or missions currently being worked?

Clearly, freedom of the press cannot be more important than the lives of our military, or our intelligence operatives in foreign lands, far from any U.S. protection.

The only thing they have to rely on are the federal laws protecting them.

When they aid and abet violators of laws protecting national security, prosecute.

Prosecute fully, ANY and ALL involved in the publishing of classified material.

And, yes, Hillary, that means you as well.

With a belief that politicized operatives inside the NSA are thought to be the ‘leaks’ on Trump administration communications, looks like a hardball approach is needed.

Days before leaving office, Obama widened info-sharing on NSA intell-gathering, which got even more politicized intelligence agency groups access to leakable info.

Fine…if Left-wing operatives are embedded in the NSA, it’s time to weed them out.

President Trump would be well-advised to cut loose every new hire in that agency since Jan 20, 2009, the day Obama was inaugurated and his guys started hiring.

(Besides, Mr. Trump ran on a campaign of govt cutbacks…last in, first out, right?)

Failing that, the only other alternative is to closely monitor those hires.

National security concerns justify the act, one way or the other, because the leaks involved reveal sensitive information is being mishandled by partisan operatives.

Time to either start firing…or start spooking…the spooks.

An anonymous insider advises major news groups are funded by terror groups that pay advertising dollars to drive an agenda to undermine the GOP administration.

No evidence has been provided, but the seriousness of the charge demands that an investigation be initiated by a neutral party to determine its validity.

This is the way ‘fake’ news gets started folks.

We hope CNN and the NY Times will openly cooperate with any investigation.

What if the GOP saw the growing American populist outrage pre-election, and actually recruited Mr Trump to be a Republican stalking horse?

The logic is they realized only an establishment outsider could beat Clinton…

…and an outsider could take the heat while dismantling Obama’s agenda…

…and if the Republicans themselves voiced opposition to Mr Trump, it would pull more Independents and Democrat voters from Hillary.

What if, after a certain point where a victorious President Trump has taken the partisan slings and arrows while destroying Obama’s policies…

…thereby inoculating other Republicans…

…he decides to resign, say, for ‘health’ reasons?

Are Republicans this crafty?

Only time will tell.

A singer appearing at the Grammys in a Make-America-Great-Again gown blew her album sales through the Amazon roof after her red-carpet presence was recorded.

Rush Limbaugh noted her sales went up 18 million percent.

Now, THAT’S the definition of a creative entrepreneur!!

Typically, the LA Times focused on negative Internet comment rants, totally ignoring the boom in sales Joy Villa must have been ecstatic to see after her Grammy debut.

Which do you think Ms. Villa was more focused on…

…negative comments in the LA Times…

…or a BOOMING RISE in her bank account balance?

We envision lots of dreamers, feverishly working out how to build on that potential.

And as word spreads that Hillary’s running again…

…it just might be her first call will be to Ms. Villa, for contact info on that designer.

Two states suing against President Trump’s travel ban shouldn’t have any standing.

In 2012, the Supreme Court all but shut down Arizona’s effort, when all they were trying to do was enforce immigration law when Obama’s administration wouldn’t.

In his majority opinion, Supreme Court justice Kennedy wrote “…the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.” (see Opinion of the Court, page 25)

Funny how 2 states can all of a sudden find a pliable judge who thinks different.

Worth the read, and the video…

“An immigrant is somebody who has made a decision of the will to choose America. Immigrants want to come to this country because they believe in America, they want the kind of life America makes possible,” D’Souza continued. “A refugee is someone who just wants to get away from some problem. a civil war a famine, something that is going on in his or her own country.”

“The difference can be  summarized as an immigrant wants to come here. The refugee simply wants to get out of there.”

Report: A contributing editor at Politico predicts Hillary will run again.

Of course she wants that believed, if only to keep the dollars flowing in.

When a neighbor lies about his property line, using provably fraudulent data year after year to support his claim that your land is his land, what would you do?

After being proven a liar several years in a row, would you believe yet another claim of his with another provably fraudulent document, and just give him the land?

Of course you wouldn’t. At best you’d never trust him; at worst, prosecute for fraud.

So, now, consider the facts about this global warming hoax pushed on us daily.

In 2009 there was Climate-gate: emails exposed global warming scientists plotting to skew, obscure, and otherwise cherry-pick data to support their warmist narrative.

Then in 2011 more emails come out, yet again revealing funding-greedy scientists openly willing to manipulate, tweak, or hide data to keep the funding streams alive.

In 2015 we heard of large scale South America temperature-tampering; 2016, there was the Middle East-Africa gambit, exposing non-existent data collection sites.

Now we hear the NOAA played games before the UN Climate Change Conference, using unverified data sets, ignoring procedures, and failing to archive evidence.

What IDIOT doesn’t realize a massive fraud is being perpetuated?

An IBD headline captures the essence: “If Global Warming Is Real, Why Do Government Scientists Have To Keep Cheating?” 

Why?

It’s all about the money, and in the case of global warming, the cost is trillions…

…year after year.

Now THAT’S a fraud worth prosecuting!