Friday, October 28, 2016


by -

Our immigration policies are not working in America and now Obama wants to bring in 57% more refugees in 2017.

Immigration is a big issue right now in the elections and Obama could be helping Trump when it was announced the White House and the Democrats want to raise the number of imported refugees to 110,000 next year.

The increase is huge.

We brought in 70,000 refugees in 2013, 2014, 2015 and the White House raised the number to 85,000 in 2016.

Now Obama wants to bring the number up to 110,000 in 2017 with most of the refugees coming from Syria.

Obama even took to the airways to urge Americans to accept the Syrian refugees.

Helping refugees is something that we should do, but importing so many people from a place that where core beliefs contradict with Western equality could become very dangerous.

One thing that Republicans must consider is the combination of the increased refugees and the illegal immigrants and the potential threat to the balance of power in America. If amnesty was pushed through, there could be a large amount of newly registered Democrats.

Amnesty could be devastating due to the fact that many live in red states like Texas, but many have also been settled in battleground states.

There have been reports that the government is even paying to relocate many illegals and refugees into the middle of America, the area that normally always goes red in most elections.

If Republicans ever want to keep any power they have, then they cannot allow a broad sweeping Amnesty deal that would make many illegals and refugees citizens of the USA.

Do you think we should bring in 110,000 new refugees next year? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

During the Civil Right’s movement, it was southern Democrats that fought to keep segregation and they will be happy to know it is back.

California State Los Angeles has decided to offer segregated housing for students that are African American.

A liberal university in one of the most liberal states in America is now supporting the idea of segregation.

The irony is incredible.

The housing is roughly 20 units in a larger complex that is just for black students and those that share similar concerns.

We’ll ignore the racist thought that all black people share the same concerns, and focus on the blatant racism to segregate a portion of the population.

Aaron Rodgers, not the football player but a student at Cal State LA said this when asked about the separate housing.

“We don’t want to come off as we are separating ourselves. If you want to live in the black dorms, you shouldn’t have that fixed mindset … ‘Oh, I just want to live the black dorms because I’m black.’ In this whole building, there are other races,”

That should clear it up right? No!

The program is supporting segregation and closed thought.

Universities around the United States are making it harder for people to think freely.

Brown University is even putting tampons in the boys bathrooms, and you know what, that sound about fitting these days.

We fought for civil rights now we are just handing them back over without any thought for the future.

Wake up America before there is nothing left that resemble the principles this country was founded.

What do you think about the segregation? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

Tensions with Russia are heating up and this week they took a very dangerous step in letting us know they are serious.

A Russian fighter jet flew within ten feet of a U.S. Navy spy plane over the Black sea.

The jet carried out a maneuver called an intercept to harass and redirect the spy plane.

An official spoke on the condition of anonymity about the incident and said that the event lasted roughly 19 minutes.

He also said the maneuver was “unsafe and unprofessional”.

This is just the latest in several aggressions toward our military around the world.

Iran has been doing similar maneuvers with boats in the Persian Gulf.

A situation is escalating with Russia that is hard to deny at this point. Every day, it seems like, the government is telling us that Russia is hacking our systems and threatening our elections.

Now they are actually threatening American lives with such reckless and dangerous military actions.

All of this comes on the heels of a rough meeting between Putin and Obama in China for the G20 summit over last week that sparked a lot of comments on Twitter.

Obama and Hillary Clinton designed a new “Russian Reset” back when Obama first took office.

It is safe to say that no matter how much the Democrats try and tie the Russian problems to Donald Trump, they only have themselves to blame.

What do you think about the actions of Russia and the failed “Russian reset”? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
DNC Files

A Russian hacker going by the name of Guicfer 2.0 released ten documents that were stolen from the DNC’s computer system.

The secret documents talk about Trump and how to portray him, have financial records of top donors, and surprisingly “confidential” strategies for Hillary Clinton.

A majority of the files have gone to WikiLeaks and will be published soon, but here is the best of what we know.

After Liberty News Now staff members searched through the secret documents, here are 18 big surprises we found.


by -
secret weapon

This election season has been anything but normal and most if it is due to the baffling rise of Donald Trump. The rise has been so quick that it has taken the GOP establishment completely off guard.

Hillary Clinton has mocked what is happening on the right with Donald Trump and her Republican counterparts, but Trump has a secret weapon.

In the beginning of the race, the GOP almost forced Trump to sign a pledge to support the eventual nominee and not run as a third party candidate. The party didn’t want to fracture, but now that Trump is the one that is winning they are trying to figure out what to do next.

Meanwhile the Dems are laughing the whole time, but if you really look at what is going on, the Democrats are the last ones who should be laughing. Trump’s secret weapon is his appeal to Democrats.

Today he held an event in Chicago, and some of the news coming out of Illinois should scare Hillary worse than her email scandal. There are reports that over 10% of Democrats are going to vote for Trump or have already voted for him in early voting.

What does that mean? Well, Ronald Reagan got 13% of Democrats in Illinois to vote for him in 1980. The growing 10% that Trump holds is the largest number of Dems switching sides since Reagan’s monumental election.

Sure there are Republicans who say they will never vote for Trump, but their support is becoming less and less important. Trump is dominating when it comes to Independents voting and now that a sizeable chunk of Democrats are hoping on board the Trump train, things are looking very different.

Hillary is having a hard time knocking Bernie out of the race and one problem that both of them are facing is the lack of voter turnout. On the other hand, the Republican primaries are breaking records and that is due to Trump.

Trump is bringing new people to vote, capturing independents and now is bringing Democrats across the isle. The possibility of stopping the Trump train is dwindling by the day, and the real question is whether the GOP will honor the same pledge to Trump that they forced him to honor at the beginning of the election.

by -
democrats pay

If there’s a racial wealth gap in this country—well, it looks like Democrats have no one but themselves to blame.

According to an analysis by the New Organizing Institute, minorities working for Democratic political campaigns are paid substantially less than their white counterparts. And, often, they’re given less prestigious jobs.

African-American staffers, in fact, made just 70 cents on the dollar for white employees.

For Latino staffers, the difference was even a little wider: they were only paid 68 cents on the dollar.

In any other election year, this might’ve been swept under the rug. But in 2016, it could be a major disaster for Democrats moving forward.

As race relations become a major issue in the 2016 race—spurred on by brutal riots in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, over the deaths of black civilians at the hands of white cops—Democrats have learned that they’re not immune to protest.

Earlier in 2015, Democratic presidential candidates like Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley saw speeches and panels interrupted by #BlackLivesMatter protesters, who demanded they do more to address racial inequality. O’Malley was even slammed when he dared tell activists that “all lives matter,” not just black ones.

Democrats have long rested on their “demographics as destiny” plan for victory—essentially, winning over minority populations that grow faster than white ones.

But it looks like they might have to start, literally, putting their money where their mouth is if they want to continue to have any sort of legitimacy on race issues in this country.

by -
Clinton Sad

With less than two months until the first Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton’s in deep trouble: she’s trailing Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) in New Hampshire by 14 points.

Sanders, the self-avowed socialist, leads Hillary 56 percent to just 42 percent in the second-in-the-nation primary contest.

Worse for Clinton, just 49 percent of Clinton’s supporters say they are “enthusiastic” about her—while a whopping 76 percent of Sanders’s supporters say they’re enthusiastic.

The enthusiasm gap means that Sanders’s ultimate lead could be even larger than polls suggest—since more excited voters are more likely to go to the polls to vote.

However, Clinton got some good news in the poll as well.

While more people in New Hampshire prefer Sanders to Clinton, they like Clinton as well: 70 percent of Sanders friends say they like what Clinton has to say. Only 20 percent say they don’t like the things that Clinton is saying.

Part of the favorability for Clinton among the most liberal of Democrats comes from the fact that Hillary has moved far to the left on a number of issues—at odds with many positions she held just a few years ago.

She’s also been helped by Sanders—who has refused to ramp up attacks on Hillary. Sanders even famously gave Hillary cover in the first Democratic debate, when he responded to a question about Hillary’s email server scandal by saying that the American people were “sick of hearing about [her] damn emails!”

Gov. Martin O’Malley (D-Maryland), the only other Democrat running for the presidency, is a distant third in New Hampshire, and hasn’t seemed to gain much traction at any point of the race.

by -
2016 GOP

Liberty Guard, founded by former Congressman Bob Barr, released their ratings recently that ranked each presidential candidate based upon a Liberty index.

Included in the scorecard are 17 candidates in total — 14 Republicans and 3 Democrats.

The GOP candidates include: Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina, Former Governor Jeb Bush (FL), Dr. Ben Carson, Senator Rand Paul (KY), Senator Ted Cruz (TX), Governor Chris Christie (NJ), Governor John Kasich (OH), Former Governor Mike Huckabee (AR), Senator Marco Rubio (FL), Former Governor George Pataki (NY), Former Governor Jim Gilmore(VA), Former Senator Rick Santorum (PA), and Senator Lindsey Graham (SC).

The Democratic candidates include: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-V), and Former Governor Martin O’Malley (MD). The complete scorecard may be found at

The scoring model examined each of the candidates on public statements, announced platforms/plans, and their voting record (either as an incumbent or past political service). In each of the categories: healthcare, national security, taxation, immigration, electronic privacy, 2nd Amendment, cronyism, budget, education, and ethics; liberty-minded sub-topics were used as the judging criteria.

Most notably (and unlike any other scorecard so far),Liberty Guard rated candidates on cronyism and ethics.

In releasing the scorecard, Liberty Guard Chairman Bob Barr emphasized, “The American people are tired of Beltway insiders and their cronyism. The scorecard is a reliable, unbiased way to see how the candidates stack up, issue by issue, on liberty-related topics.”

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) both outperformed their respective GOP counterparts by advocating and fighting for limited government and liberty-minded principles based on the Constitution. At the bottom of the list includes Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Former Governor Jeb Bush (R-FL).

“This scorecard is the first of its kind — ranking candidates on liberty matters, taking into account all a candidates’ past statements and positions as well as votes. This comprehensive effort will inform voters decisions as they sort out the wheat from the chaff,” Liberty Guard President Steve Thomas added. “The typical establishment candidates that would be flourishing in past elections are now suffering. Voters are making this ever more evident by citing their distaste for ‘career politicians.'”

by -

In a development that could end the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, top Senate investigators into the email scandal are considering a grant of immunity to Bryan Pagliano, the computer whiz that Clinton hired to set up the private and insecure email server in her Chappaqua, New York home in exchange for testimony about her activities.

Mr. Pagliano, a low level but potentially explosive witness in the investigation into Clinton’s server, said last week that he would exercise his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if he were subpoenaed by the Senate to testify in the matter without a grant of immunity.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson (R-WI) – the two key committees investigating the former Secretary of State’s private email server – have said they have the authority to grant immunity to Mr. Pagliano if he is willing to talk.

To advance the investigation, the two Senators have proposed a “Queen for a Day” proffer session where Mr. Pagliano would let them know what he knows without consequence in an off-the-record setting so all sides could decide how to proceed. In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, the two Senators said:

“The Committees have the authority to obtain an immunity order, to acquire the information they need, while also protecting your right against self-incrimination.”

If the Senators grant immunity to Mr. Pagliano he would have no reason to exercise his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because he could not be prosecuted for any crimes he may have committed – known or unknown.

For her part, Mrs. Clinton has insisted that she complied with all laws when operating the server, did not send or receive classified communications using the server and that she turned over 30,000 pages of work related emails – as she defined them – a full two-years after the law required her to do so.

As the heat over the server, which was seized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for forensic analysis, increases, Mrs. Clinton first refused to apologize for setting up her own server and then reversing herself earlier this week in an interview with Andrea Mitchell of ABC News. In a terse response to a question about the server, Mrs. Clinton said:

“That was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility.”

Critics have commented that taking “responsibility” for breaking the law without consequence shows contempt for the law and lends credence to the charge that Mrs. Clinton sees herself as above the law.

Normally a liberal politician booster, The New York Times reported this week that a new review by the inspector general for the intelligence community has concluded two messages did contain information that was top secret at the time.

Continuing examination of the server by the FBI has turned up an estimated 150 more highly classified documents including top-secret satellite imagery, privileged communications between foreign diplomats and government officials with the United States, and other sensitive documents.

For his part, Mr. Pagliano was paid by Mrs. Clinton’s political operation through early 2009 who then shifted over to the State Department where he was an information technology specialist. At the same time, he was paid by Mrs. Clinton’s campaign to install and maintain the server she kept at her New York home.

Now it looks like the dam may be about to break.

In a letter obtained by POLITICO, Bryan Pagliano’s lawyer Mark MacDougall told Senator’s Grassley and Johnson that he would give no such preliminary overview (proffer) so the Senators could gain a better idea of what Pagliano knew about Clinton’s private server.

MacDougall said that a proffer session about what Pagliano was not a grant of immunity, is custom rather than law and that answering questions could be used to claim that his client had “waived his right” to avoid self-incrimination. In his letter, MacDougall said:

“Members of congressional committees and their lawyers have lately taken an expansive view of what constitutes a waiver by an individual citizen of his or her right under the Fifth Amendment.”

“Any ‘proffer session’ or other disclosure by Mr. Pagliano – or his lawyers acting on his behalf — of the contents of his possible testimony creates the very practical risk that our client will later be said to have waived his constitutional protections.”

“We cannot set the stage for such an episode by engaging in the kind of discussion with the committees’ staff as suggested in your letter.”

“Given the plain language of the governing statute, and in the absence of any facts to suggest that an order of immunity may be issued to our client by a U.S. district court any time soon, there is no basis for a ‘proffer session’ or similar extra-legal exercise with the committees’ staff,” the letter said.

Political observers note that such legal back and forth often times means that the sides are coming closer to an immunity deal. If Mr. Pagliano is granted immunity, which many expect, his potentially damaging testimony could blow the wheels of Hillary Clinton’s second attempt to win the Democratic nomination and the White House next year.

by -

Can Obama really be that delusional?

In a speech Tuesday to the African Union, on his tour of Africa, Obama touted his accomplishments in front of African leaders–and announced that, were he able to run again, he would probably win.

His comments came while he was warning African leaders about overstaying their term limits–which Obama rightly believes flies in the face of democracy and causes instability in African nations.

“I am in my second term,” he told the crowd. “It has been an extraordinary privilege for me to serve as President of the United States. I cannot imagine a greater honor or a more interesting job…”

Obama continued, pointing out that no matter what he thinks about how many terms he could (apparently) keep winning, the law doesn’t allow it: “But under our Constitution, I cannot run again. I actually think I’m a pretty good President–I think if I ran I could win.”

He added, “So there’s a lot that I’d like to do to keep America moving, but the law is the law.”

Barack Obama’s approval rating is currently at 41%, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll. 52% of Americans currently disapprove of the job he’s doing.

Even if Obama were allowed to run for a third term, it’s highly unlikely that his numbers would allow him to cruise to victory. His approval rating hasn’t gone above 50% since April 2013, just a few months after his re-election.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, a third Obama term might actually have been their best bet: Hillary Clinton, essentially the only realistic Democratic nominee after two disastrous midterms gutted Democrats in Congress and in statehouses nationwide, has seen her own approval rating plunge more than 20 points in the last few years.



When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than...