How to remove Trump from office

The DNC recently published a survey of Middle Class voters after months of blaming Russia for their stunning loss in November.

It’s worse than they thought.
By a staggering 35 point margin Middle Class voters now understand they have a better chance with Republicans on the economy and creating jobs.

That’s got to hurt.

Via the RNC:
Key findings of the “White Working Class Voter Project”

• By a staggering 35-point margin, Republicans are believed to be more likely to “help improve the economy and create jobs” than Democrats
• Democrats trail on the initial Congressional ballot by 10 points (43% – 33%)
  • Republicans are doing better with those under the age of 60 (45 % – 32%) than those over the age of 60 (42% – 34%)
• A majority approve of the job President Trum*p is doing (52% – 44%)
  • Trump’s approval is higher among those under the age of 60 (56% – 40%) than it is with those over the age of 60 (49% – 47%)
  • Trum*p’s approval is higher in districts surveyed that Hillary Clinton carried (53% – 43%) than ones he carried himself (52% – 45%)
• A majority also say the Trum*p Presidency is either going as well as they expected or going better than they expected
• When asked: “Thinking about Democrats in Congress, what is your greatest concern?” the top 2 answers were “hyperpartisanship/not working with Republicans” and “obstructionist/opposition to Trump”
• 66% of GOP voters approve of the job House Republicans are doing, up from 44% last year
• These voters’ share of the electorate was stable from 2012 to 2016, but Democrats margin among them got 12 points worse

You can read the full House Majority PAC-funded survey here.

Gowdy's report described progress over the previous year in several areas, including:

• Receiving 20,000+ emails and other documents from the State Department, that were never before released to Congress.
• Acquiring 15,000 additional pages of documents after numerous classified and unclassified briefings with administration agencies.
• Producing almost 100 hours of interviews and 2,500 pages of testimony from survivors of the terrorist attacks and others with first-hand accounts of before, during and after the attacks.
• Bringing to light that former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, had employed a private email account to conduct official State Department business.

1. The State Department failed to protect U.S. diplomats in Libya: Clinton and the administration should have realized and addressed risks. (The Democrats' version of the report acknowledges "security measures in Benghazi were woefully inadequate").
2. The CIA misread how dangerous Libya was in midst of a revolution after overthrowing Khaddafi a year earlier.
3. The Defense Department failed to rescue Americans: U.S. military forces did not reach Benghazi until mid-afternoon the day after the initial attack on the compound. "No U.S. military asset was ever deployed to Benghazi despite the order of the Secretary of Defense at 7 o'clock that night," Gowdy said.
4. The Administration subverted investigation through what Gowdy described as "intentional", "coordinated", and "shameful" stonewalling. Clinton deleted numerous emails on the private server she was using for official business, which the report says "makes it impossible to ever represent to those killed in Benghazi that the record is whole."
5. A Clinton aide influenced the State Department's review: Cheryl Mills, Clinton's former chief of staff has said she offered suggestions on drafts.[72]
6. Americans were transported to Benghazi airport by Khaddafi loyalists, the same group the U.S. had sought to oust earlier. Stated the report: “Some of the very individuals the United States had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution were the only Libyans that came to the assistance of the United States on the night of the Benghazi attack.”
7. A White House meeting during the attack generated a list of 10 action items, half of which related to an anti-Muslim YouTube video that sparked protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.[73]

The so-called “antifascist” movement in America today bears a strange resemblance to the very fascism it purports to combat. When we see masked Antifa protesters in black, carrying weapons, disrupting public events and blocking speakers from campus, this looks more like fascism than its opposite. The close relationship between self-styled antifascism and fascism itself can be seen in some little-known aspects of one of Antifa’s main financial sponsors, George Soros.

The Hungarian-born Soros became a billionaire through shrewd global investments and currency manipulation; his Quantum Fund is one of the world’s first private hedge funds. Soros is the main funder of some 200 leftist groups, including Planned Parenthood, MoveOn.org, and Black Lives Matter.

Soros also backs self-proclaimed antifascist groups—this year the Soros-backed group Alliance for Global Justice gave $50,000 to the militant thugs associated with the group Refuse Fascism.

Soros doesn’t merely fund activism; he also funds disruptive violence.  Essentially his costumed baton-wielding squadrons amount to a private army: he has created a militia of paid thugs similar to the Italian Blackshirts and the Nazi Brownshirts.  Soros’ strategy is to launch dozens, even hundreds, of groups and then see which ones deliver the goods.  Borrowing from the field of venture capitalism, my term for what Soros does is venture thuggery, operating through paid protesters.

The paid protester is something of a new phenomenon in American politics. In the 1960s we had protesters on the left, even violent ones, but they weren’t being rented out by the hour. Soros’ groups, by contrast, advertise for disrupters and looters. On one ad I saw on Craigslist, protesters are promised $15 an hour to cause trouble.  This way leftists can not only indulge their violent streaks in the fantasy they are fighting Hitler; they can also be paid for their Brownshirt thuggery.

It may seem crude, even insensitive, for me to use such language in talking about Soros, who is Jewish and who was after all a refugee from Nazism.  Soros loves to play the Nazi card, as when in the aftermath of 9/11 he flayed President Bush’s attorney general John Ashcroft for questioning the patriotism of its critics—a tactic that Soros likened to the Nazis.  “It reminded me of Germany under the Nazis,” Soros said.  “It was the kind of talk that Goebbels used to use to line the Germans up. I remember, I was thirteen or fourteen.  It was the same kind of propaganda.”

This reference to his youth makes the transcript of a 1998 CBS Sixty Minutes interview with Soros especially revealing.  Here is what Soros told interviewer Steve Kroft about those fateful days in Hitler’s Germany.

Kroft: You’re a Hungarian Jew.

Soros: Mm-hmm.

Kroft: …who escaped the Holocaust.

Soros: Mm-hmm.

Kroft: …by—by posing as a Christian.

Soros: Right.

Kroft: And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.

Soros: Right.  I was 14 years old.  And I would say that’s when my character was made.

Kroft: In what way?

Soros: That one should think ahead.  One should understand and anticipate events when one is threatened.  It was a tremendous threat of evil.  I mean—it was a very personal experience of evil.

Kroft: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

Soros: Yes.  Yes.

Kroft: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

Soros: Yes.  That’s right.  Yes.

Kroft: I mean, that’s—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years.  Was it difficult?

Soros: Not—not at all.  Maybe as a child you don’t—you don’t see the connection.  But it was—it created no, no problem at all.

Kroft: No feeling of guilt.

Soros: No.

Kroft: For example, that “I’m Jewish and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be there.  I should be there.’  None of that?

Soros: Well, of course I, I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away.  But there was not sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was—well, actually in a funny way, it’s just like in markets—that if I weren’t there, of course I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would—would be taking it away anyhow.  And it was the—whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away.  So the—I had no role in taking away that property.  So I had no sense of guilt.

What interests me here is not what young Soros did—I’m not going to attach much weight to the moral conduct of a 14-year-old—but rather how the mature Soros retroactively interprets his previous actions as a collection boy for Hitler. Evidently, Soros believes that accompanying an official from a fascist government that is collaborating with the Nazis for the purpose of serving confiscation notices to Jews to steal their property and possessions is not something to feel guilt or regret about.

Why? Because just like a market transaction, the outcome would have happened anyway. Soros’ comment reminds me of the incident involving the notorious Nazi doctor at Auschwitz, Josef Mengele. Mengele’s son Rolf visited him in South America after the war and confronted Mengele with his crimes.

Mengele insisted he did nothing wrong. He was not responsible for what happened at Auschwitz, he said, because the captives there had already been marked for death. So here we have Soros mounting what may be termed the Mengele Defense, and getting away with it.

Soros reflects the type of base amoralism that is more characteristic of fascism and Nazism than of the forces that defeated fascism and Nazism. His anti-fascist pose camouflages deep affinities between Soros and the Nazis, in the same way that antifascist groups today closely resemble the Blackshirts of fascist Italy and the Brownshirts of Nazi Germany.  Soros and the left’s self-styled antifascism is a fraud because there are no fascists they are fighting.  The only fascism that is recognizable in their actions is their own.

Dinesh D’Souza’s new book The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left is published by Regnery

The Democratic party is facing a revolt from the left after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman said the party would back pro-life candidates in 2018.

The DCCC chairman, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, told The Hill that there will not be “a litmus test” for candidates on the subject of abortion. Lujan’s comments come as Democrats attempt to rebuild a broken party that has hemorrhaged elected offices on both the state and national level. (read the globalsit MSM and you would think everyone in amercica is a demonrat)

Lujan’s comments sparked immediate outrage from left-wingers.

“I’m afraid I’ll be with holding support for the DCCC if this is true,” said former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, whose name was briefly floated this year as a candidate for DNC chair.

“What better strategy than to betray their base and reaffirm that women’s basic rights are negotiable and disposable,” said prominent liberal columnist Jill Filipovic.

“Reducing the rights of those with child-bearing capacity to a mere matter of opinion is utterly unconscionable,” declared New Republic writer Rachel Cote. She added: “The Democratic Party is in fact saying that there’s ‘no litmus test’ regarding their colleagues’ support of basic bodily autonomy. Terrible.” (Satan himself couldn't have said it better!)

“This is a betrayal of every woman who has ever supported the Democratic party,” said liberal journalist Lauren Duca, whose work Hillary Clinton has personally praised. (Please note Cloudy)

Renee Sherman, a board member of the pro-choice group NARAL Pro-Choice America, called Lujan out by name on Twitter for not kicking pro-life candidates out of the party.

“I had an abortion. I’d love to chat with you about why my healthcare access is up for debate to win elections. Let’s talk,” said Sherman. She added: “I understand not everyone supports abortion, but you don’t have to put party money behind candidates who will take access away.”

And so it goes on. How sick are these people with their abortions and their trannies etc etc. No wonder Americans are increasingly revulsed by these scumbags.

FRACTURED relations between European nations have begun widening this week as a row between Italy and France ruptures the “united front”.

Getting Beeno as a rugby coach is like asking Piss Mint to be your AA sponsor

LMFAO !!! 

ANGELA Merkel’s government has been called on to tighten housing and deportation rules for refugees following a deadly knife attack in Hamburg last week.

Beeno

The surprising part, is that you would do a better job as the SA Director of rugby, than Piss Mint would, being a AA sponsor.

So there is hope

GERMANY’S car industry is facing a devastating crisis as allegations of collusion and the ongoing fallout from the emissions scandal continue to threaten confidence in the country’s prized carmakers.

Auto giants Daimler, Volkswagen and BMW were all hit with lawsuits accusing the companies of colluding illegally to drive up the prices of their cars in the US and Canada - but this is just the latest in a series of failures that could spell the end of the dominance of German firms.

Attorney David Wingfield said in a statement: "If the allegations in the claim prove to be true, then Canadian consumers have been harmed by a long-standing cartel of German car manufacturers to provide inferior components in their vehicles while charging premium prices for these vehicles.”

While in Brussels EU officials are set to look into claims Audi, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and Volkswagen have been colluding on technology for years after allegations emerged in German magazine der Spiegel claiming manufacturers worked together to disguise the true polluting levels of their vehicles.

Acting on evidence provided by a former Volkswagen employee, the EU has opened the cartel investigation following claims that up to 200 employees at the car giants were involved in secret closed-door meetings.

Those involved in the alleged meetings are said to have swapped vital information on methods to avoid certain test procedures for CO2 and emissions.

The European Commission confirmed it was assessing information on the alleged collusion, but added it was “premature at this stage to speculate further".

In response, German economics minister Brigette Zypries said the allegations and the resulting EU investigation could seriously threaten the country’s car industry.(Will Merkel be able to shut this investigation down? OR is she happey to see Germany collpasoing - she is a globalist after all)

She said: “What’s at stake here is nothing less than the credibility?...?of the whole German car industry. Without comprehensive clarification, confidence cannot be restored.”

She added she was taking the der Spiegel accusations “very seriously” and said all carmakers implicated would be “well advised to fully co-operate with the authorities and ensure transparency”.

Shares in Germany’s biggest car manufacturers plunged in light of the allegations and with some facing fines that experts have suggested could reach billions of dollars, it reduces the ability their ability to invest in future developments - another area where Germany’s car giants could suffer.

While international rivals have invested in hybrid technology, German carmakers have continued to develop their diesel engines and ignored alternatives. (I don't agree with this)

Last week France and Britain announced plans to halt the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2040, and countries across Europe have begun to crackdown on emissions in a bid to reduce pollution.

On Friday, a court ruling in Stuttgart paved the way for a local ban on older diesel cars that do not meet the latest emissions norms and German carmakers, including Stuttgart-born Mercedes and Porsche, may soon find themselves playing catch-up in a bid to develop hybrid technology for their vehicles.

The ongoing series of scandals facing Germany’s car industry has done nothing to improve consumer confidence, with many customers duped by false emissions claims. 

The latest controversy brings renewed negative scrutiny to Volkswagen, which has struggled since 2015 to put its global emissions cheating scandal behind it.

The company so far has set aside more than £18billion ($24billion) to cover related fines and compensation and a former executive charged with covering up the scandal agreed on Tuesday to plead guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges.

Volkswagen’s German rivals are being forced to recall millions of cars after it was found their engines had software fitted to cheat emissions tests.

On Thursday, the German transport minister ordered the recall of 22,000 Porsche Cayenne diesel cars, while Daimler and Audi voluntarily recalled three million and 850,000 cars respectively.

Fritz Esser, a leading columnist, compared the crisis facing the industry to the collapse of coal mining in Germany, which saw the number of miners drop from 350,000 in 1980 to just 28,000 today.

He wrote: “It is possible the car industry could go the same way. That one day we will look back to 2017 and say, that was the year it changed.”