tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:/posts The Patriots 2019-04-12T19:17:09Z Patriots News tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1397192 2019-04-12T00:51:00Z 2019-04-12T19:17:09Z Who is bringing The U.S. down?
  Who is behind the mass immigration? Who is bringing down our boarders? A last the answer is here:

Chalkboard Lesson: Chicago Marxists are Pulling the Strings on the Attack on our Border

 


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1392911 2019-04-02T16:21:54Z 2019-04-12T15:38:57Z Who, unsolved Mysteries
A mystery that will likely never be solved.  Looking back on all the murders committed leading up to, during and after the Clinton Years leaves one to wonder, just exactly who or what is the driving force. Who, or perhaps ‘what’ can have that much power and influence to make it happen. They control police investigations, political incidents that make Treason look like J-walking, and no one is ‘EVER’ caught. NEVER.

I have to wonder, it’s obvious that the Clintons are puppets with many string pullers, not just Soros. Is Soros a puppet as well?   Islamic Marxist Obama is absolutely a puppet with a totally fabricated past. From his days with the PLO to a marriage arranged by Valerie Jarrett to make him marketable to the death of the only two, for lack of a better word, homosexual  lovers that came forward to the present day, his climb to power is kept in the shadows. Who recruits these puppets, grooms them, protects them? 

I don’t think those answers will ever be revealed, but who or what ever holds the reins is one powerful uncontrolled power to be feared .

 

 

httpssaolcdncomcdnwebmailaolcomstationeryresourcesv1goldgorillagoldgorrilagif

 

T HE UNANSWERED MYSTERY OF THE CENTURY!!!

 

His 8 years of living in the White House is over.  He’s (mostly )  gone  ... but questions remain  . .

 

This came from a union guy in Chicago who didn't vote for Obama.   Very interesting perspective!                    

                 

It will be interesting to see what they put in his "Library" about his early years now that he is out of office.

 

In a country where we take notice of many, many facets of our public figures' lives, doesn't it seem odd that there's so little we know about Barack Obama?

 

 

As Americans, we enjoy knowing details about our news makers, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of our own ex-president.

 

 

We are all aware of the lack of incontestable birth records for Obama; that  “document managing “  has been spectacularly successful.

 

 

There are however, several additional oddities in Obama's history that appear to be as well managed as the birthing issue.

 

One other interesting thing...   There are no birth certificates of his daughters that can be found?

 

It's interesting that no one who ever dated him has shown up.  The charisma that caused women to be drawn to him so strongly during his campaign, certainly would in the normal course of events, lead some lady to come forward, if only to garner some attention for herself.  We all know about JFK's magnetism, that McCain was no monk and quite a few details about Palin's courtship and even her athletic prowess, Joe Biden's aneurysms are no secret; look at Cheney and Clinton, we all know about their heart  problems. Certainly Wild Bill Clinton's exploits before and during his White House years, were well known.  That's why it's so odd that not one lady has stepped up and said, "He was soooo shy.." or "What a great dancer.."

 

It's virtually impossible to know anything about this fellow. Who was best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen.

 

Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony. Has anyone talked to the professors?  It is odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him.

 

When did he meet Michele, and how? Are there photos there? Every president gives to the public all their photos, etc. for their library, etc.  What has he released? And who voted for him to be the most popular man in 2010?  Doesn't this make you wonder?

 

 

Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama's past saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc??  Not one person has ever come forward from his past.

 

It certainly is very, very strange...

 

This should be a cause for great concern. To those who voted for him, you may have elected an unqualified, inexperienced shadow man. Have you seen a movie named "The Manchurian Candidate" ?

 

 

As insignificant as each of us might be, someone with whom we went to school will remember our name or face; someone will remember we were the clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something about  us.

 

George Stephanopoulos of ABC News said the same thing during the 2008 campaign.

 

 

He questions why no one has acknowledged he was in their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus.  Stephanopoulos also was a classmate of Obama at Columbia -- the class of 1984.  He says he never had a single class with him. 

 

He is such a great orator; why doesn't anyone in Obama's college class remember him? Why won't he allow Columbia to release his records?    Nobody remembers Obama at Columbia University.

 

Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there... but none remembered him.

 

Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia, ever."

 

Nobody recalls him. Root adds that he was also, like Obama, Class of '83 Political Science, and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him.    At class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class?   Me.  No one ever heard of Barack!

 

And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, 'the macha' who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him."

 

Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbooks and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.

 

Some other interesting questions:

 

1.Why was Obama's law license inactivated in 2002?   It is said there is no record of him ever taking the Bar exam.

 

2...Why was Michelle's law license inactivated by court order? We understand that it was forced to avoid fraud charges

 

It is circulating that according to the U.S Census, there is only one Barack Obama but 27 Social Security numbers and over 80 alias' are connected to him.

 

The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he is reported to have never lived. And was originally registered to another man (Thomas Louis Wood) from Connecticut, who died in Hawaii while on vacation there.

 

As we all know Social Security Numbers are only issued 'once, they are not reused.  No wonder all his records are sealed...

 

Please continue sending this out.  Somewhere, someone has to know SOMETHING, before he reorganized Chicago?.. SOMETHING!!!   He just seemed to burst upon the scene at the 2004 Democratic Convention.  ANYONE??? ANYWHERE??? ANYTHING???

 

I think soon much is going to come to light about this highly unqualified person who was President of the United States for 8 years.  Soon, we will know how badly we were all doped and duped by this impostor who has basically, with much help from his minions, almost brought the greatest nation in history to its knees in ruins.

 

That will be his legacy.

 

He totally destroyed the Integrity, morals and Christian heritage of our once great country.

 

Who in the hell is he? Is America dumb or what?

 

 

 

 

 

 

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1391518 2019-03-29T22:28:01Z 2019-04-01T22:27:28Z Who is "They"
Ever wonder who ‘they’ are? The ‘they’ that put Ocasio-Cortez and "Beto" O'Rourke in office? The ‘they’ that lay the plans to infuse our Government with more socialist puppets?

 Pay attention to the names in this video, many are new to most but they are the “they” that are driving us to the Democratic Socialism (Marxism) end of government.  Wake up America, we are being overthrown by idiots.
 
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1390956 2019-03-28T04:27:59Z 2019-03-29T17:27:43Z Hungary's New Border Fence
 

Walls don’t work.....right?

 

‘They Don’t Even TRY’: Hungary’s New Border Fence Called a ‘Spectacular Success.'

httpus24newscomwp-contentuploads201902hungary-fencejpg
by Jenn Carter
Skeptics who believe a border wall will not stop illegals from entering the United States may want to look at what’s happening in Hungary.
On the day its border fence was completed, the influx of illegals entering Hungary went down from 6,353   per day   to 870 the next. For the remainder of that month, illegal border crossings were steadily below 40 per day, officials said.
They don’t even try,” a local border guard told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “We haven’t had a single Muslim migrant in six months.”
Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s pledge to stop illegals from flowing into the country appears to be a spectacular success.
Hungary’s 96-mile long, 14-foot tall double-line fence includes several layers of razor-wire capable of delivering electric shocks. The barrier features cameras, heat sensors and loudspeakers ready to tell migrants they’re about to break
Hungarian law if they as much as touch the fence, the DC report said.
Nearly every police officer in Hungary is part of a rotation to monitor the border fence   at all times.
Temporary military bases house the police while they do their rotation.
Additionally, Hungary will train and pay more than 1,000 volunteers to deploy as “border hunters”.
Illegals who are caught are arrested and dropped off on the Serbian side of the fence. They don’t get a chance to apply for asylum unless they do so at a “transit zone” where they are held in housing containers while their cases get processed, the report
said.
In September 2016, thousands of migrants streamed across the border every day as they made their way north to Austria, Germany and Scandinavia.
“It was an invasion,” Laszlo Toroczkai, the mayor of Asotthalom, told the Daily Caller. “Illegal immigration is a crime in a normal country. It’s not a normal thing to break into a country.”
By mid-year it waswell beyond 100,000 people who came across,” said Zoltan Kovacs, a spokesman for the Hungarian government. “You should at least have the ability to handle what’s going on.”
Kovacs added: “You might not like it, it’s not a nice thing, but … the only way to stop illegal border crossings is [to] first build a fence, man it, equip it, and also, in parallel, build up your capabilities in terms of legal confines, legal circumstances
to be able to handle what is coming.”
It’s no surprise the mainstream U.S. media refuses to report this story to the American public. Can you imagine how support for a Southern border wall would spike?
 
 
 
 
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1390791 2019-03-27T18:07:00Z 2019-03-27T18:53:25Z Chicago mayor blasts Smollett dismissal as 'whitewash of justice'

Chicago mayor blasts Smollett dismissal as whitewash of justice

CHICAGO (March 26, 2019) — In an astonishing reversal, prosecutors on Tuesday abruptly dropped all charges against Jussie Smollett, abandoning the case barely five weeks after the "Empire" actor was accused of lying to police about being the target of a racist, anti-homosexual attack in downtown Chicago.

The mayor and police chief blasted the decision and stood by the investigation that concluded Smollett staged a hoax.

A visibly angry Mayor Rahm Emanuel called it "a whitewash of justice" and lashed out at Smollett. 

"Is there no decency in this man?" Emanuel told the gathered media.

Smollett's attorneys said his record had "been wiped clean" of the 16 felony counts related to making a false report that he was assaulted by two men. The actor insisted that he had "been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one."

It was not immediately clear what prompted the decision to dismiss the case. In a statement, the Cook County prosecutors' office offered no detailed explanation. The city will keep the $10,000 in bail money that Smollett paid to get out of jail after his arrest.

MORE..

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1390308 2019-03-26T13:35:00Z 2019-03-26T13:35:15Z Mueller Exposes Spy Chiefs
by William McGurn


Did our intel leaders have any evidence when they pushed the Russia collusion line?


FBI acting director Andrew McCabe in Washington June 7 2017
FBI acting director Andrew McCabe in Washington, June 7, 2017. Photo: Alex Brandon/Associated Press

Now that special counsel Robert Mueller has found that no one in the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election, Democrats are busy moving the goal posts. But this is a distraction from the real reckoning that needs to come.

The one we need is for all the intelligence officials—including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Central Intelligence Agency chief John Brennan, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s former Director James Comey and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe—who pushed the Russia conspiracy theory. The special counsel has just made clear they did so with no real evidence.

MORE...



]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1385210 2019-03-13T15:02:12Z 2019-03-13T18:26:11Z Trump is stealing from the military?

So...now we are to believe that Trump is stealing from the military to build the wall...Really?

 

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., told The Associated Press, "It's coming out of military pay and pensions. $1 billion. That's the plan." Dick Durbin said.......

 

 See Dick run, See Dick lie. That will be the day when a democrat leftist is all upset about the military.

  

No one's pay is getting cut, no one's pension is getting cut, the money is coming from unused military funding that didn't spend.

    Durbin, or any other democratic/socialist for that matter,  could care less about the military, he's worried that Trump will get the wall built. Durbin and the rest of the establishment party do not want a wall. The Republicans had the Legislative, Judicial, and executive branch of our government for two years and the Rino established politicians did nothing but run interference against every promise Trump tried to fulfill. This is no different.

    If Durbin is so heart broken over the funding then he and the rest of this little commie buddies can appropriate the money for the wall and it won't have to come out of surplus Military funding in the first place. Use the surplus money to build the damn wall.

  Blaming Trump and jumping on the socialist anti-Trump band wagon is about as lame as it gets. The establishment party craps in our mess kit and the RINO/Socialists start blaming Trump.

 

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1384403 2019-03-12T18:15:00Z 2019-03-19T15:48:05Z Big Conspiracy: Electing a New Population


In my essay The Big Conspiracy: Introduction I introduced a concept, inspired by the phrase “the Big Lie” as mastered by Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Propaganda Minister, who wrote:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

To refresh your understanding of the Big Conspiracy as I defined it:

A plan so audacious in scope and scale, with an intent so sweeping, that even when told about it by people with personal experience in it or presented with strong evidence supporting the exposure, the average person will refuse to believe it because it is that big.

So haul out the foil and fashion a hat.  Here’s the first one.

https://redpilljew.blogspot.com/2018/09/big-conspiracy-electing-new-population.html



]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1382014 2019-03-06T02:58:25Z 2019-03-06T02:58:25Z Beach front paradise
   It’s common knowledge that the once great state of California has become a modern day disaster, this is how it happened. 
 
The Renegade state:  Who controls California?
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1381805 2019-03-05T17:07:25Z 2019-03-06T14:39:13Z What happened

An excellent recap by Victor Davis Hanson laying out the failed plot to unseat a dully elected president by the government bureaucracy.
 
The illegal effort to destroy the 2016 Trump campaign by Hillary Clinton campaign’s use of funds to create, disseminate among court media, and then salt among high Obama administration officials, a fabricated, opposition smear dossier failed.

So has the second special prosecutor phase of the coup to abort the Trump presidency failed. There are many elements to what in time likely will become recognized as the greatest scandal in American political history, marking the first occasion in which U.S. government bureaucrats sought to overturn an election and to remove a sitting U.S. president.

 

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1381789 2019-03-05T16:17:43Z 2019-03-05T16:17:43Z Black and white
   Socialism and Capitalism: explained: https://www.prageru.com/video/capitalism-vs-socialism/
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1381537 2019-03-05T00:03:55Z 2019-04-10T15:05:27Z The oppression industry - Four Families who Own California (Update)
 
   
  The newest conservative movement of our day # walk away movement explained.  “The oppression industry”

UPDATE  4/10/19

You_Tube has deleted this video.



]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1379443 2019-02-28T02:06:56Z 2019-02-28T02:06:56Z History Book Worthy
  There is not one gun law or gun regulation on the books that is not in direct violation of the second amendment.
   Ignorance and greed, the two most dangerous elements to freedom, we live in a country that is infected with both, Greed for power and an ignorant populous begging to be put in chains.
  Disarm the citizens to stop the violence? There is no such thing as peaceful disarmament.
 
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1373860 2019-02-13T19:42:00Z 2019-02-13T19:42:58Z Rutherford Institute Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Rein in Aggressive, Coercive, Potentially Violent Knock-and-Talk Practices by Militarized Police

by Rutherford Institute


WASHINGTON, D.C. — Warning of the danger to the public from the increasing use of “knock and talk” tactics by police, The Rutherford Institute has asked the United States Supreme Court to rein in aggressive “knock and talk” practices, which have become thinly veiled, warrantless attempts by which citizens are coerced and intimidated into “talking” with heavily armed police who “knock” on their doors in the middle of the night.

In asking the Court to review the case of Young v. Borders, Rutherford Institute attorneys denounced a lower court ruling that failed to hold police accountable for banging on the wrong door at 1:30 am, failing to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shooting and killing the innocent homeowner who answered the door while holding a gun in self-defense. Although 26-year-old Andrew Scott had committed no crime and never fired a single bullet or lifted his firearm against police, he was gunned down by police who were investigating a speeding incident by engaging in a middle-of-the-night “knock and talk” in Scott’s apartment complex.

n an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court, Institute attorneys argue that the police violated the Fourth Amendment in conducting the “knock and talk” because the late-night raid at Scott’s home was an abuse of society’s norms and a trespass on Scott’s property. The Institute has also issued constitutional guidelines to educate the public about what they can do to preserve their constitutional rights against the coercive use of “knock and talks” by police as a means of sidestepping the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against warrantless, unreasonable searches.

The Rutherford Institute’s amicus curiae brief in Young v. Borders is available at www.rutherford.org.

“Government officials insist that there is nothing unlawful, unreasonable or threatening about the prospect of armed police dressed in SWAT gear knocking on doors in the middle of night and ‘asking’ homeowners to engage in warrantless ‘knock-and-talk’ sessions,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “However, as Andrew Scott learned, there’s always a price to pay for saying no to such heavy-handed requests by police. If the courts continue to sanction such aggressive, excessive, coercive tactics, it will give police further incentive to terrorize and kill American citizens without fear of repercussion.”

On July 15, 2012, Deputy Richard Sylvester pursued a speeding motorcyclist, which he later had cause to believe might be armed and had been spotted at a nearby apartment complex. Around 1:30 a.m., Sylvester and three other deputies began knocking on doors in the apartment complex in the vicinity of the parked motorcycle, starting with Apt. 114, which was occupied by Andrew Scott and Amy Young, who were playing video games and had no connection to the motorcycle or any illegal activity. The deputies assumed tactical positions, guns drawn and ready to shoot. Sylvester, without announcing he was a police officer, then banged loudly and repeatedly on the door. Unnerved by the banging at such a late hour, Andrew Scott retrieved his handgun before opening the door. When Scott saw a shadowy figure holding a gun outside his door, he retreated into his apartment only to have Sylvester immediately open fire. Sylvester fired six shots, three of which hit and killed Scott. A trial court subsequently ruled in favor of the police, ruling that Scott was to blame for choosing to retrieve a handgun before opening the door. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that Sylvester was protected by “qualified immunity,” reasoning that the use of excessive force did not violate “clearly established law.”



]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1371975 2019-02-08T18:13:00Z 2019-02-08T18:12:57Z Don’t Buy The Carbon Dioxide Tax Myth – It Just Means More Government Control

By H. Sterling Burnett


The carbon dioxide tax is like the Hydra of myth. Every time some hero cut one of the Hydra’s heads off, two more sprang up in its place. The same is true for the carbon dioxide tax. Every time a version of the carbon dioxide tax is proposed, economists and other analysts deftly cut its head off, showing its promises of climate salvation and economic prosperity to be false, myths like the Hydra itself, yet two more versions of the tax arise.

Progressives and socialists embrace the carbon dioxide tax myth to promote more government control, their control, over the economy and peoples’ lives.

Sadly, a number of old mossback, Rockefeller Republicans have also embraced the myth of the carbon dioxide tax. The main attraction for them seems to be their belief they can create a revenue-neutral carbon dioxide tax. For them, it’s just a matter of political engineering. The problem is, the idea a carbon dioxide tax can be revenue neutral is just as much of a myth as that it will save the earth from climate doom (as if the earth needed saving, which the best science shows it doesn’t), or that it will increase jobs and boost the economy.

As my colleague James Taylor has persuasively written, no carbon dioxide tax is revenue neutral for the households being taxed. A carbon dioxide tax raises the price of coal, natural gas, and gasoline in an attempt to force consumers to purchase more expensive wind power, solar power, and electric vehicles. Although consumers will spend substantially more money on energy and energy-related bills, the wind and solar industries will pay no carbon dioxide taxes.

As Taylor points out, the tax revenue generated by a “successful” carbon dioxide tax — one that significantly reduces carbon dioxide emissions — will decline sharply over time, leaving little money to return to the people. Thus, although the government would not receive much revenue to return to consumers from the tax, people, now paying substantially more for their energy bills, will face a dramatic decline in their discretionary household incomes.

Nor will the tax be revenue neutral for households with workers in the fossil fuel industry or related fields. The idea that all the oil field workers, coal miners, coal and natural gas power plant operators, and those working in chemical and plastics manufacturing will be able to smoothly transition to other jobs without a hitch is a myth as well: their household incomes will fall sharply in the short-term if not permanently. And even if they could simply snap their fingers and magically switch jobs, the jobs they would be taking installing and servicing solar panels and wind turbines simply don’t pay as well as the jobs they will be forced out of by the carbon dioxide tax.

Nor, in truth, could any carbon dioxide tax be truly neutral in terms of government revenue.

Even if Congress and the president keep their hands out of the till, not finding creative ways to spend whatever new revenue a carbon dioxide tax generates, and returns it through some scheme to the people being taxed, it’s simply a fact a good portion of the revenue generated by the tax will be diverted to the bureaucracies involved in collecting it and disbursing the tax checks. No government program is cost-free.

Just as with every other government program, there will be huge transaction costs for collecting, tracking, auditing and archiving taxes paid and revenues paid out. New employees will have to be hired, or existing federal government workers will have to divert their time from other responsibilities, to account for the carbon dioxide taxes to be paid, assure that they are paid, to police the program, and to send out the revenue checks and handle complaints when disputes arise.

These and other costs will eat up billions of dollars each year. Unless these costs are paid directly out of the carbon dioxide tax revenues — in which case all the revenues will not be returned to taxpayers as promised — then the government will have to impose other taxes or take on additional debt to pay for the program. So much for revenue neutrality.

Anyone who tells you paying a new tax will be good for you, especially a tax on fossil fuels that serve to power the economic prosperity we currently enjoy, is lying. In the meantime, hang onto your wallets and when the time comes, vote any and all policymakers who support carbon taxes out of office.


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1370156 2019-02-04T05:40:41Z 2019-02-06T18:37:23Z The Wrap Up Smear

                            

 

                                                                                

The Wrap Up Smear

This is the Democratic party at it’s best. Lie,smear,slander and then publish it.                 

       Brought to you by the leaders in communist propaganda and fake news

                        Meet the face of the Democratic party.

 
 
                                                                                
                                                              

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMJdDwQlcc8

                       
                                                                              
                                                                                  
 
                                                                             
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1369582 2019-02-02T17:40:35Z 2019-02-03T18:42:40Z Movie of the year?
    This is going to be the pillow fight of the year. A pro-life movie that’s partially financed by MyPillow CEO Michael Lindell. For many this will be what is known as a “significant social event.”
 
                   

                                      “Unplanned”

 
                                                            
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1368753 2019-01-31T02:56:06Z 2019-02-03T18:39:41Z A woman's right

Abortion doctor explains a woman’s right to choose what she does ‘with her own body’.

 
 

       And this ladies and gentlemen reveals the character of today's liberals,

   it's not murder, it's just a woman's right to rip her unborn child into pieces

   small enough that it won't clog the toilet when she flushes.

      This is the platform that the democratic politicians promote to get elected. We are supposed to vote for them....

                                       

“Because they care about the ‘little’ people’’.

 
 


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1368644 2019-01-30T21:30:00Z 2019-01-30T21:29:47Z Acid Rain - Monitoring SO2 in a Flue Gas Desulfurization Unit

by Applied Analytics


From the 1970s through the 1990s, acid rain was the main environmental concern. Lakes1, vegetation2 and animals3 were affected.

The New York Times reported in 1979:“The rapid rate at which rainfall is growing more acidic in more areas has led many scientists and governmental officials to conclude that acid rain is developing into one of the most serious worldwide environmental problems of the coming decades.”4

What is acid rain?
 
Acid rain simply refers to rain or other precipitants that have uncommonly high acidity. This is a result of SO2 in the air that dissolves in water creating sulfuric acid. The source of this SO2 is largely power plants that burn fossil fuels.
 
EPA
 
The EPA, under the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, created the Acid Rain Program (ARP). The aim was to reduce the amount of NO2 and SO2 emissions, while allowing for the industry to employ cost-effective technology to achieve this goal. As the following graph shows, the program was a remarkable success.

Figure 1. SO2 Emissions from CSAPR and ARP Sources, 1980–2016 (ARP- The Acid Rain Program; CSAPR -Cross-State Air Pollution Rule)5

The EPA reports concluded that experience with the Clean Air Act since 1970 has shown that protecting public health and building the economy can go hand in hand.6 Furthermore, “The emissions reductions have led to dramatic improvements in the quality of the air that we breathe. Between 1990 and 2017, national concentrations of air pollutants improved... 88 percent for sulfur dioxide”7


Figure 2. Note. Data for SO2 concentration from SO2 Air Quality, 1980-2017 (Annual 99th percentile of Daily Max 1-hour Average) National Trend based on 42 sites. 90% decrease in national average8

The Technology
 
Flue gas desulfurization units are used to remove SO2 from flue gas; the process is also called scrubbing. The most common type is limestone scrubbing, in which the flue gas is stripped by dissolution into water. The stripped gas reacts with the limestone (CaCO3) resulting in solid residue, in this case calcium sulfite (CaSO3). The scrubbing efficiency is usually higher than 90%. To achieve this level of efficiency, the concentration of SO2 must be monitored both before and after the process.
 
The Analysis
 
The OMA-300 measures a full, high-resolution spectrum. This allows for both applications to be monitored continuously by the same analyzer, from 4000 ppm to 10 ppm full scale. Hence, it provides an indication of the process’ effectiveness by measuring the SO2 before and after the flue gas desulfurization unit.


Figure 3: Absorbance spectra of SO2 40 ppm and 4000 ppm, demonstrating that one analyzer can be used for both applications simultaneously. The absorbances at different wavelengths are correlated to the SO2 concentration.

The Future
 
While controlling industrial SO2 emission in North America and Western Europe has been largely successful, acid rain is still a problem in rapidly growing economies such as China and India. Even the famous Taj Mahal in Agra is facing corrosion of its marble9. Hopefully, in the very near future, these burgeoning regions will implement the same technology and regulations that worked so well in more established countries.
 
References
 
1. WILLIAM K. STEVENSJAN , ‘Study of Acid Rain Uncovers a Threat To Far Wider Area’, New York times, 16, 1990.
2. WILLIAM K. STEVENSAPRIL, ‘The Forest That Stopped Growing: Trail Is Traced to Acid Rain’ New York Times, 16, 1996 .
3. LES LINEMARCH ‘Acid Rain Leading to Moose Deaths’ , New York Times, 12, 1996.
4. (BAYARD WEBSTERNOV. “Acid Rain: An Increasing Threat” New York Times 6,11, 1979).
9. Henry Fountain and John Schwartz ‘Have We Passed the Acid Test?’ New York Times May 2, 2018


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1366134 2019-01-23T01:11:01Z 2019-02-08T18:07:59Z Get Ready-- they're coming for your money
I really wish this article wasn’t so dead on but I’m afraid it is. It seems that the propaganda wing of the ‘educators’ today left out the part about Marxism. It always ends up with a 100% Tax and “"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" ”
 

 
 

Throughout history, whenever the wealth gap gets large enough, it gets corrected.

If you are having trouble viewing this email, or you'd like to share this article, please click here.

Please enable images for the best reading experience


January 22, 2019
Dorado, Puerto Rico

Every so often throughout history, the peasants grab their pitchforks and come for the elite. It happens when the wealth gap grows too extreme… when people feel like they are getting left behind, with no opportunity to advance.

Central banks around the world have printed trillions of dollars over last decade, and pushed interest rates to zero, and sometimes below. And all of that stimulus went directly into the pockets of the wealthy.

Since 2009, the world’s billionaires more than DOUBLED their combined wealth. All the billionaires in the world had $3.4 trillion in 2009. By 2017, they amassed $8.9 trillion.

Mark Zuckerberg multiplied his wealth almost 20 times over, from $3 billion in 2009, to over $58 billion in 2019.

$8.9 trillion is a massive, almost incomprehensible amount of wealth.

But it really shouldn’t be that surprising if you think about it… these people are wealthy for a reason. Typically, they are pretty good at making money. And with the snowball effect, if you give them more time, they will probably make even more.

For the last ten years, we’ve seen a huge asset price inflation in everything from the stock market, to bonds and real estate, and even fine art and wine.

But if you’re a wage earner without assets, you’ve been left out. Wages and median household wealth have stagnated.

And this is a global issue…

The combined wealth of the poorest half of the world--3.8 billion people--fell by 11% just last year, according to Oxfam, a group working to alleviate poverty.

The New York Times claims the richest 8 people on the planet have more wealth than the poorest 3.8 billion.

And Forbes says the 3 richest Americans have as much wealth as the poorest half of the country’s population.

People feel trapped, like they have no path to prosperity. They see money thrown around by the government, and the rich. They see stocks and real estate boom… but where is theirs?

It’s this lack of MOBILITY that really gets the masses worked up.

3.4 billion people got poorer last year. How many more stayed exactly where they were, or barely budged? The vast majority of the global population is the same or worse off than they were 12 months ago.

Meanwhile a tiny group got embarrassingly rich.

I’m not trying to sound like some radical, left-wing, social justice warrior. I just know that throughout history, whenever the wealth gap gets large enough, it corrects.

Sometimes that happens through legislation and sometimes it happens through violence. People demand that their politicians forcefully redistribute the wealth. And the politicians, always hungry for more power, are happy to step up to the plate.

We’re starting to see this in America today.

Last week we talked about New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s speech in which he said: “Brothers and sisters, there’s plenty of money in the world. There’s plenty of money in this city. It’s just in the wrong hands.”

What he meant was that the people who earned the money shouldn’t get to keep it.

Then there’s the new star of Congress, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. She supports hiking income taxes up to 70%, providing free medical care, free college, a chicken in every pot and a unicorn in every garage.

And, of course, she blames capitalism for everything wrong with the United States… and says “it will not always exist in the world.”

Ray Dalio, manager of Bridgewater, the world’s largest hedge fund, is hobnobbing with the global elite at a Swiss ski resort in Davos. He says that among the attendees, the ideas of this 29-year-old freshman Congresswoman are actually taking root.

Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman thinks AOC’s 70% is too low.

Somewhere between 73% and 80% is the optimal tax rate he says. Under his plan, the government will graciously let you keep up to 27% of what you earn.

Unfortunately, the public likes what it hears.

According to Gallup, 51% of 18-29 year olds view socialism favorably.

Only 45% view capitalism positively. That’s down from 68% in the same age group just a few years ago.

And membership in the Democratic Socialists of America has swelled 7x just in the last two years.

Their candidates are certainly crowding the 2020 primary.

There’s Elizabeth “you didn’t build that” Warren. Bernie Sanders and his tens of trillions of dollars worth of promises for free-stuff.

Former Obama cabinet secretary Julian Castro is one Presidential contender who wants “free” two-year college. Like Bernie, he has also endorses Medicare for all, a government run socialized healthcare scheme.

Other likely contenders, Senator Corey Booker and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, want a federal guaranteed jobs program to hand out cushy government job with benefits to anyone who wants one.

And now Kamala Harris is officially in the race.

Harris is a Senator from California who will undoubtedly appeal to the socialist uprising. Already she endorsed AOC’s call for a 70% tax rate, and won’t rule out BANNING private car ownership to address climate change.

Her campaign slogan is “For the people.” And the campaign colors are red and yellow… just missing the hammer and sickle.

image

All of these candidates want to take your money and redistribute it to the people who keep them in power. It is SO obvious what is going to happen next.

There will be more government spending that they can’t afford. More bureaucracy, more central planning…

As de Blasio said, he thinks people have a socialistic impulse which makes them want the government “to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be.”

And unfortunately the statistics are supporting this view.

These are the new socialist candidates for the presidency who all promise to take your money and do with it what they see fit.

But here’s the thing, none of this stuff works. Central planning doesn't work. Bureaucracy doesn't work.

It drags everyone down, and lifts up only the politically connected. We’ve seen it a million times before, across the world, throughout history.

Unfortunately, it seems like the trend of American socialism is picking up steam.

These Presidential candidates (along with a large chunk of American voters) are determined to turn America into yet another failed experiment in socialism.

To your freedom,

Signature

Simon Black,
Founder, SovereignMan.com

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1363018 2019-01-13T22:26:20Z 2019-01-14T18:26:18Z How they do it


Fake News    The Communist News Networks 
 
 

 

 

Examples of the Media Manipulating Events

 

There's no denying that the media often isn't wholly objective and truthful in its coverage of news events. The photos you're going to see below show just how easy it is to manipulate people's perceptions of an event that's being covered for the sake of whatever agenda that the powers-that-be at a given news network might have. Take a look: An angle makes a world of difference.

 

 

 

 

Creating the impression of strength in numbers for Hillary Clinton!

 

 

 

 

This soldier looks like he was threatening the boy in the first image.

It turns out he wasn't.

 

 

 

 

 

Not many people turned out for the launch of UK PM Theresa May's campaign bus...

 

 

 

This photo was staged between photographers and a young Palestinian.

 

 

 

 

The kid in this infamous photo was participating in a pro-immigration demonstration.

He wasn't even a detained illegal immigrant.

 

 

The camera was used to create the illusion of more people.

 

 

 

 

Not quite as many people there as was made out...

 

 

 
 
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1361379 2019-01-08T15:53:00Z 2019-01-08T15:54:22Z The 16 Year Plan to Destroy America

by Allen Williams


The globalist chart below pretty well sums up the Obama administration as well as Hillary's presidential plans if she had won the 2016 election.


Glancing at the chart above may appear conspiratorial at first but a great number of these tag items have already been done or are in progress. For example, rogue operators have been operating in government as in FBI agents Strzok and Page.

ISIS funding has been traced to NATO and hence Obama. There's no question that the Iran deal was the epitome of funding America's enemies. And Obama did a number of purges in the US military to weaken the command structure.

Conservatives have been under attack by the media for some time and attacks heightened in social media censorship in recent years.

There's little doubt that Obama's selection of Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor were intended to move the court to the progressive left.  And US immigration experienced an unprecedented flood of illegals including violent criminals under his watch.

Hillary Clinton has already called for the end of the electoral college during her 2016 loss. The Clinton foundation has pocketed millions in their supposed philanthropic endeavors in Haiti.  And Hillary made millions more in the Uranium One sale to the Russians.

Get the full report here: https://beforeitsnews.com/v3/opinion-conservative/2019/3423493.html

]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1358016 2018-12-28T22:44:00Z 2019-01-24T05:37:34Z Spectrum - a Rip off Internet Service Provider

by Allen Williams


I acquired Time-Warner’s Everyday Low Price internet plan about six years ago as I’m not a gamer and I don’t stream movies from NetFlix. I just enjoy reading the news and making occasional online purchases.  So I didn’t feel the need to pay for Hi speed internet.  Time Warner was a pretty good plan with decent service.

About 5 years ago Time-Warner was bought out by AT &T who sold off the cable service to Charter Communication’s Spectrum.  

Right from the start I began getting calls from their representatives for me to upgrade my service, add phone, TV and what not which I declined.  I have my own broadband phone installation which works fine so I didn’t need another.  At the same time I was receiving saturated mailings from Spectrum informing me of what extra service packages I could order.  The phrase ‘not interested’ has absolutely no meaning to the company.

In December of 2018, I opened my Spectrum bill and found that it had jumped 25 percent, down slightly from the 33 percent increase of 2017.  I promptly called them to discover the reason for the latest increase.

The Representative I talked with either wasn’t very knowledgeable of Spectrum plans or was deliberately misleading me on the various options.  It’s likely a corollary of the axiom “Tell customer anything to get the job or keep the service.

The Time-Warner Everyday Low Price (ELP) Internet plan is no longer offered on the Spectrum Website and the company will not let customers sign up for that plan even though my monthly bill continues to show the ELP selection.  http://concerningconsumers.bangordailynews.com/2017/03/16/home/spectrum-discontinues-time-warners-14-99-everyday-low-price-internet/ After informing me several times that Time-Warner no longer exists and that essentially I didn’t have a right to the ELP service at Spectrum, she continued to evade my questions on the reason for the price increases.  After much persistence on my part she finally told me that Spectrum initiated a company wide price increase.  

However, despite the representative’s assertions, the pricing increases appear to be some sort of punitive measure to force the consumer on to a plan of the company’s choosing rather than honoring the user’s preference. There’s also nothing like subsidizing Spectrum’s acquisition costs for Time Warner.

Today’s business strategies concentrate on forcing customer’s to buy services they don’t need or want at outrageous prices in a captive market created by government regulations and other federal enablers.  Remember Net Neutrality..a half baked government plan to equalize broadband speeds, no blocking access or throttling traffic, etc?

Broadband competition is intentionally muted to force prices upward and holdovers from less expensive plans are targeted for forced upgrades:  https://eu.democratandchronicle.com/story/money/business/2017/06/08/spectrum-customers-not-happy-in-time-warner-cable-changeover/376695001/

I’m not alone in experiencing Spectrum’s abusive rate hikes; Charter Communications has lost roughly 100,000 subscribers during the switch from Time -Warner Cable to Spectrum.  Here are more customer’s thoughts:

“After being a customer for 18 years they are trying to increase prices well above their ongoing advertised prices of TV Service, Internet Service.” 

“When Spectrum purchased Time Warner I kept getting a letters in the mail from Spectrum stating save $10 to switch to Spectrum, reading the fine details, year two would increase by $10, year 3 would be what ever going rate is.  I just hit year 2 and price went up $20.  I called and spoke to 5 people. All said I am getting the correct rate.  If anyone has a copy of the letter to prove me right or wrong would be appreciated”   Read more Spectrum complaints at: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/spectrum/internet/spectrum-spectrum-internet-service-took-over-time-warner-cable-industry-california-1338932

Spectrum offerings differ from locale to locale usually pushing phone, Internet and TV services at three to four times the cost of internet alone. The cheapest Internet offering I saw was a promotional at $44 per month soon to become $65 a month.   And Spectrum only offers two speed tiers – 60 Mbps and 100 Mbps, “with no data caps, usage-based pricing or additional modem fees,” according to a recent company press release.  

  • 60 Mbps = $64.99 ($53.99 for customers who also have Spectrum TV)*
  • 100 Mbps = $104.99 ($93.99 for customers who also have Spectrum TV)*

I asked the Rep if there were any changes to my broadband speed.  Spectrum responded that I’m getting 3.5 MB service but clocking the Internet speed with Speedtest shows 2.3Mbps.  http://www.speedtest.net/#, Download at 3.02 Mbps; Upload 0.25 Mbps

Spectrum’s own speed test is pretty comparable with a slightly higher Upload speed at 0.5 Mbps but these will vary from day to day based on traffic load, etc.  https://www.spectrum.com/internet/speed-test.html 

Both tests confirm that I’m getting less than 3.5 Mbps service so either the Rep doesn’t know what speed is supposed to come with Time-Warner’s old ELP service or one gets whatever the company feels like providing.

I would rate Spectrum at zero if the Sitejabber system would allow me for Spectrum’s deceptive business practices, disingenuous advertising, credit billing irregularities, minimal plan choices and unwillingness to allow people to keep their current plan and an endless solicitation harassment to upgrade services.

Spectrum is a dud. Best to avoid it.


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1357262 2018-12-26T18:50:00Z 2018-12-26T18:51:57Z Judicial nominee faces Senate scrutiny over Knights of Columbus membership

by Ed Condon


Washington D.C., Dec 21, 2018 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- A judicial nominee faced questions from Senators this month about whether membership in the Knights of Columbus might impede his ability to judge federal cases fairly. The Knights of Columbus say that no candidate for public office should have to defend his membership in a Catholic service organization.

Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) raised concerns about membership in the Knights of Columbus while the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewed the candidacy of Brian C. Buescher, an Omaha-based lawyer nominated by President Trump to sit on the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

Senators also asked whether belonging to the Catholic charitable organization could prevent judges from hearing cases “fairly and impartially.”

In written questions sent to Buescher by committee members Dec. 5, Sen. Hirono stated that “the Knights of Columbus has taken a number of extreme positions. For example, it was reportedly one of the top contributors to California’s Proposition 8 campaign to ban same-sex marriage.”

Hirono then asked Buescher if he would quit the group if he was confirmed “to avoid any appearance of bias.”

“The Knights of Columbus does not have the authority to take personal political positions on behalf of all of its approximately two million members,” Buescher responded.

“If confirmed, I will apply all provisions of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges regarding recusal and disqualification,” he said.

Kathleen Blomquist, spokesperson for the Knights of Columbus, told CNA that the senators’ questions echoed the kind of anti-Catholicism seen in previous generations of American history.

“Our country’s sad history of anti-Catholic bigotry contributed to the founding of the Knights of Columbus, and we are proud of the many Catholics who overcame this hurdle to contribute so greatly to our country,” Blomquist told CNA

“We were extremely disappointed to see that one’s commitment to Catholic principles through membership in the Knights of Columbus—a charitable organization that adheres to and promotes Catholic teachings—would be viewed as a disqualifier from public service in this day and age.”

President Trump nominated Buescher to serve on the U.S. District Court on Nov. 3. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Buescher’s nomination Nov. 28, sending written questions to him on Dec. 5. 

The Knights of Columbus is active in 17 countries worldwide. In 2017, members carried out more than 75 million hours of volunteer work and raised more than $185 million for charitable purposes. Successive popes, including Pope Francis, have praisied the group for their charitable work and the manner in which they articulate Catholic faith and values.

In her questions to the nominee, Sen. Harris described the Knights as “an all-male society” and asked if Buescher was aware that the Knights of Columbus “opposed a woman’s right to choose” and were against “marriage equality” when he joined.

Responding to the senator’s questions, Buescher confirmed that he has been a member of the Knights since he was 18 years old, noting that his membership “has involved participation in charitable and community events in local Catholic parishes.”

“I do not recall if I was aware whether the Knights of Columbus had taken a position on the abortion issue when I joined at the age of 18,” he wrote in response.

Harris raised a statement from Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson, who said that abortion constituted “the killing of the innocent on a massive scale” and asked Buescher if he agreed with Anderson.

Buescher said he was not responsible for drafting statements or policies made by the Knights and that, as a federal judge, he would consider himself bound by judicial precedent regarding abortion.

“I did not draft this language. If confirmed, I would be bound by precedent of the United States Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and would not be guided by statements made by others,” Buescher told the senator.

Blomquist told CNA that asking a judicial nominee to defend his membership of a major Catholic charitable organization is disturbing.

“We believe that membership in the Knights of Columbus, which helps everyday men put their Catholic faith into action, is worthy of commendation and not something a nominee for public office should be asked to defend," she said.

In 2014, Buescher ran as a candidate in the Republican primary election for Nebraska attorney general. During that campaign he described himself as “avidly pro-life” and said that opposition to abortion was part of his “moral fabric.”

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) noted the nominee’s previously outspoken opposition to abortion and asked “why should a litigant in your courtroom expect to get a fair hearing from an impartial judge in a case involving abortion rights?”

Buescher responded that “as a candidate for Nebraska Attorney General in 2014, I did what candidates for any major state or federal office do, which is to take political positions on a variety of issues of the day.” 

“However, there is a difference between taking political positions as a candidate for elective office and serving as a federal judge. I believe a judge’s role and obligation is to apply the law without regard to any personal beliefs regarding the law,” Buescher wrote.

“If confirmed, I will faithfully apply all United States Supreme Court and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent on all issues, including Roe v. Wade."

Buescher also fielded questions from senators about Trump administration policy on Title X funding for clinics providing abortions and referrals, as well as on the application of anti-discrimination law to questions related to gender identity or sexual orientation.

The nominee underscored that, as a judge, it was not for him to advance personal or political opinions but to make fair and impartial rulings based on the law and judicial precedent. 

If confirmed by the Senate, Buescher will fill the vacancy left by Judge Laurie Smith Camp, who assumed senior status - a kind of judicial semi-retirement - on Dec. 1.

This story has been updated.






]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1354784 2018-12-18T18:55:00Z 2018-12-18T18:54:44Z EPA restores common sense to overaggressive water regulations

by Tim Huelskamp and James Taylor


The Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday it is rolling back some of the excessive, and possibly illegal, water regulations imposed by the Obama administration. EPA’s announcement is a welcome relief for homeowners and property owners impacted by overly aggressive EPA officials.

As a federal executive agency, EPA can only enforce laws that have been passed by Congress. While EPA has some rule making authority, it cannot make up laws of its own and then decide to enforce them. This is a very important check against a dictatorial presidency or executive branch. Regarding water regulations, Congress, via the Clean Water Act, has given the executive branch authority to regulate only those bodies of water that are “navigable waters of the United States.”

EPA has always asserted a broad definition for navigable waters. Dating back to the 1980s, EPA has asserted it can regulate smaller, streams and tributaries that cannot be navigated but that flow into navigable waters. EPA has also asserted it can regulate wetlands that are adjacent to navigable waters.

The Obama administration attempted in 2015 to further expand the definition of navigable waters to include such entities as isolated ponds, dormant stream beds that are dry most of the year, and minor depressions in the land that hold water only in the immediate aftermath of significant rainfall.

The consequences of the 2015 regulatory overreach can, and have been, devastating. Overly aggressive EPA officials tell farmers they cannot manage or cultivate farmlands that hold isolated puddles merely a few days of the year. Homeowners are told they cannot landscape or fill in nuisance depressions in their property that hold water briefly after a heavy rain. Federal bureaucrats have stripped homeowners and families of practical ownership rights to property they have purchased and managed for generations. Property owners who defy the EPA and other federal bureaucrats face steep penalties and fines.

Citizen lawsuits have been moderately successful challenging the Obama administration’s overreach. Courts have blocked enforcement of the Obama administration’s 2015 regulations in 28 states. Still, homeowners and landowners in the remaining 22 states remain subject to the oppressive 2015 regulations. The issue has been a likely candidate for eventual Supreme Court review, but in the meantime, people remain subject to the unfair policy.

The Trump EPA is thankfully proposing to restore common sense to EPA regulatory authority. The agency proposes to walk back the Obama administration’s asserted authority to regulate stream beds and land depressions that are usually dry. EPA will no longer regulate wetlands unless they are “physically and meaningfully connected” to waters under EPA jurisdiction. EPA will also eliminate subjective criteria for determining whether land or water features qualify under navigable waters jurisdiction, granting individuals more certainty about how they can use their property. These corrections are long overdue, and represent another example of President Trump keeping campaign promises to reduce environmental and regulatory overreach.

Environmental activists are sounding an alarm about potential environmental harms, but their arguments are weak. EPA will still regulate all navigable waters, as well as meaningful permanent and intermittent tributaries to navigable waters. Also, very importantly, all 50 states have their own environmental laws and regulations, allowing regulation above and beyond navigable waters as defined by EPA. For normally dry streambeds, isolated depressions that only occasionally hold water, and other land features that the Obama administration sought to regulate, regulations will once again come from state and local governments that are more responsive and accountable to the people and communities being regulated.

EPA’s proposed rule will continue to provide strong environmental protection for the waterways Congress authorized EPA to regulate. At the same time, the proposed rule will roll back executive branch overreach and protect the rights of homeowners and landowners.


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1354005 2018-12-16T07:27:31Z 2018-12-17T18:08:59Z Real education
 
This is pure education with the political correctness stripped from it. Islam, the religion of peace.  A history of Islam and a window into our future.

What future do the people with open arms welcoming the Muslim influx face? 
                
]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1351136 2018-12-07T17:31:00Z 2018-12-07T17:30:48Z The great Christmas night raid

by W. Thomas Smith, Jr

 

Continental Army General George Washington's celebrated Crossing of the Delaware has been dubbed in some military circles,  America's first special operation. Though there were certainly many small-unit actions, raids, and Ranger operations during the Colonial Wars and there was a special Marine landing in Nassau in the early months of the American Revolution, no special mission by America's first army has been more heralded than that which took place on Christmas night exactly 230 years ago.

Certainly the mission had all the components of a modern special operation (though without all the modern battlefield technologies we take for granted in the 21st century): "A secret expedition is how John Greenwood, a soldier with the 15th Massachusetts, described it, as quoted in Bruce Chadwick's The First American Army.

If nothing else, all the elements for potential disaster were with Washington and his men as they crossed the Delaware River from the icy Pennsylvania shoreline to the equally frozen banks of New Jersey, followed by an eight-mile march to the objective the town of Trenton.

The river, swollen and swift moving, was full of wide, thick sheets of solid ice. And unlike the romanticized portrayal of the operation in the famous painting by Emanuel Leutze (the one with Washington standing in his dramatic, martial pose; his determined face turned toward the far side of the river), the actual crossing was made in the dead of night, in a gale-like wind and a blinding sleet and snowstorm. Odds are, Washington would have been hunkered down in one of the 66-ft-long wooden boats, draped in his cloak, stoically enduring the bitter cold with his soldiers, some of whom were rowing or poling the boats against the ice and the current.


WASHINGTON'S STRATEGIC CONCERNS


The decision for the crossing and the subsequent raid on Trenton was based on Washington's belief that he had to do something. Otherwise, as he penned in a private letter,the game will be pretty near up.

To the easily disheartened and the cut-and-runners, it might have seemed "the game" was indeed already 'up'. After all, many of Washington's Continental Army were wounded, sick, and demoralized. Recent losses to the British had been severe. Desertion numbers were rising, and enlistment terms were almost up. Reinforcements were poorly trained and ill-equipped. Ammunition was in short supply. The soldiers were not properly outfitted for extreme winter conditions: Clothing was spare. Many men were in rags, some naked, according to Washington' own account. Most had broken shoes or no shoes at all.


THE PLAN


The mission itself, though a huge gamble, was tactically simple.  Washington, personally leading a force of just under 2,500 men, would cross the river undetected, march toward Trenton, and attack the enemy garrisoned in the town at dawn.

 Two of Washington's other commanders, Generals John Cadwalader and James Ewing, were also directed to cross: Cadwalader's force was to cross and attack a second garrison near Bordentown. Ewing's force was to cross and block the enemy's escape at Trenton. Both commanders, discouraged by the weather and the river, aborted their own operations. But according to Maurice Matloff's American Military History (the U.S. Army's official history), Driven by Washington's indomitable will, the main force did cross as planned.

 Speed of movement, surprise, maneuver, violence of action, and the plan's simplicity were all key. And fortunately, the elements all came together.

The factors in Washington's favor were clear: The weather was so bad that no one believed the Continentals would attempt a river crossing followed by a forced march, much less at night. The Continentals were numerically and perceived to be qualitatively inferior to the British Army. The Hessians, mercenaries allied to the British and who were garrisoned in Trenton, had a battlefield reputation that far exceeded their actual combat prowess. And no one believed the weary Americans would want to attempt anything with anyone on Christmas.

 

THE CROSSING


Hours before kickoff, Washington had his officers read to the men excerpts of Thomas Paine's The American Crisis, a portion of which reads:

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph.”

By 4:00 p.m. the force was gathered at McKonkey's Ferry, the launching point for the mission. The watchword, “Victory or death,” was given. When darkness set in, the men climbed into the boats and began easing out into the black river.

Back and forth throughout the night and into the wee hours of the 26th, the boat crews ferried the little army, a few horses, and 18 cannon across the Delaware. The crossing was complete by 4 a.m., but two hours behind schedule, and the temperatures were plummeting. At least two men, exhausted and falling asleep in the snow, froze to death.

 

ATTACKING TRENTON

 

The next obstacle was the march toward Trenton in blinding snow, sleet, even hail; and on bloody frostbitten feet. Keep going men, keep up with your officers, Washington, now on horseback, urged as he rode alongside his advancing infantry.

Just before 8:00 a.m., the advance elements of the American army were spotted on the outskirts of town by a Hessian lieutenant. But by the time he was able to sound the alarm, all hell was breaking loose. Americans were rushing into Trenton with fixed bayonets. The Hessians , some still in their underwear, and nearly all with hangovers from too much Christmas Day celebrating, were attempting to form ranks, but were quickly overrun. Many fled in a panic. Hundreds surrendered. Those who resisted were shot down or run through with the bayonet. The Hessian commander, Col. Johann Rall, was desperately trying to rally his men. But he was shot from his horse, and died later that day.

One of Washington's junior officers, Lieutenant James Monroe was leading a charge against a Hessian position in the town, when he took a musket ball in the chest and collapsed. Amazingly he survived, and would ultimately become the fifth president of the United States.

The fighting lasted about an hour. Four Americans had been killed and ten-times as many Hessians lay dead in the snow. Some 900 enemy prisoners were rounded up, along with weapons, ammunition, and other desperately needed stores. And Washington's victorious army was soon marching back along the river road to the waiting boats and the return crossing.

 

WHAT IT MEANT FOR AMERICA

 

Days later when many enlistments were up, Washington ordered his commanders to form ranks. He then rode out before the troops, and appealed to their sense of duty as well as the criticality of their fight:

"My brave fellows, you have done all I asked you to do, and more than could be reasonably expected, but your country is at stake. The present is emphatically the crisis which is to decide our destiny. " Indeed it was in December of 1776, just as it is in December of 2018.

Washington held his little army together. Many of the continentals renewed their enlistments. They then capitalized on their Trenton victory with wins over the British at Trenton (the second go around) on January 2, and Princeton on January 3.

The initial Delaware crossing and the raid on Trenton was the bold, high-risk shot-in-the-arm the nearly disintegrated American army needed in late 1776. The fighting was far from over, and there would be many setbacks for the Americans before the Treaty of Paris was signed formally ending the war in 1783. But the great Christmas night raid in 1776 would forever serve as a model of how a special operation or a conventional mission, for that matter might be successfully conducted. There are never any guarantees for success on the battlefield; but with a little initiative and a handful of good Americans, the dynamics of war can be altered in a single night. {Not to mention the providential hand of the Almighty - ED}


 


W. Thomas Smith Jr. is a former U.S. Marine infantry leader, parachutist, and shipboard counterterrorism instructor and co-author of The Complete Idiot's Guide to Pirates. Be the first to read W. Thomas Smith Jr's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox. Sign up today!

{A 2015 article updated from the Webnode site and republished here in honor of God,and remembrance of the marvelous victory he provided for America to be an independent self governing nation. .- ED}





]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1349064 2018-11-30T18:42:00Z 2018-11-30T18:42:11Z Brig. Gen.: Trump’s Right, Ex-Communist Brennan Is Threat, Needed to Be Stripped


There was a great outcry among Democrats and their liberal media allies on Wednesday when it was announced that President Donald Trump had revoked the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan.

Brennan, who now works as a paid analyst for NBC and MSNBC, has been a harsh critic of the president and has even accused him of committing “treason” against America. That’s an ironic accusation, given the strong suspicion that Brennan was thoroughly involved in what appears to be a “treasonous” scheme by the Obama administration to spy on, undermine and ultimately overthrow the Trump campaign-turned-presidency.

Nevertheless, while the left wails about Brennan’s loss of a security clearance — which has absolutely nothing to do with his “freedom of speech,” and only affects his freedom to leak classified materials — there are plenty who support the move that strips Brennan of his access to sensitive information.

The Independent Journal Review noted that one individual who supported the move was author and retired Army Brig. Gen. Anthony Tata, who explained why Brennan was a “clear and present danger” who never should have been granted a security clearance to begin with.

“I think it’s the right move by the president. Communist John Brennan never should’ve had a security clearance,” Tata stated on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday.

Co-host Brian Kilmeade interjected that Brennan had admitted in the past that he voted for a Communist Party USA candidate in the 1976 presidential election.

“And he supported that way of life,” Tata stated. “And the president made the right decision in revoking his security clearance.”

But Tata wasn’t just talking about Brennan’s politics from decades ago.

“You look at what he did in his official capacity … he oversaw the Iran deal and all of the intelligence, he manipulated (Islamic State group) intelligence for President Obama, he was part of the Russian hacking, he was standing down the cyber team to allow the Russia hacking in 2016,” Tata said.

“He had a secret meeting in March of 2016 with Russia. He flew to Moscow, and so there is a lot of evidence here. He met with Harry Reid and gave him parts of the unverified, Clinton paid-for dossier,” he continued.

Kilmeade interjected again to point out that Reid had stated the impression he received along with the dossier was “go and announce this,” implying that Brennan had utilized Reid to get the unverified dossier out into the public domain.

“And then he spied on American citizens and lied in front of Congress about that spying. And question 29 on the security clearance form says ‘have you ever supported overthrowing the U.S. government’ — all you gotta do is look at Brennan’s tweets and he supports the removal of this president, and right there that’s enough evidence to get rid of his clearance,” Tata declared.

IJR reported that Tata added, “I think that John Brennan is a clear and present danger and a threat to this nation.”

The general made a rather compelling case for why Brennan should have been stripped of his security clearance, a case echoed by the official White House statement read by press secretary Sarah Sanders about the matter, in which she stated that Brennan “has a history that calls into question his objectivity and credibility.”

While Brennan’s loss of security clearance may indeed be “unprecdented,” as the media made abundantly clear in their lamentations, that is true only insofar as he appears to be the first former CIA director to have involved himself in an equally “unprecedented” conspiracy to undermine and overthrow a duly elected president.

As was also made clear by the White House on Wednesday, Brennan may be the first high-level former Obama official to be stripped of his security clearance, but he likely won’t be the last.

Sanders included a list of other Obama administration officials who still retain security clearances, but whose credentials are “under review.”

That means they’re also at risk of being stripped of their clearances soon. And good riddance, truth be told. It’s about time.


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1347707 2018-11-26T19:23:00Z 2018-11-26T19:22:50Z Judges Shut Down Professors’ Attack on the Second Amendment

By Kara Pendleton


An effort to stop Texans from legally carrying handguns on university campuses has failed. What some would call a twisted interpretation of the Constitution by three University of Texas at Austin professors was soundly shut down Thursday by a panel of three federal judges.

The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges determined the professors’ claim that the campus carry law infringes upon their First, Second and 14th Amendment rights was invalid.

The claims made by the professors in their lawsuit filed two years ago may leave some people scratching their heads. The reason may be found in a review of the facts. The full ruling of the judges may be viewed online. Here is the basic breakdown, one amendment at a time:

How does campus carry infringe upon the First Amendment? According to professors Mia Carter, Jennifer Glass and Lisa Moore, students and professors might be too afraid to discuss controversial topics in the classroom when someone in the room might be armed without their knowledge.

“Compelling professors at a public university to allow, without any limitation or restriction, students to carry concealed guns in their classrooms chills their First Amendment rights to academic freedom,” the lawsuit said, according to The Texas Tribune.

The appeals court panel affirmed the dismissal of all claims by a district court judge. In the matter of the First Amendment, the district court judge had ruled that the plaintiffs “cannot manufacture standing by self-censoring her speech based on what she alleges to be a reasonable probability that concealed-carry license holders will intimidate professors and students in the classroom.”

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs claimed that the campus carry law did not meet the “well-regulated” part of the Second Amendment. The judges called that spin on the amendment “admittedly fresh” but “invalid.”

This brings us to the 14th Amendment, which is not part of the Bill of Rights, as the prior two are. This amendment deals with citizenship and the rights of American citizens:

So how on earth does a student opting to carry a means of self-defense on campus infringe upon someone else’s citizenship or rights under the 14th Amendment? Hand on tight. It’s a doozy of an explanation.

The professors claimed in their lawsuit that campus carry violated the amendment because “the university lacks a rational basis for determining where students can or cannot concealed-carry handguns on campus.”

The federal judges shot that down as well, saying that Glass “ultimately fails to address Texas’s arguments concerning rational basis. Instead she simply argues that the prohibited concealed-carry zones are an ‘inexplicable hodge-podge.'”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton applauded the decision in a statement Thursday.

“The lawsuit was filed because the professors disagreed with the law, not because they had any legal substance to their claim,” Paxton said. “The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed for all Americans, including college students, and the 5th Circuit’s decision prevents that right from being stripped away by three individuals who oppose the law enacted by the Legislature.”

The case might not be over, yet. The professors can fight this ruling by asking for a “full appeals court” hearing or, within 90 days, opt to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Their attorney, Renea Hicks, told The Dallas Morning News he doesn’t expect they’ll ask the appeals court to rehear their case.

“I’m doubtful that there’ll be a request for en banc review,” Hicks said. “As to asking for [Supreme Court] review, that’s something we’ll just have to discuss amongst ourselves when we all can coordinate schedules and sit down and meet.”


]]>
tag:newpatriotsblog.com,2013:Post/1345841 2018-11-20T19:45:00Z 2018-11-20T18:12:00Z CNN and Other Leftist Outlets Accused of Planning to Smear Manafort Jury

by Cillian Zeal


The Paul Manafort case is now in the hands of the jury — and, if the people at CNN and other leftist news outlets have anything to do with it, that jury could be facing some serious intimidation.

According to Breitbart, CNN and six other news outlets have sued to obtain the personal details of the individuals who will judge the merits of the government’s case against the former Trump campaign manager.

Along with CNN, BuzzFeed, Politico, The New York Times, NBC and The Associated Press have filed a suit requesting the details of the jurors, including their names and home addresses.

Breitbart described the suit as “a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.”

Writing at The Federalist, Bre Payton noted that the request by CNN and other left-leaning outfits suggested there was more going on that simple journalistic pursuit of information.

“Publicly outing the names and home addresses of jurors is considered ethically questionable, as outlined in this guidance sheet on the topic from the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press,” Bre Payton noted at The Federalist.

This is doubly troubling when you take into account the fact that the judge in the case says he’s received threats due to his role in adjudicating the matter.

In rejecting the motion put forth by the news organizations, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said that he’s currently being trailed by U.S. Marshals because of the threats made against him, according to Fox News.

“I can tell you there have been (threats), Ellis said, adding that “The Marshals go where I go.”

“I don’t feel right if I release (the jurors) names,” he concluded. That would be bad enough, but CNN in particular has a long history of intimidating people that cross them. Last year, they threatened to dox an individual who created an anti-CNN .gif meme.  According to Breitbart, the network also doxxed an elderly Trump supporter who had promoted a pro-Trump event that may have been set up by Russians, leading to harassment and threatening.  And then there’s the time, as RealClear Politics reported, that the network gave out George Zimmerman’s Social Security number. We could go on and on.

With that kind of history in mind, CNN’s request to the court looks less like an act of journalists seeking information than it does the groundwork of a plan to attack the Manafort jury if it comes back with a verdict the media doesn’t like.

And then there’s the time, as RealClear Politics reported, that the network gave out George Zimmerman’s Social Security number. We could go on and on.

With that kind of history in mind, CNN’s request to the court looks less like an act of journalists seeking information than it does the groundwork of a plan to attack the Manafort jury if it comes back with a verdict the media doesn’t like.

This is an absolutely farcical request that serves no legitimate journalistic purposes. It’s doxxing, plain and simple.

These jurors don’t deserve this. CNN shouldn’t be putting their thumbs on the scales of justice.,



]]>