Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

Air Force Veteran Forced to Sell His Home, The Reason Why Will Make Patriots Everywhere Furious

Published

on

A retired Air Force veteran has spent the better part of the last seven years locked in a heated battle with his homeowners association over the display of a 17-inch American flag, a flag he served in the military to defend and protect.

Larry Murphee claims that this fight has cost him his home and several hundred thousand dollars. The kerfuffle wasn’t so much about the flag itself but where Murphee wanted to have it displayed.

He stuck the small flag in a flower pot on his porch. Yes, that’s right. A flower pot on the porch. And yet this seemingly enraged the homeowners association. The Tides Condominium Association sent Murphee a letter informing him that he was in violation of policy and told him to take the flag down.

take our poll - story continues below

Should President Trump declare a national emergency to build the wall?

  • Should President Trump declare a national emergency to build the wall?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Amazon Sucker Punches AOC on Their Way Out of NYC

He said no, which resulted in the association fining him $1,000 for not taking the flag down. This prompted him to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit against the association in federal court.

Gust Sarris, Murphee’s lawyer, argued that the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act prohibits HOAs from preventing residents from having flags on display.

Back in 2012, Murphee and the HOA reached an agreement about the flower pot, allowing him to keep the flag on display.

However, the agreement was not upheld.

A few months later, the HOA changed the flag ordinance to a flower pot ordinance, and it started fining Murphree — again — at the rate of $100 for each day he left the flag in the pot, WTLV reported.

Again, Murphree refused to pay the fines and another legal battle began.

This time, when the fees started piling up the HOA began applying his dues toward the penalties without his knowledge, he told WTLV.

Once he fell far enough behind on his dues, the HOA filed a lien on his property.

“They just started nitpicking every little thing that I did,” Murphree said.

The HOA issued violations for not parking straight in his driveway and leaving a Christmas decoration up after Christmas were among the infractions.

Finally, Murphree said he was forced to sell his condo at a loss to avoid foreclosure and move in with his girlfriend in St. Augustine.

“Should any man who served in the military lose his home, a retirement home, because they want to be patriotic? Anybody can see that the HOA has gone overboard,” Sarris told The Washington Post.

The fight for Murphee continues to this day, with the vet stating “Somebody has to stand up and say ‘this is not right.'”

What’s the point of buying a house and property if someone else, government or otherwise, gets to tell you what you can and cannot do with it? Isn’t that just glorified renting since you technically still have a landlord telling you what to do and how to care for your property?

It doesn’t make sense to join one of these organizations if you actually want to invest in your own private property. No organization should have the authority to tell a veteran who served this great nation that they cannot display the flag of the country they love.

These people are completely insane. Hopefully, Murphee will win this case and the HOA will be put back in their place.

Source: TheBlaze

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

NY Sen. Gillibrand: ‘I Could Support’ Beto’s Call To Tear Down Existing Border Wall

[This article originally appeared at Lidblog.com and is reprinted with permission.]

Published

on

Kirsten Gillibrand

[This article originally appeared at Lidblog.com and is reprinted with permission.]

When NY Senator/Presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand was appointed to the U.S. Senate, Hispanics went nuts because she was so anti-illegal immigration. Now the political hack is talking about tearing down the existing border barriers.

On Thursday, Twitchy said that Democrat White House hopeful Beto O’Rourke told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes that he would tear down the parts of the border wall already up and in place.  Sensing that stance would be popular with the extreme leftists Sen.Gillibrand one of what seems like the thousand Democrats considering a run for the White House in 2020, said she could support O’Rourke’s call to tear down existing barriers.

If there was ever any doubt that Democrats support open borders, this should remove them.

“I’d have to ask folks in that part of the country to see whether the fencing that exists today is helpful or unhelpful,” she told Fox News.  “I could look at it and see which part he means and why, and if it makes sense, I could support it.”

Fox News added:

O’Rourke, who’s seriously mulling a White House bid of his own, said Thursday in an interview with NBC News that he’d “absolutely … take the wall down,” referring to the barrier by El Paso, Texas.

O’Rourke, who came close to upsetting GOP Sen. Ted Cruz in last November’s Senate election in Texas, argued that the existing 600 miles of wall and fencing along the 2,000-mile border have “not in any demonstrable way made us safer.”

Republicans quickly criticized O’Rourke, charging that he embraces open borders.

Quite an agenda for the Democrats, wouldn’t you say?

While speaking in New Hampshire, Gillibrand also claimed the border crisis is “manufactured.”  In other words, she thinks it’s all FAKE!

“I think the only national emergency is the humanitarian crisis that President Trump has created at our border by separating families from children and treating people who need our help inhumanely. I think this is manufactured, I think this [is] inappropriate,” she said.

Odd, we don’t recall her angst when Obama separated families at the border…

Here’s the strange part, before she advocated open borders she was strongly opposed to illegal immigration.

In Jan 2009 when she was appointed to take over for Hillary, the NY Times wrote:

During her one term in the House of Representatives, from a largely rural, traditionally Republican district, Kirsten E. Gillibrand was on safe political ground adopting a tough stance against illegal immigration.

Ms. Gillibrand, a Democrat, opposed any sort of amnesty for illegal immigrants, supported deputizing local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws, spoke out against Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s proposal to allow illegal immigrants to have driver’s licenses and sought to make English the official language of the United States.

The Spanish language daily El Diario gave the Senator front page coverage. They ran. Kirsten Gillibrand’s photo on their front page with the blaring headline “ANTI INMIGRANTE” (anti-immigrant)

Even New York Assemblyman Peter Rivera, a fellow Democrat and  the senior Hispanic in the state legislature, issued a statement condemning Gillibrand for among other things, wanting to “use local police to enforce federal immigration law, against the advice of state law enforcement groups,” and supporting “more walls and guards on our southern border.” 

She wanted more walls, but since then the direction of the winds shifted, the Democrats became the no borders party, and the spineless Gillibrand changed her stance.

How high does the body count have to get before she recognizes that a problem exists? A body count doesn’t really matter to the NY Senator, Gillibrand is a political hack who changes her positions whenever the wind direction changes.

Continue Reading

News

Mueller’s Thorn Gets Gagged in New Roger Stone Ruling

Mueller seems to have had enough of Roger Stone’s trickery…at least in one, very specific place.

Published

on

Roger Stone

When it comes to Robert Mueller’s long and arduous look at the 2016 election, there has been no shortage of ostensibly zany moments.

This certainly wasn’t expected.  The somber and shameful task of promoting a democratic conspiracy theory into the ousting of a President should be serious business.  The reason that it hasn’t been all P’s & Q’s is thanks to Mueller’s own, ever-widening scope.

Now well over a year and a half in, Mueller’s team have begun seeking out some of the fringe characters in this theory, including longtime political trickster Roger Stone.

take our poll - story continues below

Should President Trump declare a national emergency to build the wall?

  • Should President Trump declare a national emergency to build the wall?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Unfortunately for the Special Counsel, Stone is no rube when it comes to these sorts of operations, and has forced Robert Mueller’s team to take extraordinary action against him.

Roger Stone remains free to talk about Robert Mueller and the Russia investigation, just not in and around the Washington, D.C., courthouse where the longtime Donald Trump associate is fighting the special counsel’s charges he lied to Congress and obstructed its Russia investigation.

That’s the end result from a four-page order issued Friday from a federal judge who had been considering a complete gag order on Stone in the wake of his full-on media blitz since his arrest last month in south Florida.

But, wait; there’s more.

Also Friday, Mueller’s team released a filing in the case that included a tantalizing nugget suggesting federal prosecutors might have obtained “Stone’s communications” with WikiLeaks, the website that dumped stolen Democratic emails during the election. While the language was somewhat vague, legal watchers quickly noted that it might represent a jarring new revelation, as previously Stone had only conceded to trying to connect with WikiLeaks via intermediaries.

Roger Stone was arrested weeks ago in his south Florida home, in a raid reminiscent of a SWAT-involved hostage situation – an event that CNN was in place and ready to capture long before police had even arrived.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend