Wednesday, March 29, 2017

It's erroneous in the extreme to state that it's about undoing Obama's climate rules--he was a bit player. Deeply globalist George HW Bush in 1990 mandated massive global climate spending in 13+ fed. agencies. Every US president since has eagerly added to the legalized theft of America unbeknownst to US taxpayers who've been forced to pay for their own genocide

.
Trump knows it's not about "Obama" or undoing "Obama's climate change policies." How could it be when George HW Bush in 1990 formalized US genocide via climate "change" scare with his USGCRP (US Global Change Research Program)? And every US president since eagerly added to it. While not mentioning names in his 3/28/17 remarks, Trump clearly states it's been much longer than just the past 8 years in which "climate" regulations have strangled Americans and the American economy:  

"The action I'm taking today






You people know it maybe better than anybody."...3/28/17, "Remarks by President Trump at Signing of Executive Order to create Energy Independence," whitehouse.gov.


....................


Mafia style legalized theft of the United States was put in motion in 1990 by a so-called "conservative" and has been enabled every day since by more so-called "conservatives":

"The (US) Government’s Role in Climate Science Funding...took a critical step with passage of the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (USGCRP) (signed by George HW Bush). This Act established institutional structures operating out of the White House:"... Signed Nov. 16, 1990. (13+ agencies listed below).

"[33]. The motto of the USGCRP is "Thirteen Agencies, One Vision: Empower the Nation with Global Change Science." For a full setting out of the 1990 Act, see USGCRP (2014)."

"2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science Rand D as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch and the various agencies that fall within its purview."...








 
established institutional structures operating out of the White House."...

Signed Nov. 16, 1990: Vast, unelected parts of US government (Executive agencies and their subgroups) are diverted to attend to an alleged global crisis of climate and environmental "change." Deeply globalist George HW Bush mandated that US taxpayers be forced to fund global climate science in all countries on earth, formalizing US taxpayers' role as global slaves. From his speech hoping for New World Order managed by the corrupt, unelected UN: "We have a real chance at this New World Order, an Order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the UN's founders." (begins 1:21)


Bush #1 New World Order
Bush's 1990 Act: "Reference : Global Change Research Act (Public Law 101-606, 104 Stat. 3096-3104), signed on November 16, 1990," data.globalchange.gov (https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/9204bd83-649f-4056-9f3e-678c3f612553) or (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-104/pdf/STATUTE 104-Pg3096.pdf)

"To require the establishment of a United States Global Change Research Program, Nov 16 1990, aimed at understanding and responding to global change, including the cumulative effects of human activities and natural processes on the environment, to promote discussions toward international protocols in global change research, and for other purposes.


 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Global Change United States of America in Congress assembled, Research Act of 1990.... 

MEMBERSHIP.—The Committee shall consist of at least one representative from—
(1) the National Science Foundation;
 (2) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
 (3) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the Department of   Commerce;
 (4) the Environmental Protection Agency;
  (5) the Department of Energy;
  (6) the Department of State; 
  (7) the Department of Defense;
 (8) the Department of the Interior;
  (9) the Department of Agriculture;
 (10) the Department of Transportation;
 (11) the Office of Management and Budget;
 (12) the Office of Science and Technology Policy;
(13) the Council on Environmental Quality;
  (14) the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
 of the National Institutes of Health; and p. 3, pdf:
     (15) such other agencies and departments of the United States as the President or the Chairman of the Council considers appropriate.

    Such representatives shall be high ranking officials of their agency or department.... (e)"

(image above of Bush #1 via You Tube "New World Order quotes") 

.......................  

Added:

"The new phrase “global change”, if it means anything, is a more accommodating substitute for “global warming”."...

"The political attractiveness of a putative crisis apparently calling for a large expansion of state power [6]"...(From Introduction, 6)

"“If you really believe or accept that global warming is a legitimate, real, immediate threat, then there's no amount of money you wouldn't pay to avoid it," he said."

 6/27/2013, GOP Energy lobbyist insider Mike McKenna, quoted at end of Politico article, "GOP climate tack: Talk jobs, not science," Politico Pro, Darren Goode
.......... 
===================

The boom in global climate science spending since 1990 was funded almost entirely by US taxpayers without their knowledge:

 3/6/2015, "Causes and consequences of the climate science boom," William Butos and Thomas McQuade (William N. Butos, Professor of Economics, Trinity College, Hartford, CT, USA, william.butos@trincoll.edu +1-860-297-2448.  Thomas J. McQuade, Independent Scholar, San Diego, CA, USA thomas@mcquades.net +1-347-274-9903. Forthcoming in The Independent Review)

"Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around....
[32]" (item #11) 


USGCRP's "certainty as to the deleterious effects of human-induced climate change is quite notable.  It begins (p. 1) with: “The rate of global change today…far exceeds anything observed and documented in human history.” It appears to be completely oblivious to the controversies which surround such a conclusion. 

The new phrase “global change”, if it means anything, is a more accommodating substitute for “global warming” and its postulated effects, and is uniformly used in the sense of “change for the worse”. [39]"

......................

Added: It's a $4 billion a day "industry" (about  something that doesn't exist, ie, US CO2 danger; that US CO2 has been and continues to be a global murderer): 

"Climate change" is a $4 billion dollar a day "industry" and growing as of July 15, 2015:

"The $1.5 trillion global "climate change industry" grew at between 17 and 24 percent annually from 2005-2008, slowing to between 4 and 6 percent following the recession with the exception of 2011’s inexplicable 15 percent growth, according to Climate Change Business Journal."


July 30, 2015, "Is Climate Change Now Its Own Industry?" Insurancejournal.com, Don Jergler

................... 

"The science:"

Hard sciences vs "Climate science:"

"Science, in rare cases, is also susceptible to another sort of Big Player: one with the ability to portray a favored hypothesis as settled, consensus scientific knowledge even in the absence of a substantial body of confirming evidence.  This is difficult, or impossible, to carry off in the hard sciences."

................................

Added:  US taxpayers are mandated "to assist the world" in the matter of "global change." In other words, US taxpayers are global slaves:

"Legal Mandate," From Globalchange.gov

"The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) was established by Presidential Initiative in 1989 and mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to “assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change.”


===============

Comment: The use of US taxpayer dollars to lavishly fund a new global industry of jet setters is due the willingness of the US political class to steal from the poor and suffering and give to the rich. Precious tax dollars needed for real problems continue to be diverted to "climate industry" pals.





......................

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

13 states join brief in support of Trump's temporary travel ban: US Constitution confers no right of entry to the US for any class of foreign citizen. 'Power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative,' and aliens seeking admission to the US request a 'privilege.' (1982)

.
"Nonresident aliens who are in foreign territory clearly not under the sovereign control of the United States do not possess rights under the United States Constitution regarding entry into this country." From the brief, p. 11. Citations, p. 21

3/27/17, "Texas AG Paxton leads 13-state coalition backing Trump's revised immigration orders," Dallas Morning News, James Barragan, Austin

"Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday led a coalition of 13 states in filing a brief with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals defending President Donald Trump's revised immigration order. In the brief, Paxton and representatives from 12 other states argue that the Trump administration's new order is legal and falls under the president's power over foreign affairs and national security. 

Federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland placed nationwide blocks on the order two weeks ago. The revised order would place a 90-day ban on travelers to the United States from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. It exempted green card and visa holders in an effort to resolve the reasons that courts blocked Trump's initial ban. It would also block the entry of refugees into the country for 120 days and limit refugee admissions to 50,000 in the fiscal year.  

"Rather than leaving national security in limbo while litigation dragged on, President Trump issued a revised immigration order that addresses the 9th Circuit's concerns and is a vital step in securing our borders," Paxton said in a written statement. "It is imperative we find a way to better screen refugee applicants to maintain national security. The president is fulfilling his solemn duty to protect Texans and all Americans."

Paxton was the first attorney general to file a brief in support of the original immigration order in February after it was blocked by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The brief filed Monday says the 4th Circuit shouldn't follow that decision, which was "wrongly decided."

The brief argues that "nonresident aliens" applying to enter the country are not extended constitutional rights. Therefore, Paxton said, the ruling by the federal court in Hawaii, which was based on concerns about religious discrimination is erroneous.

"For the district court in Hawaii to rule that it's a violation of somebody's constitutional rights -- they are non-resident aliens," Paxton said. "We think it's not the law. It's a made up constitutional right." 

The president, the brief says, has discretion over who to allow into the country when it concerns national security and foreign affairs. Because the revised order lays out specific national security concerns, the brief says, it should be allowed to stand. 

Opponents say the renewed order doesn't address their concerns about religious discrimination. The six countries in the travel ban are majority Muslim. 

The brief says the order does not discriminate against religion because it classifies those seeking entry into the U.S. by nationality, not religion. The president, the brief argues, is allowed to suspend the entry of "all aliens" or "any class of aliens" if their entry would be detrimental to the country.
.
Texas is joined in the brief by the attorneys general of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia, as well as Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant."

From the brief: 

(page 21): "Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenges rest on the flawed premise that the United States Constitution confers on nonresident foreign citizens, located abroad, rights regarding admission into this country. But it is “clear” that “an unadmitted and nonresident alien” “ha[s] no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise.” Mandel, 408 U.S. at 762.

The “power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative, and aliens seeking admission to the United States request a “privilege.” Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982)....

The Executive Order classifies aliens by nationality—not religion. The Executive Order’s temporary pause in entry by nationals from six countries and in the refugee program neither mentions any religion nor depends on whether affected aliens are Muslim. See EO §§ 2, 3, 6. These provisions distinguish among aliens only by nationality. Id. Thus, the Executive Order is emphatically not a “Muslim ban.” Indeed, numerous Muslim-majority countries in the world were not covered by the seven-country list used in the prior Executive Order, 6 and the Pew Research Center estimates that this list from the prior Executive Order “would affect only about 12% of the world’s Muslims.”"


------------------------ 

Added:  3/24/17, "Virginia federal judge rules in favor of Trump's travel ban," LA Times, Jaweed Kaleem 

"Unlike federal judges before him, a judge in Virginia on Friday ruled in favor of President Trump’s revised travel ban in a case brought by Muslims who said the president’s executive order illegally discriminated against their religion by restricting travel from six majority-Muslim countries. 

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga of the Eastern District Court of Virginia in Alexandria wrote that the plaintiffs, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other Muslim community leaders from across the country, probably would not prevail in their suit.

Trenga said the travel ban likely “falls within the bounds” of Trump’s authority as president, and he rejected a request to halt the order. 

Trenga’s ruling doesn’t have an immediate effect on the ban, which was put on hold by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland last week. But it gives ammunition to government lawyers arguing for the ban across several U.S. courts where cases against it are pending. 

The Hawaii and Maryland rulings agreed with arguments that the travel ban violated the Constitution by discriminating against Muslims. The judges cited statements by Trump and his campaign associates about restricting Muslim travel to the U.S. as evidence of their intent to single out followers of Islam.

Trenga’s opinion gave less weight to Trump’s statements. It more strictly looked at how the travel ban is worded in light of presidential power over immigration and national security. 

The judge highlighted the changes made to narrow the scope of the travel ban after an initial version of the order was struck down by federal courts in January and February. Changes in the new version included omitting Iraq from the list of countries whose travelers would be blocked and removing preferential treatment of refugees who were religious minorities.

The Department of Justice, which is defending the Trump administration in court, hailed Trenga’s move.

“The Department of Justice is pleased with the ruling,” department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement. “As the Court correctly explains, the president’s executive order falls well within his authority to safeguard the nation’s security.”

The original travel ban, signed Jan. 27, was halted by federal district courts and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The new ban, signed March 6 and scheduled to go into effect March 16, was modified in an attempt to pass court muster.

The Maryland ruling stopped the revised executive order’s 90-day ban on travel into the U.S. by citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The Hawaii ruling went a step further by also blocking a 120-day pause on refugee resettlement from any country. It also blocked the government’s attempt to cap refugee resettlement and the compiling of a series of government studies and reports on how refugees and foreign visitors to the U.S. are vetted.

Those rulings, as well as the one Friday in Virginia, are not final but temporary decisions on the travel ban as the cases over its constitutionality proceed.

The Department of Justice has appealed the Maryland decision to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals but has not appealed in the Hawaii case.

Trump has said he wants to take arguments over the travel ban to the Supreme Court."


..............................

Additional on Virginia Federal Judge ruling: "(Judge) Trenga said only the order itself should be up for review by the courts — not the president's past comments. And since the president does have the authority to halt immigration, he ruled Trump's order should go into effect."

3/24/17, "Virginia court gives Trump his first win on updated travel ban," aol.com, Grant Suneson

"After two federal courts stalled his renewed attempt at a travel ban, President Trump finally has a judge on his side.

Judge Anthony Trenga of Virginia ruled in favor of Trump's plan. The order bars refugees from entering America for 120 days and blocks all people from six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days.

Judges in Maryland and Hawaii wrote that Trump's order didn't seem to be in response to any specific threat. They also noted that since Trump called for a Muslim ban while campaigning, his order violated freedom of religion. 


(Judge) Trenga said only the order itself should be up for review by the courts — not the president's past comments. And since the president does have the authority to halt immigration, he ruled Trump's order should go into effect.

This doesn't overturn the previous rulings that froze the executive order. But it does give the Trump administration support in the lower courts and bolsters its case if the travel ban goes to the Supreme Court."







.........
 

US may have committed Act of War when it hacked 1996 Russian election. Americans intervened to help Yeltsin win, worked in Moscow hotel. "Yanks to the Rescue," Time cover, Boris Yeltsin with American flag, 7/15/1996. LA Times article 7/9/1996

.

























Time cover, July 15, 1996

Cover story: "RESCUING BORIS"

"THE SECRET STORY OF HOW FOUR U.S. ADVISERS USED POLLS, FOCUS GROUPS, NEGATIVE ADS AND ALL THE OTHER TECHNIQUES OF AMERICAN CAMPAIGNING TO HELP BORIS YELTSIN WIN,"

In the end the Russian people chose--and chose decisively--to reject the past. Voting in the final round of the presidential election last week, they preferred Boris Yeltsin to his Communist rival Gennadi Zyuganov by a margin of 13 percentage points. He is far from the ideal democrat or reformer, and his lieutenants Victor Chernomyrdin and Alexander Lebed are already squabbling over power, but Yeltsin is arguably the best hope Russia has for moving toward pluralism and an open economy. By re-electing him, the Russians defied predictions that they might willingly resubmit themselves to communist rule. The outcome was by no means"...(log in required)
................................

LA Times article, 1996

7/9/1996, "Americans Claim Role in Yeltsin Win," LA Times, Eleanor Randolph

"Russia: Consultants say they spent months in Moscow secretly devising U.S.-style strategy." 

"A team of American political strategists who helped Gov. Pete Wilson with his abortive presidential bid earlier this year said this week that they served as Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin's secret campaign weapon in his comeback win over a Communist challenger. And while some Muscovites are debating whether the Americans saved Yeltsin's job or merely provided one voice among many working to revive the Russian president's political chances, the consultants have now emerged to give interviews about how they quietly peddled advice to Yeltsin's 36-year-old daughter and key advisor, Tatyana Dyachenko.

"I don't have candidates generally who are as responsive as Boris Yeltsin," said George Gorton, who worked for Wilson in 1994 and later ran Wilson's abortive bid for the GOP nomination. "Certainly not Pete Wilson."

Hired in February through a San Francisco firm with connections in Moscow, Gorton said that the team members never met Yeltsin. Instead, they sent their detailed, unsigned memos to his daughter. "We were told that we were formally retained as advisors to the Yeltsin family."

Although the Americans spoke no Russian and worked through translators, they began secretly laying out an American-style campaign to counter the public sentiment running against Yeltsin. When they started, Yeltsin's approval rating was about 6%, and, as they told Time magazine, Josef Stalin had a higher positive rating in their polls. Yet last week, Yeltsin defeated Communist candidate Gennady A. Zyuganov by more than 13 percentage points.
*
In an interview here Monday, Gorton said that he and his colleagues quickly realized that Yeltsin did not trust his campaign advisors to help him win reelection and placed more value on the advice of his daughter.

"However, she didn't know anything," Gorton said. "She's very bright, very articulate, very strong-willed, but she didn't have the first idea about campaigning, not even the ideas that a child here would have."

The Americans were brought in by a circuitous route. Felix Braynin of San Francisco, a Soviet immigrant who is now a wealthy consultant to American businesses working in Russia, began helping the Yeltsin campaign last year.

After he asked about American advisors who could help, San Francisco lawyer Fred Lowell suggested Gorton and Joe Shumate, an expert on political polling, and Richard Dresner, a political strategist who has helped not only Wilson but President Clinton in his earlier campaigns for governor of Arkansas.

The Americans will not say how much they were paid, although their fee has been estimated at about $250,000. They were told that their involvement had to be treated like a state secret because of fears that the Communists would use their presence to try to foment anti-Western sentiment among voters.

The group worked in hiding on the 11th floor of the Kremlin's lavish President Hotel in downtown Moscow. The hotel can be entered by invitation only. After six weeks inside, Gorton and his colleagues began to sneak out for occasional meals in the city or to go into the countryside to help conduct some of Russia's first focus groups.

"What you have to understand is that this hotel is a minimum-security prison masquerading as a five-star hotel," said Steven Moore, a 28-year-old political consultant who joined in the effort. The team is still secretive about some of its Russian business. Dresner prefers to stay mum about whether he was in touch with his old colleague Dick Morris, now Clinton's chief campaign advisor. Citing certain "agreements" that they refuse to explain, Dresner and Gorton acknowledge only that information about their work was made available to the Clinton White House.

The American advisors also worked with the Russians on such details as replacing a poster of a scowling Yeltsin with a smiling version. They suggested that some negative ads needed to be more subtle--persuading the Yeltsin campaign to pull one poster that showed a hammer and sickle made of cockroaches.

Some of Yeltsin's Russian advisors felt strongly that he could not criticize communism, especially since Communists had done so well in parliamentary elections in December and their leader, Zyuganov, was doing so well in the polls.

But Yeltsin followed the American advice until the last few days before the first round of balloting June 16, Gorton said. At that point, however, the Russian advisors canceled the anti-Communist ads. About the same time, Dresner said, Yeltsin's campaign polls showed a flattening out.

But mostly, Yeltsin took their advice, the Americans said.

Perhaps the most troubling moment in their adventure came when it appeared some of Yeltsin's advisors in the Kremlin were trying to convince him to cancel the election. At one point, the Americans believed that a Moscow pollster was handing out false numbers showing that Yeltsin could not possibly win.

"It came to the point that we wrote a memo I would never have written anywhere else. We said: 'This campaign is in the bank. It's over. It's finished,' " Gorton said, meaning that Yeltsin had won."




...........

Saturday, March 25, 2017

Virginia federal judge rules in favor of Trump's travel ban-LA Times, 3/24/17

.
3/24/17, "Virginia federal judge rules in favor of Trump's travel ban," LA Times, Jaweed Kaleem  

"Unlike federal judges before him, a judge in Virginia on Friday ruled in favor of President Trump’s revised travel ban in a case brought by Muslims who said the president’s executive order illegally discriminated against their religion by restricting travel from six majority-Muslim countries.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga of the Eastern District Court of Virginia in Alexandria wrote that the plaintiffs, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other Muslim community leaders from across the country, probably would not prevail in their suit. 

Trenga said the travel ban likely “falls within the bounds” of Trump’s authority as president, and he rejected a request to halt the order.

Trenga’s ruling doesn’t have an immediate effect on the ban, which was put on hold by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland last week. But it gives ammunition to government lawyers arguing for the ban across several U.S. courts where cases against it are pending.

The Hawaii and Maryland rulings agreed with arguments that the travel ban violated the Constitution by discriminating against Muslims. The judges cited statements by Trump and his campaign associates about restricting Muslim travel to the U.S. as evidence of their intent to single out followers of Islam. 

Trenga’s opinion gave less weight to Trump’s statements. It more strictly looked at how the travel ban is worded in light of presidential power over immigration and national security.


The judge highlighted the changes made to narrow the scope of the travel ban after an initial version of the order was struck down by federal courts in January and February. Changes in the new version included omitting Iraq from the list of countries whose travelers would be blocked and removing preferential treatment of refugees who were religious minorities.

The Department of Justice, which is defending the Trump administration in court, hailed Trenga’s move. 

“The Department of Justice is pleased with the ruling,” department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement. “As the Court correctly explains, the president’s executive order falls well within his authority to safeguard the nation’s security.” 

The original travel ban, signed Jan. 27, was halted by federal district courts and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The new ban, signed March 6 and scheduled to go into effect March 16, was modified in an attempt to pass court muster.

The Maryland ruling stopped the revised executive order’s 90-day ban on travel into the U.S. by citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The Hawaii ruling went a step further by also blocking a 120-day pause on refugee resettlement from any country. It also blocked the government’s attempt to cap refugee resettlement and the compiling of a series of government studies and reports on how refugees and foreign visitors to the U.S. are vetted.


Those rulings, as well as the one Friday in Virginia, are not final but temporary decisions on the travel ban as the cases over its constitutionality proceed.

The Department of Justice has appealed the Maryland decision to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals but has not appealed in the Hawaii case.

Trump has said he wants to take arguments over the travel ban to the Supreme Court."



..........................................

3/24/17, "Virginia court gives Trump his first win on updated travel ban," aol.com, Grant Suneson

"After two federal courts stalled his renewed attempt at a travel ban, President Trump finally has a judge on his side.

Judge Anthony Trenga of Virginia ruled in favor of Trump's plan. The order bars refugees from entering America for 120 days and blocks all people from six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days.

Judges in Maryland and Hawaii wrote that Trump's order didn't seem to be in response to any specific threat. They also noted that since Trump called for a Muslim ban while campaigning, his order violated freedom of religion.

But Trenga said only the order itself should be up for review by the courts — not the president's past comments. And since the president does have authority to halt immigration, he ruled Trump's order should go into effect.

This doesn't overturn the previous rulings that froze the executive order. But it does give the Trump administration support in the lower courts and bolsters its case if the travel ban goes to the Supreme Court."


.........






...........

Putin meets with France presidential candidate Marine Le Pen in Moscow. Le Pen said Russia and France should work together to save the world from globalism and Islamic fundamentalism-BBC

.
3/24/17, "France's Marine Le Pen urges end to Russia sanctions," BBC 

"Russian president Vladimir Putin has met France's far-right [sic] presidential candidate Marine Le Pen in Moscow, saying she represents a "fast-growing element" of European politics.

Mr Putin defended the meeting - a coup for Ms Le Pen - saying that he was not seeking to influence France's election.

Ms Le Pen has garnered widespread support at home but her extreme views have deterred most foreign leaders.

Russia was accused of meddling in the US election in support of Donald Trump.

"Of course I know that the election campaign in France is actively developing," said Mr Putin. 

"We do not want to influence events in any way, but we reserve the right to talk to representatives of all the country's political forces," he added.

Ms Le Pen, the leader of France's National Front (FN) party, called during her visit to Moscow for the lifting of EU sanctions against Russia, arguing that they were "counterproductive".

When Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in March 2014, the US and EU imposed travel bans and asset freezes on individuals and companies linked to Russia's ruling elite.

"I believe that barring parliamentarians from speaking to each other, working together is an infringement of democratic rights," Interfax quoted Ms Le Pen.

Speaking at Russia's lower house of parliament, the Duma, she vowed to push for the so-called "blacklists" of targeted individuals to be abolished.

Ms Le Pen has previously stated her approval of Russia's annexation of of Crimea.

She also said that Russia and France should work together to save the world from globalism and Islamic fundamentalism."

----------------

"Moscow likes what Le Pen has to say: By Steven Rosenberg, BBC News, Moscow"

"Moscow likes what Marine Le Pen has to say. It likes her call for EU sanctions imposed on Russia to be scrapped. It likes her claim that "Crimea has always been Russian" and that "there was no Russian invasion of Crimea". It likes her commitment to forge a strong partnership with Moscow. Which explains why the Kremlin leader took the decision to meet her in Moscow.

It's rare for Vladimir Putin to receive a presidential candidate from abroad. I asked President Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov whether any Russian banks or financial institutions intend to provide financing for Ms Le Pen's campaign. "I don't have that information," he replied. 

Coverage of her in the Russian state media has been favourable. There is little doubt Russia would be happy to deal with a President Le Pen.

However, today, the French far-right presidential candidate was less than happy to deal with the media. Journalists crowded into the lower house of parliament, the Duma, for a le Pen press briefing. She never showed up. 

FN Treasurer Wallerand de Saint-Just has said Ms Le Pen's visit is not a cash-raising exercise, though party members have said they are seeking millions to fund the presidential and later the parliamentary election campaigns, the Associated Press news agency reports.

Recent opinion polls in France put Ms Le Pen neck-and-neck in the first round with centrist candidate Emmanuel Macron, with Mr Macron slated to win the run-off."




........................

Rush Limbaugh: Politicians calling themselves "conservative" haven't been willing to endure the assaults that come with action. Enter Trump, and now we've got action. This is what it looks like. It's always going to be ugly and upsetting-Feb. 24, 2017

.
Rush Limbaugh: Politicians calling themselves "conservative" haven't been willing to endure the assaults that come with action. "So enter Trump into all of this, and now we've got action."

"You’ve got to win the election and then you have to implement the agenda and whatever it takes. And you have to withstand all of the assaults that are going to come your way in the process. And this has been something that many on the right, the Republican Party…They haven't wanted to endure the assaults....So they’ve been pragmatists or compromisers."

2/24/17, "What Is Conservatism in the Age of Trump?" RushLimbaugh.com 

"Many people who thought that they were the modern-day leaders of conservatism, in fact found themselves in a new category called Never Trumpers. They were the group of people that thought no matter what, Trump should not win....
 
And many of those people are still there. And they are still active in what I call the academic or intellectual side of conservatism.... 

But I don't think it's had a leader in a long time. I don’t think there’s any one person that can tell you what it is and have other conservatives agree with it....Conservatism, largely, became an academic exercise. It became a movement that wasn’t really fraught with much action. It was a lot of philosophizing....You’ve got to win the election and then you have to implement the agenda and whatever it takes. And you have to withstand all of the assaults that are going to come your way in the process. And this has been something that many on the right, the Republican Party… They haven’t wanted to endure the assaults....So they’ve been pragmatists or compromisers.... 

So enter Trump into all of this, and now we've got action. We have action. Whether by design or by accident where Trump is concerned, we have action against the left, and this is what it looks like. And it’s always going to be ugly and it’s always going to be upsetting — and it’s not going to get better.... 

Much of the alleged intellectual heft of conservatism ended up being Never Trumpers or Never Trump, and they still may be Never Trump. But Dr. Larry Arnn, who is the president of Hillsdale College — and you’ve heard me sing his praises on numerous occasions on this program...Dr. Arnn addressed CPAC yesterday morning. His speech was titled, “The Roots of Conservatism,” and he posed two fundamental questions to the CPACers....What is conservatism and what are we conserving? Now, here’s, to me, unbridled truth. 

Whether you claim to be politically conservative or not, we are in a mess that has been made by wanton liberalism — liberalism which has not been opposed much, and certainly not at all in the last eight years. It’s gotten its lip service. But the actual warrior aspect of conservatism? That’s what everybody’s wondering: “Where is that? Where is the warrior-conservative movement?” Yeah, we know we’ve got a lot of brainiacs that sit up there and they think and they write and they publish and all. But where are the warriors?...

The ‘crisis’ facing American conservatives today, Dr. Arnn proposed, is a crushing administrative state that unconstitutionally combines the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government into one unaccountable body. ‘In those agencies there is no separation of powers,’ Arnn warned. Administrative agencies, run by unelected bureaucrats, operate outside of the bounds imposed upon the government by the U.S. Constitution. And every year these governing bodies create regulations with the force of law that strangle the economy and threaten individual liberty. 

With all the consternation on the right about whether President Trump is a conservative or not, Dr. Arnn reminded [the CPAC] audience of one simple fact: The president campaigned vigorously on cutting back regulations and limiting the unconstitutional administrative state. If the president succeeds in rolling back the administrative state, in restoring the proper function of constitutional government by limiting regulations, ‘I think that guy is a conservative,’ Dr. Arnn said, and let me tell you something: Dr. Larry Arnn is every bit the intellectual conservative that any of the others who are known as intellectual conservatives are.... 

Well, this mess that we are in — whether you claim to be politically conservative or not — the fact is that the solutions...will be conservative....And that means that as Trump solves problems, they’re going to be considered to be conservative solutions."...

Rush Limbaugh: Related Link:
 
Hillsdale Collegian: Arnn Calls Trump a Conservative at CPAC Speech
 
....................

Laura Ingraham on governing as a "conservative:" The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters," she said.".

7/16/2016, "Donald Trump Forces G.O.P. to Choose Between Insularity and Outreach," NY Times, Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin
   
"Laura Ingraham, a conservative radio host supportive of Mr. Trump, said the party’s future base would have to be made up of “working-class nationalists,” who have been drawn to Mr. Trump and reject the Bush-era policies around immigration and trade.

The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters," she said."...(8 parags. from end) 


.......................

Added on ObamaCare from Codevilla:

"Obamacare has existed strictly at the sufferance of the (GOP) House leadership since that majority took office in January 2011": Angelo Codevilla:

9/17/2013, "The Obama-Boehner Project," Angelo M. Codevilla, libertylawsite.org

"The Republican Party owes its majority in the House of Representatives – and John Boehner his speakership thereof – to the American people’s dislike of Obamacare. Because the US Constitution is explicit that the US government may expend only funds appropriated by Congress, Obamacare has existed strictly at the sufferance of the House leadership since that majority took office in January 2011. But John Boehner and his chosen band have thwarted the majority of Republican congressmen’s desire to use the constitutional power they have to refuse to appropriate money for Obamacare. In this, Boehner and co. have worked in bipartisan coordination with the ruling class, including the media, including Fox News....

The ruling class’ foolishness and insincerity, its willingness to insult the American people’s intelligence, are no joke. But we can take comfort in its transparent ineptitude."


..................


Added: The Republican Party doesn't exist: Codevilla

"So long as the Uniparty exists, mere voters will have no way of affecting what the government does."

12/15/2013, "Breaking The UniParty," Angelo Codevilla, libertylawsite.org


 

.......................