Dangerous Incompetence @Walgreens.

So my wife went yesterday to Walgreens to get her pneumococcal vaccination the one they recommend for all adults 65 years or older.

The first store she went to didn’t have it and couldn’t be bothered to call another store to see if they had it. So she set off to drive to the next store to see if they had. Fortunately they where more cooperative at the next store because they didn’t have it either and they called another store to see if they had, they did so she continued her journey.

She arrives at the Walgreens gives the employee all her paperwork that clearly say’s what she’s there for. “You’re her for you’re second shot correct?” the employee asked and she confirmed yes. She had already received the first pneumococcal vaccination before but do to Covid hadn’t gotten the second vaccination. The employee gives her the shot.

She get’s home and there is three messages from the store to call them back. she does.

They apologies for the mix up and told here they gave her the Covid-19 vaccine instead of the pneumococcal vaccination.

Problem is, she already had gotten both Covid vaccination’s making this her third one.

They told her it should be alright and scheduled another appointment for the correct vaccination. I wouldn’t go back but that’s me.

She didn’t sleep at all last night worrying what might happen now.

Hope you all are careful out there and make sure that you’r getting what you’r supposed to be getting.

The Filibuster. Is it raciest OR does it keep politicians in check?

Go figure, from the left it’s racist as is everything today and from the right it’s a stop gap from a one party take over of the government.

Lengthy post, so are the articles but worth the time I think if you want to be informed and make a common sense decision, in my opinion.

From the left a good article from VOX with a misrepresentation of history if you care to research the history for yourself and come to your own conclusion. Missing from the “History” is Senator Robert Byrd, “He filibustered against the 1964 Civil Rights.”

Hears some excerpts from the article, it’s actually a interesting read I thought.

“The question of what to do about the filibuster — the once-arcane Senate rule that creates a de facto 60-vote threshold for major legislation — is arguably the most important topic in Washington, DC, right now.

It is the main thing blocking Senate Democrats from approving President Joe Biden’s sweeping policy agenda on party lines; as such, it has become a subject of fierce partisan (and intraparty) dispute.”

“Prominent Democrats, including former President Barack Obama and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),have argued that the filibuster has been a tool used by racists to protect white supremacy. In a Tuesday floor speech, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell denied this entirely — accusing Democrats of lying about history for political purposes.

“These talking points are an effort to use the terrible history of racism to justify a partisan power grab in the present,” McConnell said.”

“In 1917, the Senate finally decided to reform the filibuster, adding a provision that would allow two-thirds of senators to vote on a “cloture” motion that would end debate — interrupting an individual senator who won’t stop talking.

This provision, called Rule 22, was designed to make filibustering harder. But it actually had the opposite effect: It was now possible for a minority of senators to block bills by voting down cloture motions. This is how the filibuster works today (albeit with a three-fifths threshold for cloture rather than the original two-thirds, thanks to a 1975 reform).

The defenders of Jim Crow pioneered this new filibuster, successfully deploying it again and again to block civil rights bills. Richard Russell, a leading filibuster practitioner and staunch segregationist, said in 1949 that “nobody mentions any other legislation in connection with it.”

Two political scientists, Sarah Binder and Steven Smith, identified every bill between 1917 and 1994 that they believe died purely because of the filibuster. Among these, half were civil rights bills, including anti-lynching bills proposed in 1922 and 1935.”

Why the debate over the filibuster matters

“It’s fair to wonder why any of this matters. The mere fact that the filibuster as we know it is a “Jim Crow relic,” as Obama once put it, doesn’t necessarily say anything about whether it’s desirable to keep around today.

To understand why the history of the filibuster matters, let’s take a closer look at the arguments in favor of keeping the 60-vote threshold. Of these, the most prominent by far is that the filibuster is necessary to protect minority rights. National Review’s Dan McLaughlin made this point clearly in a recent essay:” ( Read the rest of the article here, it’s actually a interesting read.)The filibuster’s racist history, explained

Now from Mitch McConnell: 03.23.21 U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding the legislative filibuster:

‘If our Democratic colleagues really believe what they’re saying, did they themselves use a racist tool against Senator Scott’s police reform bill last year? Did they use a racist relic when they delayed the CARES Act or blocked legislation to protect unborn babies who can feel pain? […] Or is our colleagues’ story that the filibuster was not an offensive relic as recently as last summer, but magically became an offensive relic the instant Democrats came to have a majority?’

“While House Democrats try to overturn a certified election result from last November, some Senate Democrats are agitating to break Senate rules to ram through a partisan rewrite of all 50 states’ election laws.

“The 60-vote threshold is the reason why huge pillars of domestic policy don’t oscillate back and forth every time a different party wins the majority.

“Think of something like the Mexico City Policy, the executive-branch policy about funding overseas abortions. It has flipped back and forth every single time the White House has changed party since the 1980s. Republican presidents issue the memo. Democratic presidents retract it.

“The legislative filibuster is what keeps the entirety of federal law from working that way.”

“For a long time, Senators on both sides have recognized the Senate and the country are better off with some stability. Both sides have understood there are no permanent majorities in American politics, so a system that gives both sides a voice benefits everyone in the long run.

“That’s what 33 of our Democratic colleagues said just a few years ago, when they all signed a joint letter insisting that rules protecting debate on legislation be preserved.

“That’s what President Biden believed consistently throughout his long Senate tenure. About 15 years ago, then-Senator Biden said killing the filibuster would be, quote, ‘an example of the arrogance of power.’ He restated his long-held position during the campaign just last year.

“Here’s what my colleague the Democratic Leader said in 2017. 

“The ‘legislative filibuster’ is ‘the most important distinction between the Senate and the House… Let’s find a way to further protect the 60-vote rule for legislation.’ End quote.

“The Democratic Leader, less than four years ago.

“And Democrats didn’t just spend the last four years supporting the filibuster; they spent four years using it!

“We could have had federal legislation on the books since last summer putting more body cameras on police officers, requiring fuller incident reporting to the FBI, and finally making lynching a federal crime. Among other things. But Democrats stopped it.

“A few months before, they used the filibuster to briefly turn the bipartisan sprint toward the CARES Act into a partisan standoff. The press marveled that Senate Democrats had the gall to block relief — a tactic that helped tank the markets — in order to demand further changes.

“And back in early 2018, Senate Democrats used the filibuster to block government funding and force a brief government shutdown over immigration. One of the Democratic Leader’s first major acts as the leader of his conference was to wield the filibuster to shut down the entire government. 

“So the Democratic side just spent four years defending and happily using the same Senate rule that many of our colleagues now attack.

“About a year ago, former President Obama launched a new, coordinated, and very obvious campaign to get liberals repeating the claim that the Senate rules are a relic of racism and bigotry. 

“That came just a month after Democrats had used the filibuster to kill Senator Tim Scott’s police reform and anti-lynching bill.

“These talking points are an effort to use the terrible history of racism to justify a partisan power grab in the present. It’s not unlike what we saw last summer when some protest mobs ended up defacing statues of people who actually crusaded for justice — like Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and the abolitionist Mathias Baldwin.

“Mistakenly damaging good institutions because of our troubled past. 

“Multiple fact-checkers have torn into this simplistic notion that the rules of the Senate are rooted in racism. ( Read the rest of his remarks here, Democrats’ Filibuster Threats Aren’t About Principle, Just Raw Power

Another good read from The Hill

“On September 30, 1788, Pennsylvania became the first state to elect its United States senators, one of whom was William Maclay.  In his 1789 journal Senator Maclay wrote, “I gave my opinion in plain language that the confidence of the people was departing from us, owing to our unreasonable delays. The design of the Virginians and of the South Carolina gentlemen was to talk away the time, so that we could not get the bill passed.”

“Our Founding Fathers intended the Senate to be a continuing body that allows for open and unlimited debate and the protection of minority rights.  Senators have understood this since the Senate first convened.  

In his notes of the Constitutional Convention on June 26, 1787, James Madison recorded that the ends to be served by the Senate were “first, to protect the people against their rulers, secondly, to protect the people against the transient impressions into which they themselves might be led… They themselves, as well as a numerous body of Representatives, were liable to err also, from fickleness and passion.  A necessary fence against this danger would be to select a portion of enlightened citizens, whose limited number, and firmness might seasonably interpose against impetuous councils.”  That “fence” was the United States Senate.

During this 111th Congress in particular the minority has threatened to filibuster almost every matter proposed for Senate consideration.   I find this tactic contrary to each Senator’s duty to act in good faith.

I share the profound frustration of my constituents and colleagues as we confront this situation.  The challenges before our nation are far too grave, and too numerous, for the Senate to be rendered impotent to address them, and yet be derided for inaction by those causing the delay.

There are many suggestions as to what we should do.  I know what we must not do.

We must never, ever, tear down the only wall – the necessary fence – this nation has against the excesses of the Executive Branch and the resultant haste and tyranny of the majority.

The path to solving our problem lies in our thoroughly understanding it.  Does the difficulty reside in the construct of our rules or in the ease of circumventing them? ( Read the rest of the article here, The filibuster and its consequences (Sen. Robert Byrd)

God Bless America and you.

“Many Are Mad”

From one of best bloggers I follow, I hope he doesn’t mind the re-blog.

An ancient dictum says that when the gods want to destroy someone, they first drive them mad. I’m really curious as to the second thing the gods were willing to do. I mean, what’s worse than being mad? A great many men are mad, and no one knows it, they do not know it themselves. I was told to check my attitude. I did, and it’s still there. It hasn’t gone anywhere.

You’re asking me? I wasn’t mad, but now that you’ve asked me SEVEN times if I’m mad…yes, I’m mad! I am livid! I don’t usually lose my temper. But if I get angry, it’s true, I’m scary to be around. Cause I’ll be smiling and chuckling to myself which are indeed the early symptoms of full-blown madness.

To be mad is to care. If I didn’t care about you, I wouldn’t get mad at the things you do. So many things can drive you mad as a kid, not only music. Ever make a girl so angry that she skips the anger and goes straight to laughing like a lunatic? You know a girl is mad when she starts off her sentence by saying, “I just find it funny how” because there is a 99.9% chance she did not find it funny.

Madly in love. Unless it’s mad, passionate, or extraordinary love, it’s a waste of your time. There are too many things mediocre in life, love shouldn’t be one of them. There are so many times I made you mad, irritated, upset, and tired. Today I just want to say that I’m thinking of continuing. The jealous are possessed by a mad devil and a dull spirit at the same time. Humor is reason gone mad.

Many that are not mad have, sure, more lack of reason. Many people hear voices when no one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at walls all day long. Others are called writers and they pretty much do the same thing. You’re not mad, you’re just a writer. A mad writer. You see craziness is what makes the world go round. Without crazy, there wouldn’t be passion.

Please check out the original post Many Are Mad and dig into others. He really is good!!

God bless America and you!

China, China, China. Remember When Obama Pulled U.S. Spies from China?

There was one article that really broke it all down but I couldn’t find it. Maybe someone else could find it. In the mean time here are a few I did find. Just think, now it appears his VP will be running the show.

Obama CIA Let Dozens Be Killed, Covered Up Flawed System Warning

Intelligence was alerted in 2008, but the man responsible for the alarm was fired, and then over the next five years, dozens of people were slaughtered while the Obama administration covered it up.

The spies were murdered in Iran and China after deliberately using a flawed Google communications app, but the “catastrophic” secret event was covered up.

Between 2009 and 2013, the US Central Intelligence Agency suffered a “catastrophic” secret communications failure in a website used by officers and their field agents, according to a report in Yahoo News.

“We’re still dealing with the fallout,” a former national security official stated. “Dozens of people around the world were killed because of this.”

The communications platform was first “used in the Middle East to communicate with soldiers in war zones and had not been intended for widespread use but due to its ease of use and efficacy, it was adopted by agents despite its lack of sophistication, the sources claimed.”

Iran discovered its existence and was able to use Google as a search tool to find secret CIA websites.

In Reidy’s official statement in 2008, he explained that 70 percent of operations at the time may have been compromised already and that any agents were in danger.

“The design and maintenance of the system is flawed,” he said.

The fact that the Obama administration allowed this to happen has many people wondering if it was deliberately coordinated with Google.

Why else would such a warning be ignored? Are American lives so cheap to democrats?

The mainstream media has barely mentioned this major event, so who knows if citizens will ever learn the truth.

CHINA DISRUPTED CIA OPERATIONS DURING OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, KILLING INFORMANTS AND CRIPPLING INTEL FOR YEARS

(National Sentinel) Intelligence: In yet another indication of the ineptitude and incompetence of the Obama administration – as well as its unwillingness to seriously confront a rising global power – CIA operations in China were severely disrupted beginning in 2010, with some informants actually being murdered by Beijing.

The New York Times reported Sunday that there was much disagreement over how CIA operations in China were compromised – some even suggesting that a mole within the agency was responsible. Also, the busted operations left many within the agency bitter and resentful as the U.S. intelligence community struggled mightily to contain the damage and fallout:

Current and former American officials described the intelligence breach as one of the worst in decades. It set off a scramble in Washington’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies to contain the fallout, but investigators were bitterly divided over the cause. Some were convinced that a mole within the C.I.A. had betrayed the United States. Others believed that the Chinese had hacked the covert system the C.I.A. used to communicate with its foreign sources. Years later, that debate remains unresolved.

But there was no disagreement about the damage. From the final weeks of 2010 through the end of 2012, according to former American officials, the Chinese killed at least a dozen of the C.I.A.’s sources. According to three of the officials, one was shot in front of his colleagues in the courtyard of a government building — a message to others who might have been working for the C.I.A.

China removed as top priority for spies

John Tkacik, a former State Department intelligence official, said the demotion of China to a second-tier priority reflects bias within the NSC staff.

“It means that the Obama administration doesn’t understand the profound challenge that China has become or, even more disturbing, it cannot understand that China’s challenges to America’s policies are becoming even more threatening with each passing week,” he said.

Mr. Hoekstra said he had not been briefed in advance about the NSC’s new policy on China intelligence gathering.

But the shift sends the wrong signal to the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community that China is not important, he said in an interview.

“That’s a wrong analysis,” Mr. Hoekstra said. “The current situation with China is that they are cheating on trade agreements, aggressively pursuing military capabilities and aggressively conducting cyber-attacks.”

A military official also said recently that Army, Air Force and Navy intelligence components are just beginning to understand the growing need to focus more intelligence assets on the challenges posed by China’s military buildup and aggressive intelligence activities.

2010: Remember When Obama Pulled U.S. Spies from China?

2010: The White House National Security Council recently directed U.S. spy agencies to lower the priority placed on intelligence collection for China, amid opposition to the policy change from senior intelligence leaders who feared it would hamper efforts to obtain secrets about Beijing’s military and its cyber-attacks.

The downgrading of intelligence gathering on China was challenged by Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair and CIA Director Leon E. Panetta after it was first proposed in interagency memorandums in October, current and former intelligence officials said.

Killing C.I.A. Informants, China Crippled U.S. Spying Operations

NYT/WASHINGTON — The Chinese government systematically dismantled C.I.A. spying operations in the country starting in 2010, killing or imprisoning more than a dozen sources over two years and crippling intelligence gathering there for years afterward.

Under Obama, the CIA Suffered a ‘Catastrophic’ Disaster

(Olivier Douliery/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images
(Olivier Douliery/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

This is simply stunning. A rollup of networks across the world — an event that began in Iran, where the Obama administration would soon enough be negotiating its much sought-after “nuclear deal framework,” and ended with numerous deaths is the kind of thing of which intelligence nightmares and national-security disasters are made.

One’s first instinct is to look back and see who was CIA director during that period: Leon Panetta (Feb. 2009-June 2011); Michael Morell (acting director, July-Sept. 2011); David Petraeus (Sept. 2011-Nov. 2012); Morell again (acting, Nov. 2012-March 2013); and finally John Brennan, who served out the remainder of the Obama administration.

This story now provides us a framework for looking at the high rate of turnover at CIA during this critical period during the first Obama administration, and perhaps offers some clues for the frantic nature of Iran nuclear deal, and the desperation with which some former administration officials still cling to it.

Besides Obama himself, the guy with the clearest view of the whole mess is Brennan, and wouldn’t it be interesting to get him before Congress to testify exactly just how and why things went so horribly wrong?

The CIA’s communications suffered a catastrophic compromise. It started in Iran.

Yahoo News photo illustration; photos: AP (2), Getty Images
Yahoo News photo Illustration; photos: AP, Getty

U.S. intelligence officials were well aware of Iran’s formidable cyber-espionage capabilities. But they were flabbergasted that Iran managed to extirpate an entire CIA spy network using a technique that one official described as rudimentary — something found in basic how-to books.

But the events in Iran were not self-contained; they coincided roughly with a similar debacle in China in 2011 and 2012, where authorities rounded up and executed around 30 agents working for the U.S. (the New York Times first reported the extirpation of the CIA’s China sources in May 2017).

Some U.S. intelligence officials also believe that former Beijing-based CIA officer Jerry Lee, who was charged with spying on behalf of the Chinese government in May 2018, was partially responsible for the destruction of the CIA’s China-based source network.

But Lee’s betrayal does not explain the extent of the damage, or the rapidity with which Chinese intelligence was able to identify and destroy the network, said former officials.

In 2008 — well before the Iranians had arrested any agents — a defense contractor named John Reidy, whose job it was to identify, contact and manage human sources for the CIA in Iran, had already sounded an alarm about a “massive intelligence failure” having to do with “communications” with sources.

According to Reidy’s publicly available but heavily redacted whistleblower disclosure, by 2010 he said he was told that the “nightmare scenario” he had warned about regarding the secret communications platform had, in fact, occurred.

“Can you imagine how different this whole story would’ve turned out if the CIA [inspector general] had acted on Reidy’s warnings instead of going after him?” said Kel McClanahan, Reidy’s attorney. “Can you imagine how different this whole story would’ve turned out if the congressional oversight committees had done oversight instead of taking CIA’s word that he was just a troublemaker?”

Irvin McCullough, a national security analyst with the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit that works with whistleblowers, put the issue in even starker terms. “This is one of the most catastrophic intelligence failures since Sept. 11,” he said. “And the CIA punished the person who brought the problem to light.”

Hacking Linked to China Exposes Millions of U.S. Workers

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Thursday announced what appeared to be one of the largest breaches of federal employees’ data, involving at least four million current and former government workers in an intrusion that officials said apparently originated in China.

The compromised data was held by the Office of Personnel Management, which handles government security clearances and federal employee records. The breach was first detected in April, the office said, but it appears to have begun at least late last year.

The target appeared to be Social Security numbers and other “personal identifying information,” but it was unclear whether the attack was related to commercial gain or espionage. The announcement of the intrusion came on the same day The New York Times reported that the National Security Agency had expanded warrantless surveillance of foreign hackers, an effort that could sweep up the information of innocent Americans.

SPYING FOR CHINA: Obama State Department Employee Charged

Beginning in 2011, 60-year-old Candace Marie Claiborne and a male co-conspirator allegedly requested and received numerous gifts. It doesn’t cost much to turn traitor against America these days.

Bribes from Chinese intelligence agents included cash, an iPhone, a laptop, meals, international vacations, Chinese fashion school tuition, a sewing machine, a monthly stipend, and a fully-furnished apartment in exchange for information.

Accountability was nonexistent on Obama’s watch. Obama focused on gutting America’s national security.

As for his Attorney General, she ran interference for the Clinton campaign.

They didn’t have time to bother with Chinese recruitment of American spies. Charges against Claiborne include obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements to the FBI.

So much for Obama’s legacy.

Obama’s ‘Scandal-Free Administration’ Is a Myth

In reality, Mr. Obama has presided over some of the worst scandals of any president in recent decades. Here’s a partial list:

#5 Hacking. Mr. Obama presided over the biggest data breach in the federal government’s history, at the Office of Personnel Management. The hack exposed the personnel files of millions of federal employees and may end up being used for everything from identity theft to blackmail and espionage. OPM Director Katherine Archuleta, the president’s former political director, had been warned repeatedly about security deficiencies but took no steps to fix them.

All of these scandals were accompanied by a lack of transparency so severe that 47 of Mr. Obama’s 73 inspectors general signed an open letter in 2014 decrying the administration’s stonewalling of their investigations.

One reason for Mr. Obama’s penchant for secrecy is his habit of breaking rules—from not informing Congress of the dubious prisoner swap involving Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and the Taliban, to violating restrictions on cash transfers to Iran as part of a hostage-release deal.

10 Biggest Scandals Of The Obama Presidency


Six Reasons Why Barack Obama Is the Worst President in History


Biden says he, Obama left White House without a ‘single whisper of scandal’

This image released by ABC shows Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, center, with co-hosts, Ana Navarro, left, and Sunny Hostin during an appearance on "The View," Friday, April 26, 2019.
This image released by ABC shows Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, center, with co-hosts, Ana Navarro, left, and Sunny Hostin during an appearance on “The View,” Friday, April 26, 2019. (Lorenzo Bevilaqua/ABC via AP)

Former Vice President Joseph Biden says anyone looking to the Obama administration for a “whisper” of scandal will come up empty.

The 2020 presidential hopeful told the ladies of ABC’s “The View” on Friday that his proudest accomplishment while serving the White House is absolute avoidance of scandal.

“The thing I’m proudest of is, coincidentally, we were each in a different part of the country and we were each talking to groups of people that were being televised,” Mr. Biden said. “The same day, purely coincidentally, we were asked, ‘what are you proudest of from your administration?’

You know what I said — he said the same thing as I did. Not one single whisper of scandal. That’s because of Barack Obama.”

Lest We Forget Chinagate, The Most Serious Scandal in US History

The “Chinagate” fundraising scandal plagued the 1996 Bill Clinton-Al Gore campaign and Hillary was very much involved. Chinagate aka Commercegate is the most serious scandal in U.S. history.

It involves the transfer of America’s most sensitive technology, including but not limited to nuclear missile and satellite technology, possibly in exchange for millions of dollars in contributions to the 1996 Clinton-Gore re-election effort and the Democratic National Committee.

The Chinagate scandal of 1996 ended up in an award of 900,000 in attorney’s fees and costs to Judicial Watch ten years later.

The scandal was an apparent scheme by the Clinton administration to sell seats on taxpayer-funded trade missions in exchange for campaign contributions to the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign.

Judicial Watch began an investigation and Clinton administration officials deliberately concealed and destroyed records regarding the trade mission and testimony was falsified.

Hillary Clinton Might Have Gotten Spies Killed in China

Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state from January 21, 2009, to February 1, 2013. For four years, China was receiving the emails she sent and received in real time. The emails contained Top Secret intelligence.

According to a report released early this morning, China hacked into Hillary’s basement server, possibly through a phishing attack. They then embedded a code that sent out a “courtesy copy” to the Chinese for each and every one of her communication.

That brings up the question of whether or not Hillary could have been responsible for the purge of American spies in China in 2010. It’s speculation but just the fact that she could have been responsible should suggest that her violations of national security were very serious.

HILLARY’S NATIONAL SECURITY BREACHES SHOULD BE LOOKED INTO

At that point in time and until today, U.S. intelligence could not determine where the breach came from. There are a number of possibilities. We can now add Hillary Clinton’s lack of regard for security to the list.

By 2013, the FBI and CIA concluded that China no longer had the ability to identify American agents, the Times said.

Coincidentally, Hillary left the State Department in 2013.

Stunning Report Confirms China Had Hillary’s Emails in Real Time

GOHMERT REPORTED THIS IN JULY, PETER STRZOK DENIED IT

This would confirm Rep. Louie Gohmert’s statement at a July 12 House committee on the Judiciary hearing. He referred to the intruders as a “foreign entity” although he did say it was unrelated to Russia.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) in 2016 Charles McCullough III found an “anomaly on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through their private server, and when they had done the forensic analysis, they found that her emails, every single one except four, over 30,000, were going to an address that was not on the distribution list,” Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas said during a hearing with FBI official Peter Strzok.“

It was going to an unauthorized source that was a foreign entity unrelated to Russia,” he added.

Two officials with the ICIG investigator Frank Rucker and Attorney Janette McMillan met a number of times with the FBI to warn them. One of the FBI officials was Peter Strzok as the bureau’s top counterintelligence official.

When ICIG investigator Frank Rucker spoke with Strzok, he nodded but was remarkably uninterested in what Rucker had to say, Gohmert said.

Rep Gohmert said watchdog found Clinton emails were sent to ‘foreign entity’

Hmmm, I wonder how Biden going to handle China. He had 8 years of training under Obama to say the least.

God bless America and you. Thanks for taking the time.

Texas may possibly be the most important state soon!

Texas GOP chair floats secession for ‘law-abiding states’ after Supreme Court defeat

Republican Party of Texas Chairman Allen West suggested states should secede from the union after the Supreme Court refused to hear a case President Donald Trump wanted to use to overturn the presidential election.

‘This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable,’ West said.

‘Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution,’ he added.

His comments were quickly read as a push for secession, what southern states did in the lead-up to the Civil War, in a dispute over slavery.

A lot of the Deplorabels are veterans.