#SOTU: Trump’s Four Pillars of Immigration has a Fatal Flaw

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

President Trump at the State of the Union Address on January 30 2018

President Trump’s State of the Union Address was inspiring and frankly, the best I have ever seen. The entire speech was moving, and President Trump inspired the country and the world. The vast majority of the Democrats exposed themselves as petty and ridiculous.

President Trump, however, has doubled down on his insistence that there be a “path to citizenship” for the 1.8 million illegal immigrants that would be eligible for DACA as it stands, not just those who have signed up. President Trump did not mention the fate of the parents of the young illegal immigrants, who presumably would get to stay under his proposal.

As has been documented repeatedly at TrevorLoudon.com, Democrats do not care about illegal immigrants as individual human beings, but they care very much about their vote. Trevor Loudon, therefore, describes illegal immigration as “the greatest security threat we face.”

Here is a transcript from last night’s address about illegal immigration:

Over the next few weeks, the House and Senate will be voting on an immigration reform package.

In recent months, my Administration has met extensively with both Democrats and Republicans to craft a bipartisan approach to immigration reform. Based on these discussions, we presented the Congress with a detailed proposal that should be supported by both parties as a fair compromise — one where nobody gets everything they want, but where our country gets the critical reforms it needs.

Here are the four pillars of our plan:

The first pillar of our framework generously offers a path to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants who were brought here by their parents at a young age — that covers almost three times more people than the previous administration. Under our plan, those who meet education and work requirements, and show good moral character, will be able to become full citizens of the United States.

The second pillar fully secures the border. That means building a wall on the Southern border, and it means hiring more heroes like CJ to keep our communities safe. Crucially, our plan closes the terrible loopholes exploited by criminals and terrorists to enter our country — and it finally ends the dangerous practice of “catch and release.”

The third pillar ends the visa lottery — a program that randomly hands out green cards without any regard for skill, merit, or the safety of our people. It is time to begin moving towards a merit-based immigration system — one that admits people who are skilled, who want to work, who will contribute to our society, and who will love and respect our country.

The fourth and final pillar protects the nuclear family by ending chain migration. Under the current broken system, a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives. Under our plan, we focus on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children. This vital reform is necessary, not just for our economy, but for our security, and our future.

In recent weeks, two terrorist attacks in New York were made possible by the visa lottery and chain migration. In the age of terrorism, these programs present risks we can no longer afford.
It is time to reform these outdated immigration rules, and finally bring our immigration system into the 21st century.

These four pillars represent a down-the-middle compromise, and one that will create a safe, modern, and lawful immigration system.

Watch the SOTU HERE and give one of our favorite Facebook pages a “like”:

Here is a short clip of Trevor Loudon’s hard-hitting documentary, the Enemies Within which explains how the radical left exploits illegal immigrants to get their votes.

Using their own words, Loudon compiled a montage of the most dedicated DACA activists such as Rep. Luis Gutiérrez and former Obama advisor Eliseo Medina.

Speaking of Latino voters, Medina said:

“…when they voted in November, they voted overwhelmingly for progressive candidates. Barack Obama got two out of every three voters that showed up


“We reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters”. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three?

If we have eight million new voters who care about …… and will be voting. We will be creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle…


Watch and circulate Trevor Loudon’s shocking documentary The Enemies Within as widely as you can before November 2018. It is a vote changing experience.


Read more:


Why and how we must fight to subdue FacebookGoogleTwitter

By: Oleg Atbashian | The People’s Cube
First Published in FrontPage Mag

Just last week I read a story by John Hawkins, How Conservatives Are Being Destroyed by Facebook, Twitter and Google Without Even Realizing It, where the author announced that he’d been forced to shut down his Right Wing News website and explained that in today’s social media environment, a conservative’s chances to get a political website off the ground are infinitesimal.

Then I read a story on The Daily Caller about Google having an actual secret speech police that blocks, demonetizes, and otherwise censors conservative content.

Then I received a screenshot from one of my readers, who is a U.S. Army officer, showing that my People’s Cube has been blocked by the DoD Enterprise-Level Protection System – not because of our silly anti-Left humor, but because of “hate and racism” – a blatantly false label, probably transferred from one of the blacklists shared by social media and the government (or at least the Deep State part of it). I’ve recently written about it in FrontPage Mag.

And just this morning, I received dozens of messages from my readers that Facebook wasn’t allowing them to post or share any People’s Cube links.

Different people, posting different links throughout the day, received this standard response: “We removed this post because it looks like spam and doesn’t follow our Community Standards.” The user has an option to contest this assumption. Not everyone has the time or patience for it, but a few readers persisted and sent me the screenshots.

At some point in the past Facebook had also started to limit the number of shares on our posts, explaining it by a new proportional algorithm. As a result, our traffic had dropped significantly. Many people have told me that, even though they “follow” our Facebook page, they never receive updates (but some still do). And now this.

One could say, “Forget FacebookGoogleTwitter, we shouldn’t have to rely on them anyway.” In an ideal world, maybe. But in this world, it’s the same as saying “We don’t need Amtrak to take a train to another city” when we know that Amtrak has replaced all other intercity train operators.

Back in 2005, when I started the People’s Cube, there existed a wide variety of online communities and forums where people shared links and gave us traffic, and we responded in kind. Now that variety has been almost entirely replaced by FacebookGoogleTwitter.

Why we must stop them

Visualize a field with blooming wild flowers; it seems to be endless. This is a national preserve, which means it’s public property and everyone is allowed to go there for a walk, pick flowers, or house a beehive and make honey. There is a great diversity of native plants of all colors, with bees and other small creatures flying from flower to flower, feeding on the nectar and transporting the pollen.

Now imagine that a young scientist makes an accidental discovery and creates a genetically modified blue flower that is stronger, healthier, and yields more nectar, allowing bees to make tastier honey. The seeds get thrown into the field and since the new plant has superior qualities, it soon outcompetes and replaces all other plants. Slowly but surely, the previous natural diversity is supplanted with a genetically modified monoculture. Some people sound an alarm, but they are told not to worry because it’s all for the common good. The bees are still thriving and the field is still blooming, except that now it’s all blue.

A few years go by. Suddenly people begin to notice that the blue flowers prefer some bees over others. They investigate and discover that the young scientist, who now runs a big company, has colluded with a honey-making conglomerate (identified by the letter “D”) and added another genetic modification to his blue flowers so they would only feed the D-bees and repel the competitors’ bees. The field is now surrounded with sleek billboards that promote the D-conglomerate as the only worthy maker of honey, and disparage the competition as the makers of poison. Independent beekeepers suffer losses and many go out of business.

People realize they’ve been duped. They miss the variety of choices that came with competition and freedom. They’d like to bring the original scents and colors back, but the blue monoculture won’t allow anything else to grow in its midst. Uprooting the entire new species would destroy the field and disrupt the wildlife that now lives in a symbiotic relationship with the blue flowers. And most of the previously thriving plants are extinct anyway, with the rest having mutated to survive on the preserves’ edges.

People petition the scientist-turned-businessman to stop colluding with the D-conglomerate and to re-engineer the blue flower so it can coexist with other plants and bees. He responds through his lawyers that his private company has a right to make its own rules, he can associate with whomever he wants, and everyone is absolutely free not to use his services.

He is correct on all counts, except that he doesn’t own the field. He has every right to compete and win, but not the right to use underhanded trickery in order to limit people’s equal access and choices.

If a contractor moved into a village and built superior houses for every family, people would be very grateful. But if they were to find out that at some point he started injecting chemicals into the walls so as to modify people’s behavior to his liking, that contractor would’ve been tarred and feathered. The FacebookGoogleTwitter situation is similar, minus the pitchforks and torches.

The idea that “we don’t need FacebookGoogleTwitter to drive traffic” is silly because FacebookGoogleTwitter has already replaced most pre-existing sources of Internet traffic, just like the blue monoculture has replaced all other flowers, and the new tainted housing has replaced the old one. There’s very little left on the Internet that is not in some way connected to these media giants. Unless something even more superior comes along very soon, which seems unlikely, we are stuck with FacebookGoogleTwitter.

Forcing them to change their manipulative ways may be difficult, but not impossible. We just need to make them an offer they can’t refuse. I’m not a fan of regulating businesses, but if something was bent by force, it requires force to unbend it, so please hear me out.

How we can fight and win

We use the internet to obtain and share information. But what is information? Is it a tool, a commodity, a weapon, a toy, a luxury item, or a basic necessity? It is all of the above and more.

Essential human needs result in the existence of products of dual nature and value. For example, a house can be a commercial product bought and sold on the market, but its other value is that of a family dwelling where children grow up and create their first impressions about the world – a home that becomes an inseparable part of their lives. That’s why “primary residence” has a different status from other houses you may own; the latter are valued only as financial assets. This also explains why taking away a family house or kicking out a tenant for nonpayment is legally more complicated than repossessing a car, a boat, or any other nonessential commercial product.

A similar duality exists in healthcare, which can be a commercial service provided to a customer at market prices, but it can also be a matter of life and death, essential to our wellbeing and quality of life. This is why healthcare is regulated more than any other commercial service and often must be provided regardless of the patient’s ability to pay for it in the emergency room.

Other examples of such duality include food, pharmaceuticals, and education – all having simultaneously a commercial and an existential value. But we somehow rarely think the same way about information, and that is to our detriment.

Throughout history, the human mind has been our main tool of survival. To live, we depend on accurate information about our surroundings. This makes the objective truth a basic human need. Truthful information is as essential to our existence as food, shelter, and clothing. In societies where information is distorted and suppressed by totalitarian governments, people usually die in large numbers.

But information can also be a commercial product, bought and sold at market prices by specialized organizations that have amassed great fortunes in doing so. Good for them. However, as the historian Robert Conquest pointed out, “Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.” And the Left by default is prone to manipulate information in a way that suits its agenda at the expense of the general population.

Leftists in the government are obsessed with regulating all products and services, essential or not. They’d like to regulate information as well – see the Fairness Doctrine and Net Neutrality. Conservatives have always instinctively opposed that trend, guided by the principle, “Whatever the Left does, we must do the opposite.” This kneejerk impulse to take the “diametrically opposite position” has often allowed the Left to toy with conservatives and lure them into absurd situations where they fought phantom causes. In part, due to such “diametrical” thinking, the anti-regulation conservatives withdrew themselves from the regulatory process, effectively giving the Left free reign in shaping government regulations.

Enter Donald J. Trump. Right off the bat he introduces what I call “perpendicular thinking,”meaning that instead of jumping to the opposite, he goes vaguely perpendicular. This disorients the Left (as well as some anti-Trump “diametrical” conservatives), forcing them to take unpopular and ridiculous positions on the opposite side of his choosing. And while Trump is beating the Left at their own game, keeping them confused and unable to deal with their new role of the “diametrical opposition,” we should move in and do some “perpendicular” regulation.

Let’s agree for the sake of argument that information, having the dual commercial and existential value, must be regulated the same way we regulate other dual-value products like food, housing, or healthcare.

Emergency rooms are required to accept all patients regardless of their income. Housing regulations require landlords, realtors, and mortgage bankers to serve all customers equally, even if it goes against their subjective judgment. Food companies are required to label their products with precise quantities and daily values of ingredients.

At the same time, the product called “information” is regulated in the exactly opposite fashion. It is being filtered, altered, rejected, or exaggerated according to arbitrary and subjective markers and biases, creating a distorted and fraudulent picture of reality. If a food manufacturer tried to label his products the same way, he would be sued out of existence. Imagine buying fruit juice labeled with 0% sugar instead of the actual 100% and 100% of vitamin C instead of the actual 0%.

This clearly falls into the jurisdiction of the newly reformed Bureau of Consumer Protection, whose stated goal is to stop unfair, deceptive and fraudulent business practices by:

  • collecting complaints and conducting investigations
  • suing companies and people that break the law
  • developing rules to maintain a fair marketplace
  • educating consumers and businesses about their rights and responsibilities.

Some have proposed to regulate the Internet through the FCC, but that is fraught with equating the web with a public utility, which is subject to government rationing of free speech – a pitfall avoided by the recent repeal of Net Neutrality.

In contrast, the Bureau of Consumer Protection would treat the Internet as a marketplace for commercial products, one of which is information. Instead of regulating free speech, it would protect consumers against fraud.

On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered unconstitutional any restriction of speech based on the so-called “hate speech” allegations, unanimously reaffirming that there is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment. Justice Anthony Kennedy explains this decision as follows:

A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

And yet, the unconstitutional and deceptively named “hate speech” gimmick is being excessively used to suppress conservative and libertarian speech by social media moderators and by algorithms embedded in FacebookGoogleTwitter code. The same gimmick is also being widely used today by speech police in many organizations, including educational and government entities, in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Media giants may beg to differ and remind us of their status as private companies that can make their own internal rules. But if their main product is information, which has an existential value to our society, they can no more hide behind their private status than the landlords or mortgage bankers can.

That means that FacebookGoogleTwitter and other media giants can be forced by law to discard their manipulative “hate speech” and other ideological filters and to allow a free flow of information lest they be sued by the Bureau of Consumer Protection for violating consumer rights. Wikipedia can be sued for its grotesquely biased suppression and misrepresentation of political reality, which creates a very skewed image of the world. For added entertainment value, CNN with its “Facts First” brand campaign can probably also be sued for false advertisement.

Unhinged hateful rhetoric coming from the Left never gets to be branded “hate speech,” nor is it ever blocked on social media. This alone makes the “hate speech” label meaningless and exposes the one-sided ideological agenda behind it. Of course, no logical argument will ever convince the leftist agenda-driven “hate speech police” to give up their dominance over the national debate voluntarily. Instead, this unethical practice must be outlawed legislatively, as an unconstitutional impediment to free exchange of information.

If we outlaw the corrupt system of “hate speech” policing, it will do a lot more than just free up the Internet and the rest of the media. It will pull the rug from under various demagogues who profit from the harassment of conservatives. It will clear many honest people of libelous allegations. It will demolish the sordid cottage industry of “hate speech watchers,” like the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose fundraising is directly proportional to how many honorable people they can defame as “haters” and who compile dubious blacklists, which are then used as guidance by FacebookGoogleTwitter and the mainstream media to silence or disparage conservative figures.

Social media should certainly continue to block real spam and clickbait sites with fake news (they do exist). The trick is that online reprobates aren’t likely to file a complaint and seek government protection from being blocked – unlike legitimate content providers who can and should request an investigation if they are being suppressed. Terrorist messaging can be dealt with by working with law enforcement professionals, not with SPLC and similar amateurs who have a shady agenda.

Before conservatives are erased from the Internet, legal minds in the conservative movement had better select an appropriate case of content suppression and stage an exemplary class action lawsuit that would create a seminal precedent for all future cases. If no legal ground for such a lawsuit exists, we must work with our legislators to create it.

The Left has been using such legal tactics and winning the culture wars ever since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial – an orchestrated court drama which was later mythologized by Hollywood in Inherit The Wind.

Conservatives who are philosophically opposed to regulation may not like this method, but realistically and objectively, this seems to be the least worst solution to get out of the memory hole designated for us by the leftist media giants.

People on our side should stop pretending that we are not in the middle of an all-out war waged by the Left against conservative media. We won’t survive if we continue to react to leftist attacks by lying down and taking positions whose only value is in being diametrically opposite to those of the attackers. It’s time we went perpendicular.


Bond Market Inspired Equity Sell-Off

By: Kent Engelke | Capitol Securities

Equities fell again as the yield on the 10-year Treasury is near April 2014 highs. A catalyst for the continual selloff in the 10-year is stronger than expected growth. The Euro-zone growth rate was the greatest in 17 years. I would argue this strength is the result of surging American imports.

Cynically writing, if globalism and interdependency is as great as many pundits suggest, then why is growth surging in the demise of globalism and the return back to economic nationalism?

The question at hand is will the return of economic nationalism stoke inflationary pressures? I ask a different question. Is not the return of inflationary pressures the primary goal of the world’s central bank during the past nine years?

Speaking of the central banks, today the US Federal Reserve will make a policy announcement following the conclusion of a two-day meeting. No change in interest rates is expected, but all will pay close attention to the tenor of the post meeting statement. It is a forgone conclusion the Committee will increase rates in March.

Equities are searching for a catalyst. The catalyst since November has been tax cuts and earnings and a strong case can be made the averages may “buy on rumor and sell on fact” as profit expectations materialize. Unfortunately, the next catalyst may be interest rates and potentially inflationary growth.

At the beginning of the year, the averages had not yet discounted two interest rate increases, much less the three forecasted by the FOMC. Moreover, the talk was about a flattening yield curve, not a steepening.

Speaking of Treasuries, today the Treasury will announce its quarterly refunding announcement. This statistic is quickly becoming a talking point, a statistic that as little as two weeks ago few knew existed. As noted several times, net Treasury issuance is expected to more than double in 2018, rising to over $1.3 trillion, or the greatest amount since 2009, which in itself was a record, the result of the financial crisis.

To remind all, the 20-year average yield for the 10-year treasury is around 3.75%, about 100 bps higher than today’s rate.

What will happen today? President Trump’s SOTU address offered few new clues on policy.

Last night the foreign markets were mixed. London was down 0.07%, Paris was up 0.29% and Frankfurt was up 0.17%. China was down 0.21%, Japan was down 0.83% and Hang Sang was up 0.86%.

The Dow should open modestly higher on earnings, but the gains may be short lived if the Fed announcement is more bearish than expected. The 10-year is up 4/32 to yield 2.71%.


The Search for a Russian Mole

By: Cliff Kincaid

Will the investigation of anti-Trump bias in the FBI turn into something even more ominous? Consider the well-established fact that President Barack Hussein Obama, using a pseudonym, knowingly exchanged emails with Hillary on her private unsecure server. He then lied about it. That’s why Hillary was spared. The FBI spared her to protect him.

The leadership of the FBI knew Obama was a Marxist operative and agent of influence for the world communist and Islamic movements. They knew he had ties to Louis Farrakhan and former Weather Underground terrorists. They also had a 600-page FBI file on Obama’s mentor, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis. It was released to America’s Survival, Inc. in the summer of 2008 and we then made it public. A mentor to Obama for about eight years, he taught Obama to hate white people and admire Red Russia.

Instead of investigating Obama for espionage, the FBI used a dossier based on Russian sources to investigate Trump for supposedly having Russian connections! This fact alone demonstrates the susceptibility of the FBI’s top leadership to Russian disinformation and propaganda operations. The dossier, paid for by the Hillary campaign, was concocted by a former British intelligence agent who was considered a socialist in college. He is now the subject of a criminal complaint for making potentially false statements about the distribution of claims contained in the dossier.

It was a classic Russian maneuver. As the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security explained in a 1967 study on The Techniques of Soviet Propaganda, “Soviet propaganda uses as a fundamental psychological stratagem the ancient and familiar ruse of crying ‘thief’ to divert attention from its own thievery.”

America’s Survival, Inc. presented the evidence of Obama’s service to the Russians at a November 10, 2017, National Press Club conference. As part of the campaign to hold Obama accountable, America’s Survival, Inc. has published the books, Comrade Obama Unmasked and Red Star Rising.

The issue goes beyond FBI misconduct.  We know FBI counterintelligence special agent Robert P. Hanssen was a Soviet/Russian mole inside the bureau. His record of treason spanned 22 years, from 1979 to 2001. The situation was so bad that a Commission for the Review of FBI Security Programs was created in 2001 under the leadership of William H. Webster and issued a report in 2002. As Reed Irvine and I reported at the time:

The Webster report is familiar reading for those acquainted with the disastrous neglect of security during the Clinton administration. The report is a litany of security lapses, vulnerabilities, and bad practices in what is supposed to be the nation’s premier law enforcement, counterespionage and counter terrorism agency. Webster and his panel found an institutional bias against security and a lack of sufficient resources, personnel and management attention, all of which began in the mid-1990s.

Webster found that there were practically no controls on highly sensitive classified documents and that computer systems were absurdly vulnerable to the “insider threat.” FBI agents with access to classified intelligence information were not required to take polygraphs. There is not even a Bureau-wide definition of what constitutes a security violation. No wonder Hanssen was able to give the Russians so much classified information and compromise so many human intelligence sources and intelligence collection programs.

In a follow-up column, “The FBI Protected Russia’s Spy,” we noted evidence that the FBI was informed back in 1990 that Hanssen might be spying for the Soviet Union. Hanssen’s brother-in-law, Mark Wauck, who was also an FBI agent, had told his superiors that he suspected that Hanssen was spying for the Soviets. The FBI did not discover Hanssen’s espionage at the time.  So he continued spying for the Russians for another 11 years.

Hanssen was a top-level FBI Supervisory Special Agent who worked for the Soviet Counterintelligence Division within the Bureau’s New York City office and the Soviet Analytical Unit within the Intelligence Division.  It was a case of a Russian spy being assigned to catch other Russian spies.

Robert S. Mueller, the Russia-gate special counsel, became FBI director after Hanssen was caught. The Inspector General warned Mueller in a report that Hanssen had escaped detection “because of longstanding systemic problems in the FBI’s counterintelligence program and a deeply flawed internal security program.” The Inspector General had recommended a central repository for the receipt, collection, storage, and analysis of derogatory information concerning FBI employees “with access to sensitive information.” Such a repository could help identify security risks and spies.

By 2007, the Inspector General said that Robert Mueller’s FBI had “not yet established” such a repository.

Mueller had issued a statement in 2003 saying he was taking the proposed reforms seriously. It’s clear that Mueller and his successor, James Comey, failed. Otherwise, how could anti-Trump and pro-Hillary FBI operatives such as Lisa Page and Peter Strzok have survived and prospered in the FBI? How could they plot with Andrew McCabe, who has just been removed as FBI deputy director?

Incredibly, Strzok, former chief of the counterespionage section in the FBI, joined the Mueller probe but was eventually let go. However, he still works at the FBI. How and why was he hired by Mueller in the first place? Who recommended him?  Why were Strzok and Page allowed to carry on an adulterous affair while they worked for the FBI? Until we get complete and honest answers, we have to assume the worst – that security risks who may be Russian agents have continued to work inside America’s premier law enforcement agency.

We may be living through an American version of “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy,” the gripping espionage novel by author John le Carré about penetration of British intelligence that was made into a film and had people wondering until the end about the identity of the Russian mole.

FBI Director Christopher Wray will have to clean house – not just of the partisan operatives but the security risks and possible Russian agents. Then the focus can move back to where it belongs — the espionage activities of Hillary Clinton and her boss, Barack Hussein Obama.

What about charging obstruction of justice in this case?


Weekly Featured Profile – Michael Leone


Michael Leone

Michael Leone, is chair of the University of Houston Young Communist League USA and a member of the Communist Party USA.

He has also been active in the Harris County Democratic Socialists – a part of Democratic Socialists of America and the Houston Socialist Movement.

In August 2017, a University of Houston Young Communist League USA flier was pinned to a campus bulletin board. The flier was aimed at building student support against “Trump’s fascist regime” and “terrorist hate groups.”

“We must stand united against Trump’s fascist regime and its Nazi henchmen, affirming that our university is a safe place for people of all ethnic backgrounds and is not safe for racist, terrorist hate groups.”

In October 2017, Michael Leone was a Young Communist League USA delegate to the XIX World Festival of Youth and Students in Sochi, Russia.

Sochi Venue entrance

This international communist gathering of more than 30,000 young people was timed to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution. The festival was personally sponsored and keynoted by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Michael Leone and his American communist friends Al Neal, Chauncey Robinson, Estevan Nembhard, Cameron Orr, Emiliana Sparaco and Yennifer Mateo mixed with young Marxist-Leninists from all over the world.

Michael Leone with North Korean delegate

Russian delegates

The delegates were also treated to an address by the then Communist Party of the Russian Federation leader Gennady Zyuganov.

Russian Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov

(Michael Leone|more…)


MARXIST DEMOCRATS PART 1: Ali Khorasani for U.S. Congress, Texas’ 2nd Congressional District

By: Trevor Loudon | New Zeal

Ali Khorasani

Several hundred communists and socialists will run for public office on the Democratic Party ticket this year. One of them is Houston activist Ali Khorasani, who is vying for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, from Texas’ 2nd Congressional District.

Ali Khorosani describes himself as a “bisexual, biracial biochemist.” Despite the fact that Khorasani is a member of America’s largest Marxist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), he leaves that part out of his campaign website, where he describes himself as a “proud Leftist Progressive with a background in chemistry and engineering.” Khorosani informs potential voters that he has been “passionate about social justice and community engagement throughout my life.” Ali Khorasani also reveals that he was selected as the “Peer Minister for Ecumenical and Interreligious Life” at St. Edward’s University and was a part of former President Obama’s “Interfaith Challenge.”

Khorasani is one of four 2018 candidates endorsed by Houston Democratic Socialists of America. Three of the endorsees are card-carrying DSA members: Franklin Bynum, candidate for Harris County Criminal Court #8; Danny Norris, for Harris County Department of Education Board of Trustees, and Khorasani himself.

Ali Khorasani supports the Maoist-led Black Lives Matter movement.

Ali Khorosani (left) with Black Lives Matter Houston Founder “Ashton P. Woods

Houston DSA has some cross-membership with the Houston branch of the Communist Party USA. For instance Houston Communist Party leader Bernard Sampson is also active in DSA and serves as a local Democratic Party Precinct chair. Ali Khorasani also appears to have a foot in all three camps.

Here are photos of Khorasani with Houston Communist Party leader Bernard Sampson and Chicago Communist Party veteran Bea Lumpkin:

Ali Khorasani with Houston Communist Party leader Bernard Sampson, 2017.

Ali Khorasani, Bea Lumpkin, Chicago Communist Party veteran. Unity Center Houston, November 2017.

Running in an open seat vacated by retiring Republican Ted Poe, against four other Democrats in the primary, Ali Khorasani would normally be considered a long shot. However, he will have the backing of several hundred East Texas DSAers, Communist Party members and young Democrats in the primary. If Ali Khorasani wins, he will have 30,000 DSA members nationwide on his team and whispering in his ear.

This candidacy should not be under-estimated. In recent months DSA has elected more than 20 members and allies to office, including DSA comrade Lee Carter to the Virginia Assembly and DSA ally Randall Woodfin to the mayoralty of Birmingham Alabama. They are now running several Congressional candidates, as well as at least two state gubernatorial campaigns – mostly as Democrats.

The writers at Act Blue appear to be encouraged by Ali Khorasani’s progress:

2017 was a very rewarding year for our campaign. A progressive millennial scientist with zero political experience (and our awesome team of supporters) have changed the status quo of politics by promoting a bold progressive message for District 2. We appeared at the Medicare for All Town Hall, various marches and rallies, the Big Hearted Texas candidate forum, and several other political events. We were second in the Democratic primary for fundraising with an average contribution of $11, and we made it to Position 2 on the Harris County Primary ballot.

Ali Khorasani is a crypto-communist running as a Democrat. His campaign is deceptive in nature and needs to be exposed. Please help spread this information throughout Texas District 2, and beyond.

Watch and circulate Trevor Loudon’s shocking documentary  The Enemies Within as widely as you can before November 2018. It is a vote changing experience.


Read more:


This Could Be A Significant Week

By: Kent Engelke | Capitol Securities

For the first time since 2014, the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury is topping 2.7%. The selloff less than a month into 2018 has sparked many calls of a prolonged bear market.

The last time the 10-year yielded three percent was at the end of 2013 and when the Federal Reserve made its movements shift to QE tapering, only later to end up increasing QE which in turn caused the 10-year yield to drop in yield by almost half in about 13 months.

This week, I think the Treasury selloff could either accelerate or abate. As noted yesterday, President Trump gives his first State of the Union Address tonight. Typically, Treasuries sell off following the address given the speech is historically filled with increased government spending.

Later in the week is when the FOMC releases it latest policy decision. No change in policy is expected, but all think the post meeting statement will include a rate hike that is imminent in March.

And then there is Friday’s jobs data. What will the statistics suggest?

Finally, the Treasury announces its quarterly refunding plans. As noted many times, net Treasury issuance is expected to top $1.3 trillion, the greatest amount since 2009.

I can argue that if all the above indicates strength, a 3% 10-year Treasury yield is all but assured.

Historically, bond and equity prices move in tandem, defined as lower bond prices typically dictate lower equity prices. I do not think that it is different this time.

This week is also a significant week for earnings. The top technology, drug and energy companies will post results. Commenting about energy, the discount between crude and the price of energy equities is at an all-time record according to Merrill Lynch. In the same vein, but on the opposite end of the spectrum, technology valuations are near or at record levels.

Is a change about to occur?

As noted, this can indeed be a significant week.

Last night, the foreign markets were down. London was down 0.68%, Paris was down 0.48% and Frankfurt was down 0.59%. China was down 0.53%, Japan was down 1.42% and Hang Sang was down 1.09%.

The Dow should open moderately lower as the global selloff in sovereign debt is accelerating, a selloff predicated upon growth stronger than expected. Maybe dogs still chase cats and cats still eat birds as the millennial old relationship between Treasury and equity prices is still valid. The 10-year is off 5/32 to yield 2.71%.


FBI Releases Documentation Stating RT Founder Beat Himself To Death In His Hotel Room

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Back in November of 2015, I wrote about the founder of RT dropping dead of a heart attack in DC. I didn’t buy it and I still don’t. And it looks like my gut was right again. The FBI just released the results of their investigation into the matter and they caused me to actually laugh out loud yesterday. They wonder why no one believes anything coming out of the FBI these days. This is why. The media mogul and founder of RT allegedly beat himself to death by repeatedly smashing his head and upper body into the ground. Excuse me? That’s a far cry from a heart attack, which was their official cause of death… until it wasn’t.

Let me tell you a little story. This reminds me of the time in Vegas where a mob guy that I was acquainted with, drove his Ferrari into the desert. He got out and took all his clothes off and then folded them neatly on the seat. He proceeded to handcuff his own hands behind his back, walk himself out into the desert and shoot himself in the back of the head. True story. I kid you not… that’s what the authorities claimed at the time. I believe that story just about as much as the RT guy literally beating himself to death by smashing his head on the ground. Give me a freaking break.

Medical examiners in DC say Mikhail Lesin, a former aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, was killed by blunt force trauma. Gee, what do you wanna bet Putin had him offed? It was meant to send a message and it wasn’t one of ours that did it. The police are still investigating it, but won’t call it a criminal act. Not yet… well over a year after the fact. That’s insane.

In November of 2015, the Free Thought Project reported that Mikhail Lesin, the former head of media affairs for the Russian government, and the founder of Russia Today (RT), was found dead in the hotel room that he was staying at in Washington, DC. The official line was heart attack, but the guy was pretty young and it just didn’t pass the sniff test. The documents the FBI just released are of course heavily redacted, so they tell you pretty much squat. The investigation ended in October of 2016. Why did it take well over a year to come to this conclusion? Why the lies? Why the cover-up?

The District of Colombia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) and Metropolitan Police Department said that “blunt force injuries of the neck, torso, upper extremities and lower extremities” contributed to Lesin’s death. There’s no way this guy did that to himself. “The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) has released the cause and manner of death for Mikhail Lesin… Cause of Death: blunt force injuries of the head,” the statement said. “Mr. Lesin died as a result of blunt for injuries to his head, with contributing causes being blunt force injuries of the neck, torso, upper extremities, and lower extremities, which were induced by falls, with acute ethanol intoxication,” the report states. So, he got drunk and beat himself to death by falling down? You are kidding right? Anyone else have a huge problem with this? Bueller?

And careful of the media here… Zero Hedge is blaming the US and not the Russians. Both are to blame and you can bet Putin is behind this death. If the CIA or NSA had been behind it, the guy would have disappeared. Something is very, very wrong with this case. “Based on the evidence, including video footage and witness interviews, Mr. Lesin entered his hotel room on the morning of Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2015, after days of excessive consumption of alcohol and sustained the injuries that resulted in his death while alone in his hotel room,” the US attorney for the District of Columbia said in a statement. Right.

RT is the propaganda arm for the Russians. Lesin had fallen out of favor with Putin shortly before his untimely death. He had diplomatic and asylum status and no one will talk about why he was really here. According to the NY Times, until late 2014, Lesin ran the media wing of the state’s energy giant, Gazprom, before stepping down or, more likely, being forced out. He ended up in the United States, where he and his family owned properties in Los Angeles said to be worth far more than the salary of the former government minister. I figured he was in it with Putin and the Russian mob, which would explain a lot here.

Some US Senators, including Roger Wicker of Mississippi, had called for the Department of Justice to open an investigation into Lesin’s finances prior to his death. I think that is an excellent idea and prudent considering his early demise. “That a Russian public servant could have amassed the considerable funds required to acquire and maintain these assets in Europe and the United States raises serious questions,” Wicker said. I agree.

The original announcement of the heart attack back in November 2015 makes this case all the more ominous considering the fact that the medical examiner’s office also said Lesin’s body had blunt force trauma to the neck, torso, arms and legs too. How did authorities overlook his wounds? Or did they just not divulge them?

As RT reports, Lesin was considered one of the most influential figures in the Russian media landscape. A graduate of Moscow State University with a degree in Civil Engineering, he served as Minister of Press and Mass Media from 1999 to 2004. He was also a presidential media adviser from 2004 to 2009. Lesin became chief executive officer at Garprom-Media in 2013 and remained in the position until early 2015. I have no problem believing that Putin offed him… what I have an issue with is why our government is covering it up.


Was Fourth Quarter GDP Softer Than Expected?

By: Kent Engelke | Capitol Securities

The headline number for fourth quarter GDP disappointed. The economy expanded by 2.6% as opposed to the 3.0% expected rate. The reason for the shortfall was a huge drag from inventories and trade. Final sales to domestic purchasers, which exclude trade, grew by 4.3%, the fastest pace in over three years.

Consumption growth was close to 4.0%, while fixed investment rose by almost double, helped by another double digit gain in equipment investment.

Inventories subtracted about 0.7% versus an expected gain of 0.2%. This can be interpreted as bullish. Stores were depleted not increased, thus suggesting production will have to accelerate in the coming months to replace spent stores.

Regarding trade, net exports were also a big drag on growth as a 6.9% rise in net exports was overwhelmed by a 13.9% surge in imports. As stated Friday, global growth is surging and a strong argument can be made it is the US that is the proverbial engine of this global growth.

It must be remembered that trade and inventories are volatile and historically are revised in the coming months.

In my view, the data does little to challenge the underlying strength of the economy, growth that should accelerate as tax cuts and bank reform begin to positively impact the economy.

Changing topics, President Trump addressed Davos. In many regards it was a nonevent.

Commenting about the markets, the dollar resumed its decline, oil rose again and stocks were higher because of earnings. Treasuries also rose in yield with the 2-year Treasury rising to a 2.12% yield, or the highest yield in 9 years.

What will happen this week? Earnings reports will continue to accelerate including releases from the largest technology companies. There is also a Fed meeting where no change in interest rates are expected. And then there is the State of the Union address (SOTU). How will it be received?

Last night the foreign markets were mixed. London was up 0.21%, Paris was up 0.07% and Frankfurt was down 0.03%. China was down 1.56%, Japan was down 0.01% and Hang Sang was down 0.56%.

The Dow should open moderately lower as the bond market is selling off again partially upon the BOJ’s comments that inflation is “hardening.” The 10-year is off 15/32 to yield 2.72%.


NY, Anti-Trump Activists Hold Their Own SOTU Event

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

It is called ‘People’s State of the Union’ and the location is Town Hall in Manhattan. You need to buy tickets as they are $47.00.

Will Hillary be there as she too is leading the #Resist movement?

So, MoveOn.org is leading this event and has mobilized some top liberals that include Michael Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Alyssa Milano, Rosie Perez and of course Whoopi Goldberg.

Additionally, the unions are part of this event, flanked by the Women’s March movement and Planned Parenthood.

The Washington Times includes:

Progressive groups We Stand United, MoveOn.org Political Action and Stand Up America are hosting an alternative to the State of the Union aimed at bringing celebrity activists together. The event, which will take place on Monday (one day prior to Mr. Trump’s speech), has attracted a wide range of industry professionals.

“In essence, it’s a better reflection of our state of the union based on a more populist point of view, based on the people’s point of view,” actor Mark Ruffalo told People magazine on Thursday. “I think it’s important because we have a president who has a difficult time with the truth, who has a radical, divisive agenda, and spends an enormous amount of time focusing on the negative and hopelessness and despair.”

“We want to celebrate this moment that we’re in of what is now probably one of the most influential and powerful and really beautiful movements to come into play in the United States since the civil rights movement,” Mr. Ruffalo added. “[It’s a] celebration of the power and the beauty of this movement, but also of our accomplishments and to focus on what’s to come in the immediate future. […] It’s the mother of all movements.”

Mr. Trump’s first State of the Union address will begin Tuesday, Jan. 30, from 9 to 10:30 p.m. EST.

*** More? Okay, how about –>

Representatives from United We Dream, the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and other progressive organizations associated with the resistance movement have made plans to attend.

In 2016, Ruffalo was a staunch Bernie Sanders supporter and has a long been associated with liberal causes and movements. The actor has not shied away from controversy in the past. In June of 2017, Ruffalo shared a petition on social media demanding that MSNBC and NBC stop “the white conservative hiring spree.” Link

So, who is this person Julia Walsh, the campaign director for We Stand United? Hah, well Julia is a community organizer, motivational speaker and political strategist who has worked on progressive issues and campaigns since 2001. She has been an activist against fracking and for same sex marriage. She works with the United Nations on climate change and has been working on college campuses across the country getting students to vote for progressive candidates.

Meanwhile, several in congress are not attending the SOTU, while others are going but will wear black. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg will not be attending.

Just after the State of the Union address, the Huffington Post reports:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) is slated to provide her own nationally televised response to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday.

Waters will deliver her remarks on the BET program “Angela Rye’s State of the Union,” according to a report by BuzzFeed News.

Waters’ speech is not part of the Democratic Party’s official response to the president, which is due to be delivered by Rep. Joseph Kennedy III (D-Mass.).

Maxine Waters has been leading the charge to impeach 45…..on what grounds exactly still remains unclear.

This year’s theme is “building a safe, strong, and proud America,” according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters about the speech.

  • It will focus on 5 topics: Jobs/the economy, infrastructure, trade, immigration and national security. The administration official also said Trump will make the case for more bipartisanship in Congress.
  • Trump’s guests will reflect these topics, including people who benefited from tax reform and someone who can put “a face to the opioid crisis,” per the official.