The FISA Court Should Be Shut Down

AMERICAN GREATNESS has more on this… here is a snippet of the video:

“The point here Martha is the court knew about all of this,” Nunes said. “I’m glad they’ve acted, I’m glad they said something, but the court needs to be ended,” he argued.

The California Republican voiced concern that neither the FBI and FISA judges can be trusted with powerful surveillance powers on Sunday as well, telling Fox News host Maria Bartiromo that the FISA court is in “tremendous jeopardy.”

“We cannot support the FISA court right now,” he said flatly. “The judges are refusing to take action against these dirty cops and dirty lawyers who did this.”

REMEMBER, Judge Collyer signed off on a Carter Page warrant… (July 2018) via, DOJ Releases Carter Page FISA Applications – Critics Proven Right

RIGHT SCOOP notes the case presented to Judge Collyer 2-and-a-half years ago explaining all that the IG Report just confirmed:

Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation filed a secret motion with the FISA court to act on application abuses all the way back in 2017, but just five days later the FISA court, via Judge Rosemary Collyer, denied their claim. Below is a statement from Mark Levin:

Over 2 1/2 years ago, a Landmark Legal Foundation asked Judge Collyer to act on the FBI abuses committed on the court and she denied our request. Now, she asserts she has the power to act. Better late than never, I guess, but the judge should have acted much earlier.

This is the same Judge Rosemary Collyer who rebuked the FBI today.

It just goes to show you how Landmark Legal was on this well before the OIG was ever asked to investigate the FISA abuses. Levin is right though, the FISA court should have acted then as some of this was known back in 2017…..

RIGHT SCOOP has the letter to the FBI. Devin Nunes had it right on Sunday…. shut down the FISA court!

FISA Court Speaks Out (UPDATED!)

Wow… finally! People were wondering why the FISA Court was so silent. Well, not any-longer….

A secretive surveillance court issued a rare public order on Tuesday rebuking the FBI for its handling of warrant applications to wiretap Carter Page, a onetime Trump campaign foreign-policy adviser whose monitoring by the government has become the subject of significant public controversy.

Judge Rosemary Collyer, the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, wrote in the filing that a recent Justice Department watchdog report was “troubling” and described the behavior of the FBI as “antithetical to the heightened duty of candor” owed to the court by government agents.

“THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY FBI PERSONNEL TURNED OUT TO BE UNSUPPORTED OR CONTRADICTED BY INFORMATION IN THEIR POSSESSION, AND WITH WHICH THEY WITHHELD INFORMATION DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR CASE, CALLS INTO QUESTION WHETHER INFORMATION CONTAINED IN OTHER FBI APPLICATIONS IS RELIABLE. THE FISC EXPECTS THE GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE INFORMATION IN EVERY FILING WITH THE COURT,” JUDGE COLLYER WROTE.

The order could drastically reshape relations between the court and the Justice Department and could have ramifications for how some of the nation’s most sensitive intelligence programs are run. The court has long approved the overwhelming number of the government’s warrant applications and signed off on most of its surveillance activities, but in recent years it has begun to scrutinize them more closely. The rift over the matter of Mr. Page could heighten the court’s scrutiny of government surveillance.

Because of the nature of the court’s work in approving secret surveillance of people suspected of spying and terrorism, it operates in near total secrecy and rarely releases its filings or orders to the public.

The order follows the release earlier in December of a watchdog report that found serious lapses in the FBI’s handling of the warrant against Mr. Page. In the report, the Justice Department’s inspector general found that the FBI had withheld exculpatory material about Mr. Page from the court and made misleading statements about his relationship with another government agency.

Judge Collyer ordered the Justice Department to explain by Jan. 10 what steps it was taking to prevent such lapses in the future. The judge’s order also indicated it planned to release more secret material about the case in the coming weeks on its public docket, offering the possibility of additional insight into the government’s most secret surveillance programs…..

(WALL STREET JOURNAL)

REMEMBER, judge Collyer signed off on a Carter Page warrant… (July 2018) DOJ Releases Carter Page FISA Applications – Critics Proven Right

RIGHT SCOOP notes the case presented to Judge Collyer 2-and-a-half years ago:

Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation filed a secret motion with the FISA court to act on application abuses all the way back in 2017, but just five days later the FISA court, via Judge Rosemary Collyer, denied their claim. Below is a statement from Mark Levin:

Over 2 1/2 years ago, a Landmark Legal Foundation asked Judge Collyer to act on the FBI abuses committed on the court and she denied our request. Now, she asserts she has the power to act. Better late than never, I guess, but the judge should have acted much earlier.

This is the same Judge Rosemary Collyer who rebuked the FBI today.

It just goes to show you how Landmark Legal was on this well before the OIG was ever asked to investigate the FISA abuses. Levin is right though, the FISA court should have acted then as some of this was known back in 2017…..

RIGHT SCOOP has the letter to the FBI. Devin Nunes had it right on Sunday…. shut down the FISA court!

ALL of this — however — shows that way, way back in March 2017, Mark Levin had it right. Even the 4-people being spied on… all of it confirmed by the IG Report (more at OBAMAGATE):

Which all goes to support the idea that #NEVERTRUMPERS and the Left are chasing people to the media they despise (the media, BTW, that called this all along):

  • This is the entire issue regarding our Intelligence agencies… They abused the FISA Court warrant process. I was told that the Steele Dossier was only a small part of the warrant. For two years by Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, etc-etc. (BTW, the names represent Intel, the CIA, and the FBI). Turns out it was literally the only thing use as John Solomon, Kimberly Strassel, Sara Carter, Sean Hannity, Mollie Hemingway, Chuck Ross, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc — said. (MORE AT A PREVIOUS POST)

The bells are tolling…

 

Democrat Shenanigans (Conservative Media’s Windfall)

In a conversation on FACEBOOK I said the following for a point #2 out of three… I thought it worthwhile to pass along as a point others can use it in conversation:


More Facebook Meanderings


SECOND. This is the entire issue regarding our Intelligence agencies… They abused the FISA Court warrant process. I was told that the Steele Dossier was only a small part of the warrant. For two years by Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, etc-etc. (BTW, the names represent Intel, the CIA, and the FBI). Turns out it was literally the only thing use as John Solomon, Kimberly Strassel, Sara Carter, Sean Hannity, Mollie Hemingway, Chuck Ross, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc — said.

The funny thing about this is for two years I have said that there will be some RICH people out of this. I have said for two years Flynn’s case will be ultimately thrown out. Carter Page is already setting up a large lawsuit.

(Here is a quick excerpt from a previous Facebook discussion)

Just a quick note here. The four U.S. citizens spied on by the government we’ll have a great case to make in court to sue set government (during the whole Russian Collusion conspiracy against Trump). So not only did the original investigation cost many millions of dollars, it is possible that many millions more is going to be doled out.

NowAdam Schiff has himself (against proper procedure) gone and gotten metadata from phone companies and then matched it up with journalist an opposing political persons phones. Without a warrant. I assume another criminal case will start around this And, much like the other case millions of dollars may be doled out to these individuals who had their metadata illegally seized by the government.

BY THE WAY, you can read here “Democrats” when I say government. Ultimately all the taxpayers will have to — and have paid for it. But these incurred cost come by way of Democrats alone. (As well as never Trumper’s)

(I also noted two-years ago that if police were to fraudulently come into a home using fake warrants, when the judge found out the case was based on them, would vacate the original warrants and throw the entire case before the court out…. So too Barr may descend the original warrants which would mean all the cases based on them would be overturned. So whether one thought that Manafort was a dirty SOB and deserved jail. It wouldn’t matter.)

NOW, the general public has seen Fox News as the only news org showing what the IG REPORT said, alongside the rest of the names I named. Much like the dirty warrants overturning cases (even if people are truly dirty)… So too has the Left emboldened media people they dispose as being the only truth tellers on important issues — at least in a growing segment of the public.

In other words, not only did Democrats with TDS reelect Trump. They increased the audience to sources of news they despise [who were correct in their summation of the whole “FISA/Russia” thing].

Here are some posts of mine detailing the failure of our “Intel community” (like the Intel community should be spying on an American candidate and later a President, rather than giving him defensive briefings)

Dems Had Their Asses Handed To Them (Day 2 | Perjury Update)

Remember, just like in Clinton’s case… the impeachment fortified his popularity with the people. SO TO is this happening (as predicted) with Trump… already his popularity is up 4-points. And it is rooted in people seeing the following ass-whoopin’ by the GOP on Democratic shenanigans. NUNES hits another one out of the ballpark. House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes makes his opening statement during the second public impeachment hearing.

30-second tear-down (GOP setting records):

BTW, for your reading pleasure: LEGAL INSURRECTION, excellent write up of Elise Stefanik. Here is more from RIGHT SCOOP:

Stefanik points out that Yovanovitch testified that she participated in practice confirmation hearings in the Obama administration, taking practice questions specifically regarding Hunter Biden being hired on Burisma’s board.

Stefanik then drops her payload:

“So for the millions of Americans watching, President Obama’s own State Department was so concerned about potential conflicts of interest from Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma that they raised it themselves while prepping this wonderful ambassador nominee before her confirmation. And yet our Democratic colleagues and the chairman of this committee cry foul when we dare ask that same question that the Obama state department was so concerned about.”

So there you go. It was a huge concern for Obama’s own state department but nobody else is allowed to bring it up? And remember, this ‘prepping’ was well before Biden’s infamous comments on it that gave life to Republican concerns about it.

Levin responded to Stefanik’s testimony this way:

Two MIC DROP moments from yesterday!


PERJURY UPDATE


IN FACT, RED STATE points out that Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch may have perjured herself:

But another thing caught my eye and the eye of several other conservatives following things live – It really, really looks like Yovanovitch committed perjury today. 

I remember seeing this live and thinking “huh?”

Early on in her testimony, she stated under oath that the issue of Hunter Biden and Burisma was never brought up to her by the previous administration. Later, though, Rep. Stefanik finally got to ask some questions and that’s where things went off the rails. Under intense questioning, including reading of her prior closed-door testimony, Yovanovitch was forced to admit that the previous administration had indeed brought up the Biden/Burisma issue to her.

And lest someone argue it may have been a forgettable affair, it wasn’t just in passing. The Obama officials prepping her were apparently so concerned about the issue being raised that it was part of her mock Q and A to get ready for her nomination hearing. These are issues she studied up on and she clearly was aware that the previous administration had briefed her on the matter. Yet, we see her pretty clearly lie about it early on in today’s hearing, only admitting it after being pressed with her prior testimony.

That sure sounds like perjury to me….

The DAILY WIRE also notes the discrepancy in testimony:

Yet, earlier during the hearing Yovanovitch gave what appeared to be contradictory remarks.

Yovanovitch said, “And although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.”

[…]

WOW! And this may not be the only time — unfortunately (FEDERALIST):

  • Yovanovitch Emailed With Dem Staffer After Whistleblower Complaint, Contradicting Under-Oath Testimony: What makes the email particularly unsettling is that it indicates former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch possibly committed perjury during her ‘impeachment inquiry’ deposition, where  he was questioned under oath.

Impeachment Lies – Democratic Chaos

Below you will see in my upload (3rd video below), that it is true that the witnesses the Democrats call are refuting their narrative. EVEN WITHOUT REPUBLICANS calling witnesses of their own. So while the total count on the committees are 58 Democrat and 47 Republicans — the Founders set it up for the entire House to be involved. And as you will see, the inquiry has begun last week (again, 3rd video).

And when they are allowed to cross examine (the Democrats often times stop this from happening by shift which committee is handling the interview, or making it an Intel case), QUID PRO QUO is not crossing the witnesses lips:

  • REP. RATCLIFFE: Ambassador Taylor again today I found him to be forthright. He had very strong opinions on Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy. But again the mainstream media reporting that he provided evidence of a quid pro quo involving military aid is false. I questioned him directly on that. Under Adam Schiff’s rules I can’t tell you what he said but I can tell you what he didn’t say. Neither he or any other witness has provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aide was being withheld. You can’t have a quid pro quo with no quo!

I put together a “collage” of issues detailing why Republicans would “STORM” these secretive — nonConstitutional — hearings in order to try and make them public. Public. They are not trying to cover up anything, they are trying to make it fair and open. You would think the media would flock to this idea… however they are not. What follows are talking heads, politicians, and the like discussing and clarifying the issues.

Here is a person intimately involved in the process during the Clinton process in the house, Newt Gingrich. His NEWSWEEK article is excellent!

two very different approaches can be seen in the voting pattern in the House. In November 1973, the House voted to fund the investigation into President Richard Nixon on a bipartisan 367-51 vote. By February 1974, everyone was so convinced that Rodino was being fair and nonpartisan that the resolution to conduct a formal investigation passed 410-4.

[….]

The result of our openness was that a substantial number of Democrats continued to vote with us on the procedures despite intense pressure from the White House and outside groups. In September 1998, the House voted to release the Starr report by 363-63 (nine failed to vote). Among Democrats, 138 voted to proceed in a fair way, and only 63 voted against investigating President Clinton.

Think about that. In 1998, we carried House Democrats by better than 2:1 to investigate President Clinton.

In the current atmosphere—with the dishonest, one-sided rigged game, and indeed, an obvious liar as chair of the investigation—can you imagine two-thirds of the House Republicans voting with Pelosi and Schiff for a witch hunt conducted under totally partisan rules?

Everyone who is interested in better understanding how fair people used judicial standards and basic fairness in 1973 and 1998 should read former Congressman and current Judge Jim Rogan’s personal history of the process in an important book: Catching Our Flag: Behind the Scenes of a Presidential Impeachment.

It will make crystal clear that the current partisan actions are a complete sham.

Mark Levin had an excellent dressing down of Jake Tapper from CNN regarding his recent commentary on the GOP “STORMING” the sham process the Democrats are calling an impeachment inquiry. Levin plays audio of Jake Tapper discussing the impeachment issue of the recent “STORMING” of the sham process the Democrats have made the vaunted impeachment inquiry. The GOP, mind you, merely wants the process in the public with the same rights afforded to Trump as were afforded to Nixon and Clinton. You would assume the media want the same thing… but in fact they are supporting the “Star Chamber” like process.

What kind of issues might the GOP regarding witnesses they would call up? Hunter Biden maybe? Joe Biden? Bill Taylor… in cross-examination? Maybe on the following snippet from ACE OF SPADES?

No big deal, but Bill Taylor — Adam Schiff’s star chamber witness — also has ties to the Burisma-funded Atlantic Council.

Acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, who provided key testimony to the Democrats’ controversial impeachment inquiry yesterday, has evidenced a close relationship with the Atlantic Council think tank, even writing Ukraine policy pieces with the organization’s director and analysis articles published by the Council.

The Atlantic Council is funded by and works in partnership with Burisma, the natural gas company at the center of allegations regarding Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

In addition to a direct relationship with the Atlantic Council, Taylor for the last nine years also served as a senior adviser to the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC), which has co-hosted events with the Atlantic Council and has participated in events co-hosted jointly by the Atlantic Council and Burisma.

Meanwhile, a search of government records reveals that Joe Biden intervened with both the DHS and the DOJ on behalf of Graft Hunter’s clients.

From the Washington Examiner. Outline.com link here.

Joe Biden privately contacted the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice when he was a senior and influential U.S. senator to discuss issues that his son Hunter’s firm was being paid to lobby on, according to government records.

On at least two occasions, Biden contacted federal departments to discuss issues related to Hunter’s firm’s lobbying clients, according to records reviewed by the Washington Examiner.

Government records show that Biden, who has always insisted he knows nothing about his son’s business activities, helped Hunter’s work with strategic and highly specific interventions that could have benefited his son to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars….

If the hearing was fair and honest… the Democrats know they would lose the public confidence. Hence the secrecy. Even with the Republicans — with biased rules, are prevailing when allowed to cross examine.


More Video Fodder


After Rep. Adam Schiff read a false version of President Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Zelensky and claimed it to be parody, Larry decides to do a little investigating into why the Congressman is so confident in the whistleblower, whether he had contact with him, and whether the whistleblower actually had firsthand knowledge of the call. Larry also takes a look into why the whistleblower process requirement for firsthand knowledge was mysteriously removed.

ELDER

GRAHAM!

BONGINO

Fred Fleitz (Longtime CIA) Discusses the “Whistleblower”

Mark Levin had Fred Fleitz (WIKI) on his show to discuss the latest issues with the leaker. Insightful discussion.

The story from the beginning has utterly fallen apart BTW:

  • Quid Pro Quo and Cover-Up Allegations Against Trump are Falling Apart (PJ-MEDIA)
  • Mark Levin DEBUNKS insane allegations made by “leftwing kooks” in the media (RIGHT SCOOP)
  • Media Ukraine Conspiracy Theories Shot Down (RPT)
  • Whistelblower Fabrications (RPT)

Nothing Burger 2.0 (Ukraine) | Hewitt, Hannity, and Levin

These are just some excerpts of guests discussing the Ukraine and the Democrats outrage [nothing burger 2.0] starting with the earliest show (AM) to the latest (PM). I had time yesterday to upload the following (Dr.’s Appointment), I hope to get to Larry Elder tonight.

HUGH HEWITT (+ Rep. Gallagher)

This is why I like listening to Hugh Hewitt. Apparently Nancy Pelosi didn’t start an inquiry into impeachment like the Republicans started one with Bill Clinton. Nothing has changed after Nancy Pelosi’s presser. In other words, we aren’t even one step closer to an impeachment trial or investigation. And representative Gallagher said that they are meeting to prematurely release The whistle-blower complaint, which was already scheduled for the end of the week. So the Washington Post noted that this was not first hand information from said whistle-blower. And the Wall Street journal debunked quid pro quo. In other words the Democrats have bupkis. But now President Trump has a new whipping boy. Which is: Hunter Biden getting $50,000 a month for 5 years for doing nothing but “going into business” with John Kerry’s son and Whitey Bulger’s son.

SEAN HANNITY (+ JOhn Solomon & Gregg Jarrett)

John Solomon and Gregg Jarrett discuss everything Ukraine, the Biden’s, and even some Russia thrown in for good measure — with Sean Hannity.

MARK LEVIN (+ John Solomon)

What a great interview! Have any misunderstanding or feel ignorant about how hypocritical Democrats are? Wonder no more.

Google Censored Search Content in Orange County

GATEWAY PUNDIT has some great links in their set-up of the video:

In a previous appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight Dr. Epstein revealed that Google can take a 50-50 split among undecided voters and change it into a 90-10 split with no one knowing they had been manipulated and without leaving a paper trail… It has to do with their search suggestions.

Far left Google has a history now of election interference.

In June James O’Keefe and Project Veritas  released alarming new undercover video, leaked documents, and testimony from a Google insider revealing the tech giant’s plans to meddle in US politics and “prevent a Trump situation in 2020.”

The tech giants already pulled this off in 2018.

In January Dr. Epstein revealed that just one Google shift in search results on Election Day in 2018 shifted from 800,000 to 4.6 million votes to Democratic candidates

FULL video interview HERE.

Rat Infested

DC SHORTS has a great montage of the Democrats revealing their own hypocrisy. If Trump is racist for his statements, then so are these peeps:

The “Prince of Pico Union” adeptly destroys the Left’s narrative of Trump’s “racist Tweet” regarding Baltimore.

Mark Levin uses Elijah Cummings own words to destroy the narrative that even the word “infested” is a “dog whistle” for racism.

Is Trump “Nasty” (Larry Elder | Mark Levin)

People jump at the media’s headlines, hook and sinker. I start with Larry Elder (till 7:20) dealing mightily with the London Mayor and his attacking of OUR President. I have uploaded in the past Mark Steyn discussing London Mayor, Sadiq Khan (YOUTUBE). I likewise have posted on this pseudo-Jihadist in the past (The MSM and #NeverTrumpers Join Forces in “Wooden” Literalism). This is what the Londanistan Mayor said:

  • “Donald Trump is just one of the most egregious examples of a growing global threat,” declared Khan, “The far right is on the rise around the world… Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Matteo Salvini in Italy, Marine Le Pen in France and Nigel Farage here in the UK are using the same divisive tropes of the fascists of the 20th century to garner support,” he claimed, warning that they are “using new sinister methods to deliver their message.” — Sadiq Khan of Trump

Then Mark Levin (7:20) wallops the media for the “nasty” quote in the interview with Trump. The MSM loves narratives against Trump, but as soon as Trump is out of office, CNN and MSNBC will be struggling bigly. This is what Trump was responding to:

  • “[H]is misogynistic outbursts and attacks on journalists, minorities and anyone else perceived as an enemy drive a good number of people to conclude that he is a dangerous man to hold so much power” — Meghan Markle of Trump

A great ONE-TWO punch from Larry Elder and Mark Levin! For a good post on the issue, see LEGAL INSURRECTION.

Life, Liberty & Levin (John Solomon and Sara Carter)

AMERICAN THINKER intros the video a bit:

A compelling hour of intelligent television is in store tonight at 10 PM ET/PT on the Fox News Channel, Life, Liberty & LevinThe program will feature a discussion of the Mueller Report and the Deep State’s efforts to take down President Donald Trump with guests Sara A. Carter and John Solomon.

[….]

Tonight’s two guests, Sara Carter and John Solomon, are well-known to Fox News viewers. Carter has appeared scores of times on the channel and is a Fox News contributor. After a distinguished career as an award-winning international correspondent, she emerged in March 2017 as a probing investigative reporter in Washington, D.C. specializing in all things involving the Deep State’s hostile investigations into President Trump and his administration. She has become a regular on the #1 cable news program Hannity (M-F 9 PM ET). As Buck Sexton wrote about Carter when he interviewed her in July 2017, “She has been breaking stories left and right on surveillance, the Russia collusion investigation, and the Deep State. If you’re interested in what’s real and what’s not, she is a must-read.”

John F. Solomon is currently a vice president and an opinion contributor to The Hill. In the past, he was editor in chief of the Washington Times and before that he worked for the Washington Post and the Associated Press. Like Carter, Solomon’s beat in recent years has been exposing the details of the soft coup against President Trump. He and Carter have written articles together, including for Circa News, and their work tends to complement each other’s. They often appear together on Sean Hannity’s program to break news….

Reparations – Who Should Pay

Mark Levin starts his show by reading from a 2004 article written by the Rev. Wayne Perryman entitled, “The Racist History of the Democratic Party.” It is also summed up in these three links, one to my VIMEO, and the others to my site (w/lots of media):

  • The Rev. Wayne Perryman On Democratic Racism (VIMEO);
  • Did The Party’s Switch? (RPT);
  • Slavery Made the South Poor, Not Rich (RPT).

IF the narrative is pushed that reparations are to be given, it should be emphasized that one Party should repay them.

Here is a partial excerpt of the Wayne Perryman article Mark Levin was reading from

The Racist History of the Democratic Party

Most people are either a Democrat by design, or a Democrat by deception. That is either they were well aware the racist history of the Democrat Party and still chose to be Democrat, or they were deceived into thinking that the Democratic Party is a party that sincerely cared about Black people.

History reveals that every piece of racist legislation that was ever passed and every racist terrorist attack that was ever inflicted on African Americans, was initiated by the members of the Democratic Party. From the formation of the Democratic Party in 1792 to the Civil Rights movement of 1960’s, Congressional records show the Democrat Party passed no specific laws to help Blacks, every law that they introduced into Congress was designed to hurt blacks in 1894 Repeal Act. The chronicles of history shows that during the past 160 years the Democratic Party legislated Jim Crows laws, Black Codes and a multitude of other laws at the state and federal level to deny African Americans their rights as citizens.

History reveals that the Republican Party was formed in 1854 to abolish slavery and challenge other racist legislative acts initiated by the Democratic Party.

Some called it the Civil War, others called it the War Between the States, but to the African Americans at that time, it was the War Between the Democrats and the Republicans over slavery. The Democrats gave their lives to expand it, Republican gave their lives to ban it.

During the Senate debates on the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, it was revealed that members of the Democratic Party formed many terrorist organizations like the Ku Klux Klan to murder and intimidate African Americans voters. The Ku Klux Klan Act was a bill introduced by a Republican Congress to stop Klan Activities. Senate debates revealed that the Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

History reveals that Democrats lynched, burned, mutilated and murdered thousands of blacks and completely destroyed entire towns and communities occupied by middle class Blacks, including Rosewood, Florida, the Greenwood District in Tulsa Oklahoma, and Wilmington, North Carolina to name a few.

After the Civil War, Democrats murdered several hundred black elected officials (in the South) to regain control of the southern government. All of the elected officials up to 1935 were Republicans. As of 2004, the Democrat Party (the oldest political party in America) has never elected a black man to the United States Senate, the Republicans have elected three.

History reveals that it was Thaddeus Stevens, a Radical Republican that introduced legislation to give African Americans the so-called 40 acres and a mule and Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the bill. Today many white Democrats are opposed to paying African Americans trillions of dollars in Reparation Pay, money that should be paid by the Democratic Party.

History reveals that it was Abolitionists and Radical Republicans such as Henry L. Morehouse and General Oliver Howard that started many of the traditional Black colleges, while Democrats fought to keep them closed. Many of our traditional Black colleges are named after white Republicans.

Congressional records show it was Democrats that strongly opposed the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments. These three Amendments were introduced by Republicans to abolish slavery, give citizenship to all African Americans born in the United States and, give Blacks the right to vote.

Congressional records show that Democrats were opposed to passing the following laws that were introduced by Republicans to achieve civil rights for African Americans:

  • Civil Rights Act 1866
  • Reconstruction Act of 1867
  • Freedman Bureau Extension Act of 1866
  • Enforcement Act of 1870
  • Force Act of 1871
  • Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871
  • Civil Rights Act of 1875
  • Civil Rights Act of 1957
  • Civil Rights Act of 1960

And during the 60’s many Democrats fought hard to defeat the

  • 1964 Civil Rights Act
  • 1965 Voting Rights Acts
  • 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act

Court records shows that it was the Democrats that supported the Dred Scott Decision. The decision classified Blacks and property rather than people. It was also the racist Jim Crow practices initiated by Democrats that brought about the two landmark cases of Plessy v Ferguson and Brown v. The Board of Education….

(READ IT ALL)