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

Connect with us

News

Claire McCaskill is Voting Against Kavanaugh. Her Reason Why is Surprising.

Published

on

Democrat Claire McCaskill, who is a Democrat, has decided she’s not going to be voting in favor of Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court. Shocker, right?

McCaskill said her decision not to support Kavanaugh wouldn’t be based on the paper thin allegations of sexual assault against him, but rather, on an entirely different issue.

Free speech. She disagrees with him because he supports free speech.

take our poll - story continues below

Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?

  • Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?  

  • 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: REPORT: Smollett Tells ‘Empire’ Castmates ‘I Swear to God, I Did Not Do This’

The left has lost their minds.

“He has revealed his bias against limits on campaign donations which places him completely out of the mainstream of this nation,” McCaskill wrote in a statement posted to Twitter. “He wrote, ‘And I have heard very few people say that limits on contributions to candidates are unconstitutional although I for one tend to think those limits have some constitutional problems.’”

She also suggested that Kavanaugh would “give free reign [sic] to anonymous donors and foreign governments through their citizens to spend money to interfere and influence our elections with so-called ‘issue ads.’” She later tied him to Russia, stating that a Russian company “indicted for election interference is currently using Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion to argue for their innocence.”

McCaskill further said she was “uncomfortable about his view on Presidential power as it relates to the rule of law, and his position that corporations are people” but that his support of “unlimited donations and dark anonymous money, from even foreign interests” was the “determining factor” in her decision to vote against him.

McCaskill is alluding to the Citizens United Supreme Court case, which determined that political campaign spending was protected by the First Amendment. The Left disagrees with this, and continuously rails against the decision, even while accepting so-called dark money allowed by it.

The whole idea of limitations on campaign finance is ridiculous to begin with. The government has no right to tell someone what they can and cannot do with the money they work hard to earn. It’s their personal property, which means they can do whatever they want with it.

The fact that an elected official, who is supposed to be upholding the Constitution, would support such limits placed on free speech is extremely troubling. Perhaps this is why she’s struggling in her re-election campaign?

Just a theory.

Source: Daily Wire

 

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

Woman Rips MAGA Hat From Man’s Head, Then Claims SHE Is the Victim [Details]

How in the world does she figure?

John Salvatore

Published

on

If a person snatches the MAGA hat from your head, who is at fault? That should be rhetorical.

According to a woman who did just that, she is the victim.

It’s getting to the point where you really can’t even make this stuff up anymore.

take our poll - story continues below

Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?

  • Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?  

  • 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.

From Yahoo:

A woman who ripped off a man’s “Make America Great Again” hat at a Mexican restaurant says she wanted retribution for years of discrimination.

On Feb. 15th, Bryton Turner was eating at Casa Vallarta Mexican Restaurant in Falmouth, Mass., when a Brazilian woman, not being named by police, snatched off his red MAGA hat.

“Went out with some friends trying to enjoy some dinner and drinks when this ignoramus randomly tried to hit my hat off and started yelling at me…” Turner wrote on Facebook, sharing two videos. “I wasn’t going to press charges but in front of four cops she did it again so now she’s going to jail.”

[…]

Yahoo Lifestyle couldn’t reach the woman for comment. “I had a little bit to drink maybe that’s the reason that I couldn’t walk away but being discriminated for so many times in my life, I just had to stand up for myself,” she told Boston 25 News. “He’s not a victim. I am the victim. I have been bullied, OK?”

Check out the video posted by Bryton Turner, showing the woman snatching his hat…

Posted by Bryton Turner on Friday, 15 February 2019

Despite taking the time to fly to the Middle East to spend Christmas with the troops, President Trump and First Lady Melania were mocked by CNN and the like.

Go figure, right?

Melania wore the wrong boots.

Donald, well, was Donald. That’s always enough to set the MSM off in and of itself.

The worst part is that CNN blasted 45 for signing MAGA hats for the troops despite there being no rule against it.

What’s worse is that Obama signed Obama-type stuff for the troops back in the day, and the mainstream media was dead silent.

There’s a word for that.

It’s called hypocrisy.

From Daily Wire:

As noted by Joe Concha at The Hill, “The worst kind of bias is the bias of omission. And what’s missing from this report is precedent as it pertains to President Obama who, as a candidate, signed memorabilia for U.S. service members overseas in July 2008. Not a hint of criticism followed.”

SFGate reported on the Obama trip to Afghanistan at the time, though they never highlighted the signing of memorabilia by Mr. Obama.

Michelle did it, too:

CNN owes Trump a big apology.

Continue Reading

News

Ocasio-Cortez Trolled for the Second Time After NEW Billboard Goes Up In NYC

And boom goes the dynamite!

John Salvatore

Published

on

Self-described Democrat Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fought hard to make sure Amazon would not build a new headquarters in New York.

She celebrated after the company decided to pull out.

A couple of days ago, a billboard went up in Times Square lambasting the freshman lawmaker for her actions.

take our poll - story continues below

Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?

  • Will the media learn anything from their biased reporting of the Jussie Smollett story?  

  • 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.

LOOK:

AOC saw the billboard.

She figured she had to respond.

She sent a tweet calling the sign “wack”:

The people behind the billboard saw AOC’s response.

They decided to go after her one more time…

Check this out, per Daily Wire:

Job Creators Network put up a second billboard that stated: “Hey AOC, Saw your wack tweet.”

LOOK:

The criticism of Ocasio-Cortez “comes after Ocasio-Cortez vigorously defended her role in sinking Amazon’s move to New York City on Tuesday in the face of bipartisan criticism,” Fox News reported. “The freshman Democratic New York congresswoman has faced days of criticism from normally friendly media voices and fellow Democrats over her role in Amazon’s decision to pull back from building a $2.5 billion campus in the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens.”

New York City Democrat Mayor Bill de Blasio had to correct Ocasio-Cortez for incorrectly thinking that “the $3 billion in tax breaks that were going to go to Amazon still existed after Amazon pulled out of NYC,” The Daily Wire reported.

And boom goes the dynamite!

Ocasio-Cortez believes she was born “privileged.”

Because she was born in the USA? Because she was born into wealth?

Nope. It’s ecause she was born straight.

WATCH:

While attacking former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who may run as an Independent for president in 2020, AOC wound up with egg all over her face.

See her tweet:

Pretty rude, right?

The problem is that Ocasio-Cortez clearly has no clue about Howard’s background.

-Schultz was born on July 19, 1953, in Brooklyn, New York. In an interview with Bloomberg, he said growing up in the projects — “loosely described as the other side of the tracks”

-He experienced poverty at an early age. When Schultz was 7 years old, his father broke his ankle while working as a truck driver picking up and delivering diapers. At the time, his father had no health insurance or worker’s compensation, and the family was left with no income.

Reactions:

Schultz isn’t exactly a conservative, but he has been ripping AOC and Senator Elizabeth Warren like he’s getting paid to do it.

This is how some Dems reacted after learning Schultz might run in 2020:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend