Woman welcomes Muslim ‘refugee’ into home, gets raped

Refugees Welcome protesters in Germany.

Refugees Welcome protesters in Germany.

The rape crisis in Sweden and Germany continues unabated but news of the attacks sometimes doesn’t leak out for weeks, even months.

And sometimes the victims are those you would least expect.

Take the case of a 26-year-old Afghan man who last Thursday was sentenced to 30 months in prison for raping a 20-year-old woman who had let him live in her apartment. The sentence was given by the court in Cologne, Germany, reports Kölner Rundschau.

The migrant came to Germany two years ago, the local news outlet reports, and the contact with the woman came through the group “Refugees Welcome,” or “Flüchtlinge Wilkommen.”

The attack occurred Oct. 25, 2015, when the Afghan rapist sneaked into the 20-year-old woman’s room while she was sleeping.

The story sounds eerily similar to another out of Sweden earlier this month. A mother there, working with a welcoming group, decided to open her home to a male refugee from Eritrea. She made her daughter leave her room so she could offer the child’s room to the migrant. That migrant then decided to sexually assault her 10-year-old daughter, the Daily Caller reported.

In fact, Muslim migrants raping those trying to help them is not that unusual.

A 24-year-old spokeswoman for the socialist “Linksjugend Solid” (“Left Youth Solid”), identified only as “Selin G.” was attacked and gang-raped in a parking lot in February. She reported the crime but two weeks later in a fit of guilt said she identified with her rapists as “victims” of German and Western culture, U.S. Herald reported.

The woman posted an apology on her Facebook page to the three men who raped her, blaming their actions on the “racist” atmosphere and “sexist society” in Germany, beginning the post with, “Dear male refugees, I am so sorry!”

A Norwegian man who is an activist in support of the anti-racist “Welcoming” cause was anally raped earlier this year by a Somali migrant and expressed guilt and remorse that the rapist had been deported back to Somalia. Karsten Nordal Hauken, a member of the Norwegian Socialist Left Party who described himself as an ardent “feminist and anti-racist” confessed to a documentary team about his despair at seeing the man deported, Breitbart reported.

The left’s ‘suicidal death wish’

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, explored the leftist mentality toward rape at the hands of Muslim migrants in an interview with Jaimie Glazov last month titled “Avoiding Rape is White Privelege.” In that interview Greenfield said progressives believe it’s impossible for an “oppressed” class of people such as Muslims to commit rape against a white person. They are merely lashing out in violence against those they see as oppressing them.

For this reason many of the rapes of women volunteering as aid workers in the Palestinian territories and in refugee camps across Europe are never reported or quietly reported without media coverage.

Glazov calls it a “suicidal death wish of the left.”

“This reflects and manifests very much the whole narrative of fellow travelers, of leftists and communists, who are very willing to sacrifice others including themselves on the altar of utopian ideals,” Glazov said.

Pamela Geller’s field manual for stopping radical Islam is the
‘How-to’ book offering proven strategies to halt Shariah in the U.S.

Greenfield said the leftist activists will usually put their “anti-racist” agenda ahead of their feminist leanings. The feminists, in short, have to take a back seat to the anti-racists and anti-Islamophobes.

“They are very big on guilt and this is Stockholm syndrome in action as the entire left has an obsession with the idea that if a Muslim does something bad then something worst must have happened to the Muslim and therefore the really guilty party is not the rapist – the rapist was probably driven to it – the real guilty party is the privileged party, which is the white guy (or woman) who was raped because of his privilege and now he’s just acknowledging his privilege by feeling very guilty about it, which again is what the left does really well,” Greenfield said.

This exposes inherently racist mentality of the left, Greenfield said, because they are furthering a narrative that says the rapists possess no free will over their actions – they rape uncontrollably because they are from a certain country or background.

More sexual assaults reported in Germany over weekend

Meanwhile, at least 26 German women were sexually assaulted by Muslim migrants at a free concert Sunday in Germany in attacks the Daily Mail described as “similar to those carried out in Cologne over New Year’s Eve.”

More than 500 German women were sexually assaulted on New Year’s Eve in Cologne and several other cities across Germany.

Three Pakistani men are already under arrest after 26 women filed complaints that they had been inappropriately touched, fondled and groped during the festival in the city of Darmstadt.

Police said the number of complainants could rise and at least two other migrant suspects are being sought.

All the female victims said they were “surrounded” before being “touched and fondled” at the Schlossgrabenfestes music festival.

The three men arrested were said to be between 28 and 31 and are Pakistani nationals seeking asylum in Germany.

Media reports said more women are expected to come forward to file criminal complaints after they were groped at the festival, a four-day event.

Sweden ‘transformed’ into Europe’s rape capital

In 1975, before Sweden began experimenting with a multicultural immigration policy, it was one of the safest countries in the world.

Sweden and Denmark now have the highest rates of sexual assault in the European Union, according to a study by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights. The findings were based on data from 2012 that was published in 2014.

Read more about Sweden’s rape crisis in WND’s recent report.

Read WND’s in-depth report on Muslim rape gangs operating in Britain, covered up by police, media and social workers for years.

Sweden, once a peaceful, low-crime welfare state, has come to be known as “Absurdistan” by critics of its extreme multicultural policies that ignore the economic and social interests of Swedes in favor of migrants.

Last year 163,000 asylum seekers came to Sweden and the prognosis is that between 70,000 and 140,000 will come this year, to a country with a total population of just 9.5 million. Germany has taken in many more Muslim migrants, more than 1 million over the last year, but its population is 80 million, so Sweden has actually transformed itself at a faster rate based on per capita population.

Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlqvist of the Gatestone Institute filed an insightful report on the country’s migrant situation recently.

“One of the things Swedes are most scared of is rape,” says Carlqvist.

Even though it’s illegal for police in Sweden to keep stats on the ethnic background, immigration status, or religion of criminals, Carlqvist says it’s the worst-kept secret in Sweden as to who is responsible for the near-1500 percent increase in rapes.

Watch video of Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlqvist reporting on the country’s rape crisis:



“Almost every day we can read in the alternative media about rapes of Swedish women and girls, committed by asylum seekers or other migrants from the Third World,” she said.

Up until a few decades ago, no one had ever hear of gang rape, she said. Now it happens every week.

“This has of course been going on for many years but the swedes have been so brainwashed by the government and the main-stream media that no one has protested about the rape on Sweden. But that has all changed. These days, no one can escape the horrible realities. Just a few of miles from here is a little village that used to have 900 inhabitants but last year the authorities placed 400 asylum seekers in that little village. That means that almost half of the total population is now people from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Syria. It’s really turned the whole village upside down. I have talked to people who lived and work around there. At first, they were happy to welcome people to their part of the world. They arranged lunches and Christmas celebrations and donated clothing to the migrants. Now, many of the locals are afraid and confused. With tears in their eyes they tell me how their friendly village has been totally transformed by these young, aggressive, male asylum seekers. The asylum seekers scream at the locals, call the women whores, they steal from the shops, and don’t seem at all grateful or happy to be here. Many wonder what these asylum seekers expected when they arrived in Sweden.”

The Daily Svenska Dagbladet interviewed “Salar from Iraq,” who complained:

“We can’t sit here and wait for the decision on resident permits indefinitely… We sit at the asylum house al day long and do nothing. Our children have nothing to do, there is no playground there. And the food that is served here is strange, it doesn’t look like the kind of food we are used to.”

“The people here, they wonder if peace will ever come back to this place,” Carlqvist said.

Germans fleeing Germany?

The situation in Germany is getting so bad that some Germans are leaving in a rare case of “reverse migration.” According to Hungary Today, the number of Germans inquiring about emigrating to Hungary is on the rise.

Munich-based broadcaster Bayerische Rundfunk aired a report last week that documents an increasing number of Germans moving to the Lake Balaton area of Hungary, citing their dissatisfaction with the German government’s asylum policy and a fear of migrants.

The German reporter says Germans generally appreciate the good weather and low costs near Lake Balaton, as well as the presence of a relatively large German community. But recently they have also begun taking into account the fact that the vast majority of Hungarians are Christians and “there are hardly any migrants” in Hungary.

Hungary: The anti-E.U. European country

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been vilified by the establishment media for saying he wishes to keep Hungary a Christian nation.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been vilified by the establishment media for saying he wishes to protect Europe from the invading migrants and preserve Hungary a Christian nation.

That’s because Hungary, led by no-nonsense Prime Minister Viktor Orban, is building a razorwire fence along its southern border with Croatia, Serbia and Romania, stopping the migrants in their tracks and infuriating the European Union’s globalist leaders. The globalists running the E.U. have roundly criticized him for “splitting Europe in two” and stopping the free flow of migrants into their continent.

Orban has said he wants to preserve Hungary’s Christian heritage and he will only accept Christian refugees from the Middle East.

Once the fence is completed, migrants will only be able to travel further into Europe by squeezing through a sliver of Slovenia to the West, or risking the trek through war-torn Ukraine to the East.

Hungary has also implemented a no-nonsense deportation system that allows it to boot illegal aliens from the country within hours, the U.K.’s Express reports.

Orban has also been pilloried by globalist publications in the U.S. including the New York Times and Foreign Policy magazine.

Pamela Geller’s field manual for stopping radical Islam is the
‘How-to’ book offering proven strategies to halt Shariah in the U.S.


Top Hillary aide suffers memory loss in deposition

NEW YORK – Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff during her four years as secretary of state, demonstrated a repeated inability to recall key information about her former boss’s private, unsecured email server in a deposition with Judicial Watch, according to a 270-page transcript released Tuesday.

Cheryl Mills

In testimony Friday that lasted seven hours, three attorneys representing Mills and four from the Justice Department interrupted Judicial Watch attorneys approximately 250 times, shouting “objection” to argue why Mills should not answer the question posed.

When Mills finally did answer, she responded “I don’t recall” 40 times and “I don’t know” to another 182 questions. Her testimony was characterized by pleading she was too busy, too stressed or not sufficiently expert to have appreciated the legal implications of Hillary Clinton’s decision to use two BlackBerry phones to conduct her official State Department correspondence via a personal server in her Chappaqua, New York, residence.

Get a first-hand account of the Democratic presidential front-runner’s character in “Hillary The Other Woman.” Then take action with the Hillary Clinton Investigative Justice Project and let others know, with a bumper sticker calling for “Hillary for prosecution, not president.”

Nevertheless, Mills confirmed that President Bill Clinton first established ClintonEmail.com on the private email server to communicate with his office staff, evidently while he was still president.

Rather than establish a separate private email server for Hillary Clinton after she became secretary of state, the Clintons decided simply to use ClintonEmail.com.

The testimony is part of a lawsuit by Judicial Watch related to Clinton’s use of a private server. Mills’ deposition is among seven of former Clinton top aides and State Department officials that the Washington watchdog has scheduled over the next four weeks

Memory lapses

Consider the following exchange in which Judicial Watch attorneys asked Mills if she had any discussions with Secretary Clinton prior to Clinton leaving the State Department about leaving the emails stored on her ClintonEmail.com account with the State Department so they would be available to her successor, John Kerry.

Mills: I don’t recall having those discussions. And, you know, I can only speak to what I can recall.

Judicial Watch Attorney: Okay.

Mills: And I don’t recall having those discussions.

Asked if she communicated with Clinton by email about the Benghazi attacks, Mills responded:

Mills: I may have, I don’t recall. Because in real time obviously her office is about, happily, or sadly, five to seven feet from mine. And so given the set of events that were happening in that time period, there was a lot of, obviously, direct communication.

As an immediate follow-up, Mills was asked, “Okay. Did you communicate with Ms. Abedin [Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the State Department] about the Benghazi attacks via email?”

Mills responded:

Mills: I absolutely might have. I don’t have a recollection of doing that, but I might have.

Despite Mills’ obvious attempts to avoid answering direct questions asked by Judicial Watch attorneys, Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president, told WND the deposition included valuable information that he estimated would be very important as the other Judicial Watch depositions in the Clinton email scandal develop.

“We now know more than we did prior to Mills’ testimony regarding the Clinton email system,” Fitton told WND, “but there remain many important questions yet to be answered.”

Server ‘preexisted’ secretary

The key question-and-answer session regarding the creation of Hillary Clinton’s private email account is on page 259 of the deposition transcript:

Judicial Watch Attorney: ClintonEmail.com. Do you understand whether that was on a server that Secretary Clinton set up or on a server that was set up by President Clinton?

Mills: The server preexisted Secretary Clinton’s arrival at the State Department. President Clinton had established a server for the purposes of his own staff office, and – and her – her email was subsequently put on that. That was not information I had contemporaneous knowledge of. It is information that I’ve come to learn over the course of my time period since then.

Then, on page 265 of the transcript, the line of questioning resumes.

Judicial Watch Attorney: How did you learn how the server – or who had – who had purchased the server?

Mills: So, I’m not sure how to answer your question. But maybe I should answer it what your goal – I don’t know what your goal is. But, in other words, the server was in place at the Clinton’s residence prior to Secretary Clinton becoming secretary. It subsequently was upgraded. And it was being used for the president’s personal staff, and the email was put on that server.

Fitton also stressed that Mills admitted knowing Brian Pagliano, the Clinton family technical assistant who was hired by the State Department to make Hillary Clinton’s private email operational and integrated into the State Department’s secure government server.


YouTube, Facebook crack down on ‘hate speech’


In Europe, outside the protections of the First Amendment, American tech giants including Facebook, Youtube and Twitter reached an agreement with the Europe Union on Tuesday to crack down on online speech that some, apparently including activist groups, identify as “hate speech.”

A report from the Associated Press said the newly approved “code of conduct” will have the tech companies “quickly” remove “illegal hate speech directed against anyone over issues of race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.”

The companies agreed “to strengthen their partnerships with civil society organizations [that] often flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct,” the report said.

Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner “responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality,” said in the report, “The Internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech.”

Bloomberg’s Stephanie Bodoni said the agreement also includes Google and Microsoft.

“Beyond national laws that criminalize hate speech, there is a need to ensure such activity by Internet users is expeditiously reviewed by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame,” the group said in a prepared statement.

Long identified as a problem have been online communications among members of terror organizations such as the Islamic State, “which has used the Web and social media to spread its message of hate against its enemies,” the report said.

The companies admitted it would be a “challenge” to balance freedom of expression and “hate speech.”

Reported Bloomberg, “A French Jewish youth group, UEJF, sued Twitter, Facebook and Google in Paris this month over how they monitor hate speech on the Web. In the course of about six weeks in April and May, members of French anti-discrimination groups flagged unambiguous hate speech that they said promoted racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism. More than 90 percent of the posts pointed out to Twitter and YouTube remained online within 15 days on average following requests for removal, according to the study by UEJF, SOS Racisme and SOS Homophobie.”

The AP, which credited Facebook with having “1.6 million users” said the company was telling customers to use online reporting tools to monitor speech.

Meanwhile, Fortune said as Facebook has focused on becoming a platform for video, publishers who don’t work in the genre are becoming less and less involved.

The report cited a study from NewsWhip that said there’s been a “noticeable decline” in engagement with Facebook.

The results follow by only days a scandal in which Facebook was accused of intentionally interfering with a list of “trending” stories or news events to downplay conservative interests.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg held a meeting with some members of the conservative community over the issue.

The NewsWhip study said it looked at likes, comments and sharing of linked articles “from the top 10 publishers on Facebook over the past year. … Over the past nine months, NewsWhip says, the research shows a fairly sharp decline in engagement of all kinds: Likes, the most dominant form of interaction, dropped by about 55 percent between July of last year and April of 2016. And sharing activity also declined sharply: Shares fell by 57percent and comments by almost 64 percent.”

Asked the report, “It seems obvious that engagement for non-video content is declining. But why? It could be that Facebook is deliberately pushing that kind of article down in people’s feeds.”

WND reported two years ago that there were calls developing to censor speech online.

That was when the Southern Poverty Law Center called the World Congress of Families, which promotes the “natural family,” an “anti-LGBT hate group.”

And the same SPLC has blasted the Drudge Report for covering “black crime,” charging that the immensely popular Internet news aggregator “has been rife with what the online publisher calls ‘scary black people’ stories.”

That was when two Democratic lawmakers wanted to have Barack Obama’s Justice Department submit a report for action against any Internet sites, broadcast, cable television or radio shows determined to be advocating or encouraging “violent acts.”

That’s from the text of the bill from Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.

The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014 would have created ” an updated comprehensive report examining the role of the Internet and other telecommunications in encouraging hate crimes based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation and create recommendations to address such crimes,” stated a news release from Markey’s office.

The SPLC was later linked to domestic terror when it was cited as a source of information for a man who attacked the Washington offices of Family Research Council, and admitted he wanted to kill as many as possible.

The issue was that SPLC identified FRC as a “hate” group when, in fact, it simply follows the biblical definitions for marriage and family, and does not subscribe to a “hate” agenda at all.

Several years earlier, a Canadian administrative judge’s demand for a $5,000 penalty and a written apology from a man who criticized homosexuality in a letter to his local newspaper was overturned on appeal.

That was because the law itself specifies that exempts “the free expression of opinion on any subject,” and only applies to actions.

That’s been the legal standard in the United States as well, although there have been attempts to push the censorship plan into the actual realm of speech.

A spokesman for the Alliance Defending Freedom explained the U.S. First Amendment and the Canadian Charter of Rights were designed to protect unwanted speech.

“Speech everyone wants to hear doesn’t need protection. It’s the only reason the First Amendment was written, to protect unwanted or hurtful expressions,” the spokesman said at the time. “That’s what separates us from the totalitarian societies behind the old Iron Curtain.”

Obama signed the “Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act” early in his presidency, and it cracks down on any acts that could be linked to criticism of homosexuality or even the “perception” of homosexuality.

As Congress debated it, there were assurances it would not be used to crack down on speech.

But days after Obama signed it, in response, pastors and other Christian leaders gathered to read from the Bible at a rally organized with the help of Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Coalition.

“If this law is used to silence me or any of these preachers for speaking the truth, then we will be forced to conscientiously defy it,” Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America, declared. “That is my calling as a Christian and my right as an American citizen.”

The bill signed by Obama was opposed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which called it a “menace” to civil liberties. The commission argued the law allows federal authorities to bring charges against individuals even if they’ve already been cleared in a state court.


Katie Couric: Sorry for deceiving you on guns

Katie Couric

Katie Couric

Katie Couric is now taking blame for a deceptive edit in an interview she had with pro-gun activists in an apparent attempt to embarrass those who support gun rights.

On the website of “Under the Gun,” a documentary film that explores the epidemic of gun violence, Couric, who is the project’s executive producer, stated:

I take responsibility for a decision that misrepresented an exchange I had with members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL). My question to the VCDL regarding the ability of convicted felons and those on the terror watch list to legally obtain a gun, was followed by an extended pause, making the participants appear to be speechless.

When I screened an early version of the film with the director, Stephanie Soechtig, I questioned her and the editor about the pause and was told that a “beat” was added for, as she described it, “dramatic effect,” to give the audience a moment to consider the question. When VCDL members recently pointed out that they had in fact immediately answered this question, I went back and reviewed it and agree that those eight seconds do not accurately represent their response.

She also expressed some remorse for the edit, saying, “I regret that those eight seconds were misleading and that I did not raise my initial concerns more vigorously.”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh came down harshly on Couric, whom he described Tuesday as “not a nice person.”

“It was a totally fake and phony edit, and she’s now taking responsibility for it because the pressure obviously got to be so intense,” Limbaugh said.

“I bet you there will not be a single story on how many sponsors she’s lost because of this. Not a single one. Nor will there be any stories on how many sponsors lost here and wanted to come back and we said ‘no’ to. There won’t be any coverage like that at all, ’cause that’s not the point of the coverage.

“So they’re gonna try to cover it up for Katie and limit the damage to her as much possible. That’s why she feels confident going out there and taking the hit ’cause she knows it’s gonna all be over by the next day. And no harm, no foul, and she’ll still be doing what she’s doing the same way she’s doing it. In other words, getting away with it – except when she’s caught.”

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

Last week, Stephanie Soechtig, the film’s director released a statement trying to explain why she inserted the long pause of nothingness: “There are a wide range of views expressed in the film. My intention was to provide a pause for the viewer to have a moment to consider this important question before presenting the facts on Americans’ opinions on background checks. I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.”

Although the documentary cut out the responses, the film’s website is now providing the transcript, showing the responses were immediate and substantive:

KATIE COURIC: If there are no background checks, how do you prevent … I know how you all are going to answer this, but I’m asking anyway. If there are no background checks for gun purchasers, how do you prevent felons or terrorists from walking into, say a licensed gun dealer and purchasing a gun?

MALE: Well, one, if you’re not in jail then you should still have your basic rights and you should go buy a gun.

COURIC: So, if you’re a terrorist or a felon …

MALE: If you’re a felon and you’ve done your time, you should have your rights.

MALE: The fact is we do have statutes, both at the federal and state level that prohibit classes of people from being in possession of firearms. If you’re under 18 in Virginia you can’t walk around with a gun. If you’re an illegal immigrant, if you’re a convicted felon, if you’ve been adjudicated in same, these things are already illegal. So, what we’re really asking about is a question of prior restraint. How can we prevent future crime by identifying bad guys before they do anything bad? And, the simple answer is you can’t.

And, particularly, under the legal system we have in the United States there are a lot of Supreme Court opinions that say, “No, prior restraint is something that the government does not have the authority to do.” Until there is an overt act that allows us to say, “That’s a bad guy,” then you can’t punish him.

FEMALE: I would take another outlook on this. First, I’ll ask you what crime or what law has ever stopped a crime? Tell me one law that has ever stopped a crime from happening.

Nora Ryan, the chief of staff for EPIX, the cable channel that aired the documentary, told the Washington Free Beacon, “Under the Gun is a critically-acclaimed documentary that looks at the polarizing and politicized issue of gun violence, a subject that elicits strong reactions from people on both sides. EPIX stands behind Katie Couric, director Stephanie Soechtig, and their creative and editorial judgment. We encourage people to watch the film and decide for themselves.”

Follow Joe Kovacs on Twitter @JoeKovacsNews


Jeff Sessions to GOP: Adapt to Trump or die

(POLITICO) — Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, Donald Trump’s friendly but fierce Alabama ally, has a message for Republicans still queasy about their party’s nominee: Tide’s about to roll over you.

Sessions, a 69-year-old former state attorney general who famously donned the “Make America Great Again” trucker’s cap at a massive rally in Mobile last August, thinks Trump is more a movement than a man. And this sprightly son of country preachers and teachers is on a mission to evangelize maybe-Trumpers like House Speaker Paul Ryan on the Gospel According to Donald — with a sermon on self-preservation.

“I think [Ryan] needs to recognize, on some of these issues, Trump is where the Republicans are and if you’re going to be a Republican leader you should be supportive of that,” Sessions told me during a taping of POLITICO’s “Off Message” podcast in his Senate office last week.


Stephen Hawking can’t explain Trump’s popularity

(INDEPENDENT) — Stephen Hawking has said the popularity of “demagogue” Donald Trump is beyond even his understanding.

The world-famous theoretical physicist has made no secret of his disdain for the likely Republican Party presidential nominee – previously joking about his intelligence.

Asked if his knowledge of the universe meant he could explain the popular appeal of the billionaire tycoon, he told ITV’s Good Morning Britain: “I can’t… He is a demagogue, who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator.“


Trump is a ‘shape-shifting lizard’ on road sign

(STAR-TELEGRAM) — DALLAS Those highway sign pranksters are at it again — to the dismay of the Texas Department of Transportation — and this time they are taking playful aim at presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Early Tuesday, someone broke into three portable, electronic highway signs along Interstate 30 in Dallas County and changed the wording of the messages, which are normally used to warn motorists about lane closures.

Instead, the signs featured quips such as “Donald Trump is a shape shifting lizard” and “Bernie for President,” according to photos posted at WFAA. And, still another posted the post Memorial Day weekend messages, “Go back home” and “Work is canceled.”


Lawmakers target troops’ housing allowance

(WASHINGTON TIMES) Lawmakers want to trim the fat in the defense budget by targeting service members’ housing stipends.

Senators are using a draft of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2017 (NDAA) to change the Basic Allowance for Housing system (BAH). The goal is to move away from a flat-rate stipend based on rank and family status to a system that only allocates benefits for rent and utilities costs. The current system allows troops to pocket savings.

“While service members paid as much as 22 percent of their housing costs out-of-pocket in the decades preceding the change to the current system in the late 1990s, by 2006, out-of-pocket expenses were eliminated entirely, and indeed, in certain circumstances, as demonstrated by a recent US Army Audit Agency (USAAA) audit, the benefit now far exceeds the actual cost of housing borne by some service members,” a recent Senate report on NDAA said, the Daily Caller reported Sunday.


Hillary indicted? Huge number would still vote for her

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton

Fully half of likely Democratic voters said in a recent Rasmussen Reports survey they would vote for Hillary Clinton even if she were to be indicted for a felony.

The shocking finding was based on a national telephone and online query to 1,000 likely voters, and has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’

And by the numbers: Only 43 percent of likely U.S. voters thought Clinton ought to suspend her campaign immediately if she’s charged with a felony in connection to her home-based email server. Fifty percent, however, think she should keep on seeking the high office, felony indictment be danged, until she’s proven guilty in court.

Democrats more than Republicans thought Clinton should keep campaigning in the face of a felony, by a margin of 71 percent to 30 percent.

Just in time for the 2016 election, hear Hillary Clinton say she would NOT run for president, in “Hillary Unhinged” by Thomas Kuiper

And while 40 percent all voters said they were less likely to vote the Clinton ticket because of her ongoing email server scandal – which has brought on a federal criminal investigation – another 48 percent shrugged it off and said the issue has no bearing at all on their vote. Another eight percent, meanwhile, said the email scandal “makes them more likely to vote for the former first lady,” Rasumussen reported.

It’s not like the voters who support Clinton in the face of a felony charge think she’s innocent. Rather, they recognize her likely guilt – but support her just the same.

One more statistic from the survey: “Sixty-five percent consider it likely that Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving emails containing classified information through a private email server while serving as secretary of state. This includes 47 percent who say it’s very likely. These findings are unchanged from January.”