Connect with us

News

Trump Goes OFF On ‘Loser’ Justin Amash After He Announces He’s Leaving the GOP (Details)

Bye, bye, bye!

John Salvatore

Published

on

Michigan Congressman Justin Amash declared his independence from the Republican Party on July 4.

He was the first sitting GOP Rep. to call for President Trump’s impeachment.

Here’s the story…and 45’s loving it…

From The Hill:

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • 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.

Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.) on Thursday announced he’s leaving the Republican Party and becoming an independent, months after igniting a political firestorm when he became the first sitting GOP congressman to call for an impeachment inquiry against President Trump.

“Today, I am declaring my independence and leaving the Republican Party,” Amash wrote in a Fourth of July op-ed for The Washington Post. “No matter your circumstance, I’m asking you to join me in rejecting the partisan loyalties and rhetoric that divide and dehumanize us. I’m asking you to believe that we can do better than this two-party system — and to work toward it. If we continue to take America for granted, we will lose it.”

Trump’s reaction to “loser” Amash’s announcement:

Great news for the Republican Party as one of the dumbest & most disloyal men in Congress is “quitting” the Party. No Collusion, No Obstruction! Knew he couldn’t get the nomination to run again in the Great State of Michigan. Already being challenged for his seat. A total loser!

Amash has been hammered by Republicans and praised by liberals for saying President Trump should be impeached.

A pro-Trump state representative has now decided to challenge Amash for his seat.

What’s interesting is that Amash is now saying there’s a chance he could even run for president in 2020.

What will this guy say next!?

From The Hill:

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) on Tuesday said he would not rule out a third-party challenge to President Trump in 2020.

The Hill asked Amash if he is thinking about leaving the Republican Party to run for president as the Libertarian Party candidate.

Amash noted, “I’m just focused on defending the Constitution, it’s not something I’ve thought about. I don’t take things off the table like that, but it’s not something at the forefront of my considerations right now. I’m just focused on my job. I wouldn’t take running for governor off the table or Senate or statehouse, I don’t take things off the table.

WATCH:

His tweets:

Here are my principal conclusions:
1. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report.
2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct.
3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances.
4. Few members of Congress have read the report.

I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.

In comparing Barr’s principal conclusions, congressional testimony, and other statements to Mueller’s report, it is clear that Barr intended to mislead the public about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s analysis and findings.

Barr’s misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice.

Under our Constitution, the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” While “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust.

Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.

In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.

Impeachment, which is a special form of indictment, does not even require probable cause that a crime (e.g., obstruction of justice) has been committed; it simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt, or otherwise dishonorable conduct.

While impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances, the risk we face in an environment of extreme partisanship is not that Congress will employ it as a remedy too often but rather that Congress will employ it so rarely that it cannot deter misconduct.

Our system of checks and balances relies on each branch’s jealously guarding its powers and upholding its duties under our Constitution. When loyalty to a political party or to an individual trumps loyalty to the Constitution, the Rule of Law—the foundation of liberty—crumbles.

We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump.

Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.

America’s institutions depend on officials to uphold both the rules and spirit of our constitutional system even when to do so is personally inconvenient or yields a politically unfavorable outcome. Our Constitution is brilliant and awesome; it deserves a government to match it.

Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments section…

News

TX School Administrator Suggests Teaching ‘Opposing Viewpoints’ to The Holocaust

State level authorities were quick to shut that theory down.

Published

on

There is apparently some sever confusion in the Lone Star State regarding the nature of a new law regarding public school curriculums, and it has many around the nation alarmed.

The idea of school as a place to open your mind and absurd a variety of different viewpoints is nothing new.  In fact, it isn’t hard to argue that this is perhaps exactly what the public education system should be doing.

But there are some viewpoints out there that do not meet the standard of our civilized society, and one school administrator in Texas appears to believe that the new law requires these heinous conspiracy theories to become part of the classroom.

A top administrator with the Carroll Independent School District in Southlake advised teachers last week that if they have a book about the Holocaust in their classroom, they should also offer students access to a book from an “opposing” perspective, according to an audio recording obtained by NBC News.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • 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.

Gina Peddy, the Carroll school district’s executive director of curriculum and instruction, made the comment Friday afternoon during a training session on which books teachers can have in classroom libraries. The training came four days after the Carroll school board, responding to a parent’s complaint, voted to reprimand a fourth grade teacher who had kept an anti-racism book in her classroom.

A Carroll staff member secretly recorded the Friday training and shared the audio with NBC News.

“Just try to remember the concepts of [House Bill] 3979,” Peddy said in the recording, referring to a new Texas law that requires teachers to present multiple perspectives when discussing “widely debated and currently controversial” issues. “And make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust,” Peddy continued, “that you have one that has an opposing, that has other perspectives.”

State officials were quick to point out that this is not what the new law suggests.

Clay Robison, a spokesman for the Texas State Teachers Association, a union representing educators, said there’s nothing in the new Texas law explicitly dealing with classroom libraries. Robison said the book guidelines at Carroll, a suburban school district near Fort Worth, are an “overreaction” and a “misinterpretation” of the law. Three other Texas education policy experts agreed.

“We find it reprehensible for an educator to require a Holocaust denier to get equal treatment with the facts of history,” Robison said. “That’s absurd. It’s worse than absurd. And this law does not require it.”

Some lawmakers responded as well.

State Sen. Bryan Hughes, an East Texas Republican who wrote Senate Bill 3, denied that the law requires teachers to provide opposing views on what he called matters of “good and evil” or to get rid of books that offer only one perspective on the Holocaust.

“That’s not what the bill says,” Hughes said in an interview Wednesday when asked about the Carroll book guidelines. “I’m glad we can have this discussion to help elucidate what the bill says, because that’s not what the bill says.”

Denial of The Holocaust, (or the severity of it), has long been seen as a hallmark of white supremacists, and is considered a form of antisemitism.

There is apparently some sever confusion in the Lone Star State regarding the nature of a new law regarding public school curriculums, and it has many around the nation alarmed. The idea of school as a place to open your mind and absurd a variety of different viewpoints is nothing new.  In fact, it isn’t hard to argue that this is perhaps exactly what the public education system should be doing. But there are some viewpoints out there that do not meet the standard of our civilized society, and one school administrator in Texas appears to believe that the new law requires these heinous conspiracy theories to become part of the classroom. A top administrator with the Carroll Independent School District in Southlake advised teachers last week that if they have a book about the Holocaust in their classroom, they should also offer students access to a book from an “opposing” perspective, according to an audio recording obtained by NBC News. Gina Peddy, the Carroll school district’s executive director of curriculum and instruction, made the comment Friday afternoon during a training session on which books teachers can have in classroom libraries. The training came four days after the Carroll school board, responding to a parent’s complaint, voted to reprimand a fourth grade teacher who had kept an anti-racism book in her classroom. A Carroll staff member secretly recorded the Friday training and shared the audio with NBC News. “Just try to remember the concepts of [House Bill] 3979,” Peddy said in the recording, referring to a new Texas law that requires teachers to present multiple perspectives when discussing “widely debated and currently controversial” issues. “And make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust,” Peddy continued, “that you have one that has an opposing, that has other perspectives.” State…

Continue Reading

News

Laundrie Lawyer Goes on the Offensive After TV Host Implicates Parents

Someone’s getting testy…

Published

on

The story of Gabby Petito’s death has captured the attention of the nation in recent weeks, largely due to the strange circumstances surrounding her disappearance, her fiancé’s unwillingness to cooperate with police, his parents’ bizarre behavior, and then, of course the fact that he went missing just hours before Petito’s body was found.

None of these things have screamed innocence in the eyes of the Americans who’ve been following along at home, and Laundrie’s disappearance has allowed speculation to run rampant.

This is true not only for the Joe Anybody, but for television detectives as well, and this hasn’t sat well with a lawyer for the Laundrie family.

Brian Laundrie’s attorney Steve Bertolino tore into “America’s Most Wanted” creator John Walsh Thursday, the morning after the longtime TV host aired an ID channel special on the unsolved homicide of the Florida man’s former fiancée, Gabby Petito.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?

  • Should Congress Remove Biden from Office?  

  • 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.

“Gabby Petito: ID Special Report” delved into the details surrounding the 22-year-old Petito’s slaying and Laundrie’s status as a fugitive on a federal bank fraud warrant.

Walsh has long suggested that Brian may have made a run for the border, or be hiding out on the Appalachian Trail – a place that he was once familiar with.

This is where Bertolino got testy.

“I absolutely believe that his family is helping him stay on the run,” said Walsh, who also hosts “In Pursuit with John Walsh” on ID.

Bertolino snapped back at such speculation.

“Dusty relics like that Dog and John Walsh need a tragic situation like this so they can clear the cobwebs off their names and give their publicity-hungry egos some food,” Bertolino told Fox News Digital, also taking aim at Duane “Dog” Chapman, the reality TV star and real-life bounty hunter who entered the search for Laundrie late last month.

Police have returned to the vast wilderness of the Carlton Reserve in their search for Laundrie, this time bringing K-9 units trained to detect human decomposition.

 

 

The story of Gabby Petito’s death has captured the attention of the nation in recent weeks, largely due to the strange circumstances surrounding her disappearance, her fiancé’s unwillingness to cooperate with police, his parents’ bizarre behavior, and then, of course the fact that he went missing just hours before Petito’s body was found. None of these things have screamed innocence in the eyes of the Americans who’ve been following along at home, and Laundrie’s disappearance has allowed speculation to run rampant. This is true not only for the Joe Anybody, but for television detectives as well, and this hasn’t sat well with a lawyer for the Laundrie family. Brian Laundrie’s attorney Steve Bertolino tore into “America’s Most Wanted” creator John Walsh Thursday, the morning after the longtime TV host aired an ID channel special on the unsolved homicide of the Florida man’s former fiancée, Gabby Petito. “Gabby Petito: ID Special Report” delved into the details surrounding the 22-year-old Petito’s slaying and Laundrie’s status as a fugitive on a federal bank fraud warrant. Walsh has long suggested that Brian may have made a run for the border, or be hiding out on the Appalachian Trail – a place that he was once familiar with. This is where Bertolino got testy. “I absolutely believe that his family is helping him stay on the run,” said Walsh, who also hosts “In Pursuit with John Walsh” on ID. Bertolino snapped back at such speculation. “Dusty relics like that Dog and John Walsh need a tragic situation like this so they can clear the cobwebs off their names and give their publicity-hungry egos some food,” Bertolino told Fox News Digital, also taking aim at Duane “Dog” Chapman, the reality TV star and real-life bounty hunter who entered the search for Laundrie late last month. Police…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week