The First amendment is pretty clear. If this were a First amendment issue, the courts would handle.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705739383...ch-funding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_conti...TzjrVaBUYQ
I wonder how many Congresscreeps will be investing in Genie Oil. This also explains Trump reclassification of Occupied lands by the Jews.

March 18, 2019
Malia, Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal
By Jack Cashill
What shocked even the old timers in my hometown was that Mayor Hugh Addonizio, the man who gave me my Eagle Scout Award, would accept kickbacks in cash right across his desk. They were troubled less by his criminality -- that was expected in Newark -- than by his lack of subtlety. Addonizio paid for his indiscretion with a lengthy prison sentence.
So it is with the current college admissions scandal. People have been scamming their ways into prestige universities for decades, maybe centuries, but in the past they have had the good sense not to put the cash on the table. It seems that in this scandal a few of the bribers and their brokers may well pay for their indiscretion with prison sentences as well.
The media pretend to be shocked. In an editorial on the scandal, the New York Times singled out Harvard University for its “special admissions preferences and back doors for certain applicants.” This is the same New York Times, however, that published an entirely uncritical article three years prior headlined, “Malia Obama Rebels, Sort of, by Choosing Harvard.” 
Malia is the fourth member of the Obama family to attend that august university, none of whom, save perhaps for Grandpa Obama, deserved to be there.
Let’s start with Obama Sr., the only member of the extended family to attend college before the affirmative action/diversity era. Obama arrived at Harvard in the early 1960s with the goal of getting a Ph.D. in economics. According to biographer Sally Jacobs, Obama “struggled” with his studies but managed to get a Masters degree.
Alas, the university booted him out on moral grounds before he could get his doctorate. An inveterate playboy despite his two ongoing marriages, Obama had an affair with a high-school girl. Denied his Ph.D., says Jacobs, “He goes on to claim the title, nonetheless. He's Dr. Obama. The older he gets, the more he claims it.” As will be seen, intellectual fraud runs in the family.
Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”
Sympathetic biographer Liza Mundy writes, “Michelle frequently deplores the modern reliance on test scores, describing herself as a person who did not test well.” She did not write well either. Mundy charitably describes her senior thesis, "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community," as “dense and turgid.”
The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observed,  “To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn't written in any known language.” Hitchens exaggerated only a little.  The following summary statement by Michelle captures her unfamiliarity with many of the rules of grammar and most of logic:

Quote:The study inquires about the respondents' motivations to benefit him/herself, and the following social groups: the family, the Black community, the White community, God and church, The U.S. society, the non-White races of the world, and the human species as a whole.

AIPAC Is Coming to Town - Again!
And the Israelis are having an election
Philip Giraldi • March 19, 2019 •

The Trump Administration has delivered yet another concession to Israel’s embattled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the eve of parliamentary elections: the Israeli military occupation of much of the Palestinian West Bank and of the Golan Heights will no longer be referred to in official U.S. government documents as an occupation. America’s so-called Ambassador to Israel is a former Trump lawyer named David Friedman who is more involved in serving Israel than the United States. He personally supports the view that the illegal Jewish settlements are legitimately part of Israel, choosing to ignore their growth even though it has long been U.S. policy to oppose them. He has also long sought to change the State Department’s language on the Israeli control of the West Bank and Golan Heights, being particularly concerned about the expression “occupied,” which has legal implications. Now he appears to have won that fight, to the delight of the Netanyahu government.
And the expunging of “occupied” might be only the first of many gifts intended to bolster Netanyahu’s chances. Senator Lindsey Graham, who also boasts of his close ties to the Israeli Prime Minister, intends to initiate legislative action to go one step further and compel the United States to actually recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, the Syrian territory that was annexed after fighting in 1967, but which has not been recognized as part of Israel by any other country or international body. If a vote on the bill is pushed forward and goes as expected virtually unanimously as the subject before congress is Israel, it would hugely benefit Bibi. Some sources are also predicting that recognition of the Golan Heights could easily lead to U.S. government recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over much of the West Bank.
Israel’s election is scheduled for April 9th, so there is still plenty of time for additional mischief.
http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/aipac-is-com...own-again/

Amazon Bans the Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews

Jews Say Banning Black Books is SAFER Than Dialogue with Blacks


The banning of four Nation of Islam Black history books by Amazon, the largest bookseller in the world, provides a perfect opportunity to examine the wickedly racist ways Jewish power is wielded in America. Amazon provided no warning, no reason, no hearing, and no opportunity to respond—it was a blatant mockery of Amazon founder Jeffrey Bezos’s own creed, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” It is, however, perfect proof of what The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad said: the mental resurrection of Black people will anger our oppressors and cause them to react punitively and viciously.
http://www.unz.com/article/amazon-bans-t...acks-jews/

Leave it to the young and mostly silly idealists to speak the truth.

Until I see a RWNJ bow their head and pray, I call bullshit too.

I will offer the actual translation of "thoughts and prayers". It means "we don't want to bothered with your problems"

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/oca...s-prayers/

Another Totalitarian Communist Running for President as Democrat
Michael S. Rozeff

His name is Andrew Yang. His proposals are here.
We have a choice in assessing the Democratic hopefuls like Yang, Harris, Sanders, O’Rourke, Warren, Booker, Biden, etc. Are they colossal idiots, or are they Communist Totalitarians?
We know their ideas, and these ideas are so bad, so destructive and so evil, that we might think that these people are colossal idiots.
That would be a mistake. They have given detailed plans. They are mature people. They are successful people. They are educated. They are advertising their policies and actively seeking power.

We MUST assume that they know exactly what they’re proposing and what they intend to do if given power. We MUST take them at their word. It’s not plausible to dismiss them as morons. They didn’t get where they are by being stupid. They didn’t draft detailed communist policies for the fun of it. They are telling us to our faces what they believe and what their intentions are.
We MUST assume that these people are fully aware of what their plans for us mean. In that case, they all have to be viewed as Totalitarian Communists.
They are intent on taking over the country and running it according to their stated programs. Power over all of us is their aim with the goal of instituting their communist policies, and these will entail total control of America and Americans.
Totalitarian Communists look like anyone else. They smile, make jokes, play with their pets, kiss children, make waffles and broadcast it, wear informal dress, get their hair done, and visit dentists. Some have had businesses and made money. Some look like capitalists. This is all superficial window dressing. Look at their platforms.
Yang’s communism starts with this: “Andrew would implement a Universal Basic Income, ‘The Freedom Dividend,’ of $1,000/month, $12,000 a year for every American adult over the age of 18.”
It won’t be freedom for the people who have to pay for this income.
Yang will communize healthcare: “…we must move in the direction of a single-payer system…”
Yang wants “Human-centered capitalism”, as if businesses didn’t already only survive by offering human beings goods they want at prices they can afford. He’s obviously absorbed Marxist-communist ideas. He wants government to control industry.
These Democrats cannot implement their communist platforms without the government becoming much more totalitarian. They are Totalitarian Communists. They lie constantly that their policies will be good for Americans and enhance their freedoms, when the opposite is true.
We need not get bogged down in hair-splitting about leftist political philosophies, or definitions of socialism and communism. American communism as advocated by these candidates doesn’t necessarily conform to 19th and 20th century Marxist ideas and rhetoric, especially since they have been discredited; ideas of proletarian revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat, for example.
However, today’s Democratic communists share Marx’s utopian aspiration of creating a perfectly secure society in which everyone is insured against any contingency. They take abundance of goods as a given, just as Marx imagined abundance leading into a glorious communist future. They imagine no one of any favored group denied their rights, except unborn human beings and capitalists, just as Marx imagined an end of all “exploitation”, profits, private property and capitalism.
Today’s Democratic communists have adapted their anti-capitalism and totalitarian aspirations for control to make them current and seemingly relevant to “issues” like the environment, health, hate speech, gun ownership, and income distribution, etc. They’ve adopted progressivism as a road to their communist heaven on earth. It’s a ruse. Today’s progressives are communists-in-waiting. The Democratic candidates are communists in disguise.

Doesn't hold a candle to this:

The recent death toll of Christians in Nigeria has reached 120 with this week’s slaughter of more than 50 by Fulani Muslim militants in the Kaduna state of Nigeria, the Christian Post reported.
The Fulani jihadists, who have become a greater threat to Nigerian Christians than the Islamist terror group Boko Haram, stormed the villages of Inkirimi, Dogonnoma, and Ungwan Gora in the Kajuru Local Government Area last Monday, destroying 143 homes, killing 52 people, and wounding dozens more.
The assailants reportedly split into three groups, the first of which fired upon the people, the second set fire to buildings, and the third chased down people fleeing from the scene. Victims of the assault included women and children.

https://www.breitbart.com/africa/2019/03...ree-weeks/

It's plain to see who the good guy is.

Media Matters’ mantra:
Democrat drones may break foreign bones, but conservative words forever hurt me.
Failed Clinton operative David Brock and his hate group Media Fecal Matters want Tucker Carlson fired because he’s the only cable news anchor against bombing foreigners. They recently put out a desperate hit piece on Carlson recycling decade plus-old clips of him on Florida shock jock Bubba the Love Sponge’s radio show. The clips contain a smattering of out-of-context satirical points and hot takes on culture topics—standard, vanilla comedy radio banter. However, no crude remark made by Carlson compares to the vulgar, relentless barbarity David Brock’s Media Matters has promoted in media for decades. While Carlson may have made flippant and poor taste comments, Media Matters wants a world where millions of people of color overseas have no news anchor on nightly news making the case against our interventions and sanctions of their homelands.
Media Matters and their army of email bots are flooding sponsors demanding they desist advertising on Carlson’s program to prove their virtue for the concern for underage sex abuse victims. This is preposterous. While Brock’s Media Matters was busy shilling positive media coverage of Obama’s illegal wars in Libya, Yemen, and Syria, Tucker Carlson was making a spirited defense against our meddling in these countries’ affairs. Unlike Media Matters, which remains curiously silent when Trump continues his opponents’ sanctions and regime change, Carlson continues to challenge him based on the same principles which led him to renounce his support of the Iraq War.
If more journalists had imitated Carlson’s anti-war message and rejected Media Matters’ war bigotry, millions of people of color in those countries could still be alive, healthy, and in their own intact homes. Now, Libya has gone from one of the most prosperous nations in North Africa to a fractious, terrorist-tortured wasteland. Clinton and Obama’s bidding on behalf of financially motivated war interests have left children homeless, vulnerable to rape, and even placed in human slavery.
Media Matters does not care about people of color—their relentless attacks against the lone anchor on cable news questioning our wars, regardless of which political party is in power, shows that for them, unnecessary violence and chaos against the vulnerable, particularly women and children, is passé. Their crony capitalist-enclosed bubble is so warped and demented, they actually think the American people share their moral priorities. They actually think anyone outside their dying DC dens of sociopaths cares more about what an anchor says on a shock jock show than whether an anchor tells the truth about war.
One of Media Matters’ heroes former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, whom they have defended over the years, summarizes their callous bigotry towards human life, especially defenseless people of color overseas. When asked by CBS News whether President Clinton’s sanctions on Iraq for non-existent WMD’s was “worth” the deaths of over half a million children at the time, Albright did not hesitate. “The price is worth it,” she declared. Only racial supremacists like Media Matters could shill for such a flippant, cold dismissal of the value of human life.
Media Matters shilled for Hillary Clinton’s handling of the war in Libya too. While Carlson was warning about the dangers of elective regime change, Media Matters had no problem with Clinton laughing and joking, upon hearing of Gaddafi’s brutal rape and murder, “We came, we saw, he died!” Millions of Libyan children cries in the face of the resulting terrorism and slavery were silenced by partisan hacks like Media Matters. For them, human life is expendable, disposable, for the glory of political power.
Tucker Carlson, in contrast, continues to challenge the Trump administration’s actions in Syria and Yemen and elsewhere, bringing the perspectives of ancient minority communities there to the homes of millions of Americans.
If Media Matters and their censorship campaign against Carlson had its way, there would be no leading voices left in nightly TV news to question the constant drum beat for wars and starvation-causing sanctions in countries around the world. Think about that. In the fraudulent name of victims, Media Matters wants to silence millions of victims of perpetual war. Their idyll is a world where no media voices can question war, coups, and the morality of foreign sanctions. Their ideal media is one that blots out the faces of the human sacrifices of intervention from the American voters charged with deciding these policies.
Here at home, Media Matters’ leaders demonstrate little care for sexual assault against children and minorities when it benefits their political interests. David Brock excoriated Senator Bernie Sanders for daring to bring up Hillary Clinton’s “super predators” slur she used against African American youth to sell the public on her family-destroying, mass misery machine, the 1994 crime bill. Apparently, the leaders of Media Matters think it does not matter what racial slurs a presidential candidate used to sell the mass caging of nonviolent black men and women. Like they demonstrate in their support of occupations of people of color overseas, Media Matters sees black bodies as expendable fodder if it means getting their allies like Clinton elected. What happened to all those black boys and girls, slandered by Clinton as super predators for nonviolent acts and thrown into violent prison cages for decades? Media Matters does not want you to know because it will make their soulless cadre look bad. That is how sociopaths think.
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” Lord Acton said. Some Media Matters blogger probably just created a hit file on him for that.
In contrast, the more media power Tucker Carlson has acquired, the more bold and independent his critiques on power have become. While Carlson makes nightly critiques on his party’s crony capitalism and global interventions, Media Matters’ founders pine for the days when allies like Bill Clinton could fly 26 times on convicted-pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s nightmarish “Lolita Express” 727, refusing Secret Service detail on six day jaunts through Asia, and not be disturbed.
Any brand or organization that heeds Media Matters’ threats against independent voices like Carlson are choosing dying grasps for political power over truth-telling in the defense of real flesh and blood victims. If Carlson is muzzled, every brand that turns their back on his show will forever be linked to the footage of drone strikes on Syrian families and the photographs of US-supported starving of Yemeni children, that his show denounces bravely. Any company that chooses to side with war, mass incarceration, and the selfish elites that gain from these policies, is a company destined for the ashbin of history. There is a new media era in town. Independent thought over dying partisanship. Uncomfortable truths over violent lies. Our culture is growing up. And it will scrape Media Matters off its shoes like the waste matter it is.