Obama Says Trump ‘Has a Long Record that Needs to be Examined’

President Obama’s White House press conference on Friday was supposed to center on the economy. He spent a few minutes telling reporters that he is intent on closing tax loopholes for the wealthy (who need to pay their “fair share”) and he wants to require banks to report on who owns companies they deal with.

Yet, the conversation quickly turned to the 2016 election and what the president thinks about Donald Trump now all but securing the GOP nomination.

“He has a long record that needs to be examined,” Obama said. “This is not entertainment. It’s not a reality show.”

Every candidate, every nominee needs to be subject to scrutiny and standards, he continued. They need to have solutions to problems that are actually “plausible.”

In particular, Obama is concerned that the media is not doing its job to provide American people a narrative that is focused on facts, not sensationalism.

“I’m concerned about the degree to which reporting emphasizes the spectacle on the surface,” he said. “The American people have good judgment as long as they are given good information.”

Asked about whether Bernie Sanders should drop out of the Democratic primary and pave the way for Hillary Clinton, Obama said to “let the process play itself out.”

The president then weighed in on Speaker Paul Ryan’s telling CNN he is "not ready" to support Trump, saying “there is no doubt that there is a debate taking place” in the Republican Party into what they are and what they represent. “It’s up to the voters,” he said, to make a decision into whether this is a guy who speaks for and represents them.

As You Would Guess, There Are No Republicans In the White House Press Corps

As you would expect, there are no registered Republicans in the White House Press Corps, though 60 percent aren’t even registered at all. This survey was included in a Politico piece on President Obama’s relationship with the press around the time of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner (via WFB):

Of the journalists surveyed, more than a quarter are registered Democrats and 13 percent are not members of any political party. Sixty percent are not registered to vote, but 72 percent of those polled said they think reporters should vote in elections they cover.

Twelve survey respondents said they plan to vote for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Three said they support her rival Bernie Sanders. Two plan to vote for Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Tex.) and one supports Republican frontrunner Donald Trump.

Nearly 9 in 10 respondents said they expect Hillary Clinton to be the nation’s next president.

A separate survey of campaign reporters revealed a bit more partisan diversity, but Republicans are still widely outnumbered among the 80 journalists surveyed.

And this is why we have groups, like the Media Research Center, to keep an eye on these folks.

RNC Chief to Broker Meeting Between Trump and Paul Ryan Next Week

Yesterday House Speaker Paul Ryan told CNN's Jake Tapper he isn't ready to support Donald Trump's candidacy for President, but that things could change down the road.

"I'm not there right now and I hope to be there and I want to," Ryan said. "The bulk of the burden of unifying the Party will have to come from our presumptive nominee."

Trump fired back by saying he isn't ready to support Paul Ryan. 

"I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan's agenda. Perhaps in the future we can work together and come to an agreement about what is best for the American people," Trump said in a statement. "They have been treated so badly for so long that it is about time for politicians to put them first!"

Now, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus is stepping in and will host a meeting between the two in Washington D.C next week.

The meeting will likely take place Wednesday at the Republican National Committee on Capitol Hill.

Republicans Gingrich, Hannity, and Carson Fire Back at Paul Ryan

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan decided to make a controversial statement Thursday afternoon by saying, "I'm just not ready to support (Trump) at this point."

Donald Trump immediately responded by saying "I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan's agenda."

Sean Hannity went after Ryan in several tweets and said on his Fox News show that, “I’m not ready to support Speaker Ryan anymore... I’m thinking we may need a new speaker.”

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich joined Hannity on his show Thursday night and sided with Trump.

“First of all, Donald Trump may turn out to be the most effective anti-left leader in our lifetime. He is against political correctness. He is against bureaucracy. He places American nationalism first which I think we desperately need. I’m tired of being told we have to have phony agreements and phony efforts.”

Ben Carson weighed in on the subject early Friday morning.  “You don’t have another choice,” he said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."   

"You get behind the choice that you have, whether you like them or not, if in fact you’re a believer.”

Trump 'Ruling Out' Democrat as VP Pick

Former presidential candidate-turned-Donald Trump-surrogate Ben Carson suggested on Thursday that Trump may consider a Democrat or an independent as his running mate.

“We would consider people who are Americans and who put America first,” Carson said.

On “Fox and Friends” Friday morning, however, Trump said Democrats were not an option.

“I would rule them out,” Trump responded without hesitating.

“We want to have a great ticket,” he continued, arguing that we’ve had Democrats behind the wheel for too long and all they’ve managed to do is tank the economy.

“I’m going to pick a great Republican,” he said. “We’re going to have a tremendous victory. We’re going to win.”

One particular Republican Trump appears to be considering for VP is Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). Unbound delegates in Louisiana who support Rubio indicated they will only back Trump if he takes a look at Rubio, “Fox and Friends” anchor Ainsley Earhardt pointed out.

“I like Rubio,” Trump said, before dismissing their “one-month spat” on the campaign trail.

The businessman also mentioned Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who gave Trump a surprise endorsement on Thursday, calling him one of the “most talented” people who has ever run for president. It was a far cry from last summer, when the governor called Trump a “cancer on conservatism.”

We won’t know who Trump has chosen as his running mate until the RNC convention. We do know, though, that it will not be another outsider, but someone with an impressive amount of political experience

Unemployed Coal Miner: Clinton Sounded Joyful When She Attacked Us

Bo Copley, the unemployed coal worker who confronted Hillary Clinton over her promise to put the industry out of business, doesn’t believe her non-apologyapology.”

In an interview with Sean Hannity, Copley said he felt Clinton lied to his face. And more proof that she really meant what she initially said about putting “a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business,” is the fact that she seemed so joyful when saying it.

“She lied to you. Right to your face when she said that, didn’t she?” Hannity asked.

“It would seem so, or at least the way I took it, it was,” he replied.

“But, you know, she did say that she’s trying to bring clean energy into the coalfields. But the tone that she had when she said we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and … and co-operations out of work, really, yes, it just seemed like it was a lot of joy in her voice when she said it,” he added.

Trump, meanwhile, portrayed himself as a friend of the coal industry while at a campaign rally in West Virginia on Thursday, and it seems to have worked. The West Virginia Coal Association later voted to endorse the presumptive GOP nominee.

“Trump has said he will reverse the Democratic regulatory assault that has cost the coal industry more than 40 percent of our production and jobs since 2008,” Bill Raney, the group’s president, said in a statement.

“In contrast,Hillary Clinton’s proposals essentially double-down on the job killing Obama policies,” he said. “West Virginia can’t afford that and neither can the nation.”

Rick Perry Endorses Trump

Former Texas governor and two-time presidential candidate Rick Perry has endorsed Donald Trump for president and fully intends on supporting him throughout the campaign.

Perry, speaking by phone from his hometown of Roundtop, Texas, acknowledged Trump is not his ideal choice. When Perry was a candidate for president earlier in the 2016 cycle, he was the first to come out and criticize Trump and question his conservative credentials.

"He is not a perfect man. But what I do believe is that he loves this country and he will surround himself with capable, experienced people and he will listen to them," Perry said.

Perry, who has been urged to run as a third party candidate, dismissed that notion as "quixotic."

"I believe in the process, and the process has said Donald Trump will be our nominee and I'm going to support him and help him and do what I can," Perry said.

"He is one of the most talented people who has ever run for the president I have ever seen," he added.

Perry's endorsement is a stark contrast to House Speaker Paul Ryan, who said he was not ready to support Trump for president just yet.

Carson: Trump's Considering Democrats, Independents For VP Pick


Donald Trump on Friday morning said he would rule out choosing a Democrat as his running mate. "I’m going to pick a great Republican,” he said. “We’re going to have a tremendous victory. We’re going to win.”

Original Post: 

With Donald Trump becoming the presumptive GOP nominee, focus for many has shifted to who he will end up picking to be his running mate. But one thing that’s been assumed based on the names thrown out is that Trump is only considering Republicans.

According to Ben Carson, this is may not be the case.

The Wall Street Journal reports

While rank-and-file conservatives are searching for a signal that Mr. Trump shares their values, Ben Carson, a former GOP rival now helping the presumptive Republican presidential nominee pick a running mate, said Thursday Democrats may be among those considered.

Asked if Democrats and independents may be on the target list, Mr. Carson said “Yes,” then added, “We would consider people who are Americans and who put America first.”

Mr. Carson is the public face on the search process, while top campaign aide Paul Manafort is maintaining overall tight control, according to people familiar with the campaign.

Later, however, a spokesman for Carson said the retired neurosurgeon “fully expects Mr. Trump to choose a Republican as his running mate.”

Still, if Republicans aren’t supportive of his pick, some say it could cause chaos at the convention in Cleveland.

Given that Republican National Convention delegates aren’t bound to abide by his choice, Mr. Trump could face an arena of delegates rebelling against his running mate choice if he sends the wrong signal. “He could get to Cleveland and designate someone as his vice president and have the convention lose its mind,” said Erick Erickson, an anti-Trump conservative activist.

“Three weeks ago, I was on a call with some conservative activists and this topic came up,” Mr. Erickson said. “The consensus was that if you couldn’t get Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio on the ticket, that they would give a Shermanesque refusal to Trump’s pick,” he added in a reference to two of Mr. Trump’s former presidential rivals.

Such a plan would almost certainly have to be led, publicly, by Mr. Cruz, who has so far shown no inclination to do so.

On Thursday Trump said there’s “probably a 40 percent chance” he’ll choose one of his 16 GOP presidential opponents, but indicated it was “unlikely” to be Kasich.

In addition to choosing someone with political experience, Trump said rapport will also play a significant role in his decision. 

“I think having somebody that can get legislation through and help me with that would be good,” Trump told CNBC. “Of course, always the first reason is if something should happen, somebody that can serve and serve well and be a great president. And that’s always—you always start with that. And after that, it’s really a question of rapport. I think rapport is very important.”

Report: FBI Interviews Huma Abedin as Part of Email Investigation

The FBI has begun formal interviews in its investigation over Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state. According to an Associated Press source, the agency has already spoken with top Clinton aide Huma Abedin. 

As reported in March, the interviews are meant to determine whether Clinton’s aides knowingly or negligently discussed classified information over the unsecure email system.

The FBI has interviewed Huma Abedin, a close aide to Hillary Clinton, as part of a federal investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server as secretary of state, a person familiar with the probe said Thursday.

The person insisted on anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

The FBI and Justice Department have been investigating whether sensitive information that flowed through Clinton's email server was mishandled.

Abedin was one of Clinton's closest aides during her tenure as the nation's top diplomat, serving as deputy chief of staff. 

Although a date for an interview with Clinton herself has not been set, officials say it will happen “in the coming weeks,” according to CNN

FBI Director James Comey has made it clear that there is no timetable for wrapping up the investigation. The agency’s focus, he said, was on conducting the investigation “well and promptly.” But between the two, he said, doing it well was more important. 

"From the start, Hillary Clinton has offered to answer any questions that would help the Justice Department complete its review, and we hope and expect that anyone else who is asked would do the same," Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon told the AP. "We are confident the review will conclude that nothing inappropriate took place."

FBI officials overseeing the probe now expect to complete their work in the next few weeks and then turn over the findings to the Justice Department, which will make a final decision on whether to bring charges against anyone. Prosecutors from the Justice Department's national security division and from the U.S. Attorney's office in Alexandria, Va., have helped coordinate the FBI probe, closely overseeing investigative steps, the U.S. officials say.

RNC Chair Reince Priebus said the FBI interviews demonstrate that Clinton shouldn't be president. 

“These FBI interviews are another reminder of the gross negligence Hillary Clinton displayed as Secretary of State when she set up an off the books email server that exposed classified information on thousands of occasion," Priebus said in a statement, reports The Hill. 

"This reckless attempt to skirt government transparency laws put our national security at risk, and underscores just how big of a risk a Hillary Clinton presidency truly is."

As Expected, Donald Trump Trails Clinton By Double-Digits

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are gearing up for battle this November, but the former first lady is ahead by a landslide in a head-to-head matchup. If the election were held today, Clinton leads 54/41, which would have her  nabbing 347 electoral votes to Mr. Trump’s 191. This is a disaster, but a lot could happen in 6-8 weeks. If there’s anything we all learned this cycle, it’s that Trump is unpredictable—and that quality has usually yielded significant political dividends in the long run (via CNN):

The new CNN/ORC Poll, completed ahead of Trump's victory last night, found Clinton leads 54% to 41%, a 13-point edge over the New York businessman, her largest lead since last July.

Clinton is also more trusted than Trump on many issues voters rank as critically important, with one big exception. By a 50% to 45% margin, voters say Trump would do a better job handling the economy than Clinton would.

Almost 9 out of 10 voters in the poll called the economy extremely or very important to their vote for president, outranking any other issue tested in the poll.

Clinton has the edge on a range of other issues. She is more trusted than Trump on terrorism (50% Clinton to 45% Trump), immigration (51% to 44%), health care (55% to 39%), the income gap (54% to 37%), foreign policy (61% to 36%), education (61% to 34%) and climate change (63% to 30%).

Overall, voters are evenly split on their opinion of Clinton -- 49% see her favorably and the same share unfavorably. But a decidedly larger group (56%) see Trump unfavorably than see him favorably (41%).

Where things get a bit disconcerting is that Trump is trailing Clinton (54/41), while he already clinching decent Republican support 82/12. About 28 percent of self-identified conservatives are breaking for Hillary, so Trump needs to get his ground game operations going, his running mate vetted, and his grand campaign to convince the #NeverTrump crowd to take a rise on him. We know what Hillary Clinton would do with a Democratic Congress, are you really saying that’s worse than a hypothetical Trump administration working with a mostly Republican one? The debate continues. Yet, while Trump has to shore up with conservatives, he need to improve with women voters. He’s underwater with them by a whopping 23/70 (favorable/unfavorable), which in any other cycle, would be a general election killer. Then again, time after time, we’ve heard about Trump’s pending doom and his low ceiling, which only ended with him winning the Republican nomination.

If Trump manages to boost his polling margin by ten points, he’s the one coming out on top with an electoral landslide over Clinton, 305-233. That’s banking on him winning Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania. States that are incredibly competitive, some of which have high Hispanic populations, and one that hasn’t gone Republican since 1988. Mr. Trump has a lot of work ahead of him, which is typical of national campaigns, but more so than other Republicans in the past.

Shocker: Liberal Graduation Speakers Outnumber Conservatives 4-to-1

Liberal bias? What liberal bias?

According to Campus Reform, out of the top 100 universities, 40 of them are featuring explicitly liberal speakers at their commencement ceremonies. Only 10 are hosting speakers who are either openly conservative or who have donated to conservative/Republican politicians. (Several schools have not yet announced their commencement speakers or have speakers who are apolitical.)

Overall, Campus Reform found that 40 of this year’s commencement speakers espouse liberal philosophies. Only ten, however, champion conservative ideologies, meaning this year’s liberal speakers will outnumber conservatives at a rate of 4 to 1. A majority of America’s top schools, though, have either not announced a speaker or are hosting a speaker whose public political views do not strongly correlate with one political party.

Notably, not a single active conservative politician was invited to speak at one of the nation’s top schools. However, seven active members of President Obama’s administration will deliver commencement addresses this year, including Obama himself, who will speak to three graduating classes.

It's no wonder why colleges are churning out special snowflakes who are completely unprepared for the real world.

New: Ryan Tells CNN He's 'Not Ready to Support' Trump

House Speaker Paul Ryan joined Jake Tapper on CNN Thursday to discuss whether or not he’ll endorse Donald Trump in the 2016 election, now that he’s the presumptive GOP nominee. Mitt Romney, who chose Ryan as his running mate in 2012, has already indicated he won’t support Trump, opting to skip this year’s RNC convention. 

What about Ryan?

“To be perfectly candid, I’m not ready to support” Trump at this point, Ryan told Tapper.

“I don’t want to underplay what he accomplished,” Ryan continued. But, to unify the party, we need to do more than say it, we need to actually "advance our conservative principles," he insisted. 

As of now, he's not sure Trump can do that.

Ryan’s comments perhaps come as no surprise, considering he has repeatedly denounced Trump’s campaign behavior since assuming the speakership. For instance, although he says he didn’t want to weigh in on the primary, Ryan made an exception in March after Trump proposed to ban Muslims from entering the country. That plan, Ryan said, “is not conservatism.”

Ryan noted he didn't think he'd have to make a decision so soon, expecting the race to at least last until June. As the chair of the GOP convention, Ryan hopes Trump will have proved by then he can unify the party.

"I hope to support his candidacy fully," he said.

Rolling Stones Tell Trump To Stop Playing Their Songs At Rallies

The Rolling Stones aren't supporters of Donald Trump, and they don't even want to be peripherally associated with the candidate. The group recently ordered Trump to stop playing their songs at various campaign events, saying that they had never granted the candidate permission to use them.

The legendary British rockers have "never given permission to the Trump campaign to use their songs and have requested that they cease all use immediately," a spokesperson said in a statement obtained by NBC News.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee has been soundtracking his events with at least two Stones songs — "You Can't Always Get What You Want" and "Start Me Up" — since launching his White House bid almost a year ago.

"Start Me Up" was most recently played on Tuesday night, when Trump celebrated his Indiana primary win at Trump Tower in New York City.

Aerosmith has also asked Trump to refrain from using their songs at rallies.

Personally, I think this is a bit dumb. Music is music--it's not an endorsement unless the artist says so.

Backlash: Khloe Kardashian Goes to Cuba, Poses Under "Fidel"

Khloe Kardashian, sister of the famous Kardashain clan, recently took a trip to Cuba with her sisters Kim, Khloe and a friend. 

Yesterday, Khloe shared a photo on her Instagram and Twitter pages posing under "Fidel", which is etched under a quote on the wall. Fidel, of course, is the iron fisted dictator who has ruled over Cuba for decades. He is the same dictator who, along with his brother Raul, throws political dissidents into prison, including a man who dared to wave an American flag as the first cruise arrived on the island this week. He is responsible for the murders and deaths of ten-of-thousands of Cubans. 

Havana ????

A photo posted by Khloé (@khloekardashian) on

The outrage was swift, with many of Khloe's fans educating her about who Fidel Castro is and what he did to their families.

"Wow. Really?! Posing with Fidel....I used to adore you. I am Cuban and my family has known people who were MURDERED by this man. Disgusting!" one fan wrote. 

"Fidel?!!!! Wtf really? As much as I like you I think this is disgusting!!! Cuban American over here," another said in outrage. 

"Posing with that pig's name over you is disgusting. I had to leave my beautiful country of Cuba when I was two years old because of political reasons and that was 36 years ago. That pig ripped families apart, including mine," another detailed.

No word on whether the Castro regime allowed Khloe and her pals use the internet to post their photos while they were in Cuba, or if they had to return to the U.S. to log back on.

Here's Donald Trump's Cinco De Mayo Greeting

Presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump issued a Cinco de Mayo greeting on Twitter today, boasting that the best taco bowls in the world are made at Trump Tower. Trump also said that he loves Hispanics.

Reactions to the tweet were varied:

While Trump claims to love Hispanics, they're not really returning the favor. Over three out of four Hispanics have an unfavorable view of the candidate.

UPDATE: The plot...thickens?

UPDATE II: Judd Legum of ThinkProgress has found the taco bowl/salad. They're apparently a seasonal item at Trump Café.

This post has been updated.

Mitt Romney Is Skipping the RNC

This July, hundreds of prominent Republicans will descend upon Cleveland for the Republican National Convention. Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee for president, will not be among them. A Romney spokesperson confirmed that the former Massachusetts governor does not plan to attend the convention.

Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, plans to skip this summer's Republican National Convention in Cleveland where Donald Trump will be officially nominated — an unusual move that underscores the deep unease many Republican leaders have about the brash celebrity mogul as their standard bearer.

A Romney aide told The Washington Post on Thursday morning, "Governor Romney has no plans to attend convention."

Romney has been one of Trump's chief critics this spring. He delivered a searing, point-by-point indictment of Trump in March — from his business record to his character to his divisive campaign-trail rhetoric.

Donald Trump endorsed Romney in 2012, but it's pretty clear the love isn't flowing both ways.

The RNC is scheduled to take place from July 18-21.

2016 RACE ROUNDUP: Trump Mulls VP Pick, Mocks Hillary for Not 'Putting Away' Sanders

Now that Donald Trump is the last Republican candidate standing and the eventual nominee, the media is starting to guess who he will choose as his running mate. Meanwhile, Trump’s all but securing the nomination is bad optics for Hillary Clinton, who still hasn’t managed to put away democratic socialist Bernie Sanders. That doesn’t mean she isn’t setting her sights on the general, however, attacking Trump repeatedly in her media appearances on Wednesday.

Republican Primary

Trump Fallout: Now that Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee, angry "Never Trump" Republicans have been burning their registration cards and vowing to vote third party. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) even dropped hints he may run as the alternative nominee. Or, will libertarian candidate Gary Johnson siphon those lost Republican votes?

Then, on Thursday, Mitt Romney, who already told us how he feels about Trump, noted he will not be going to the convention. It seems there’s no love lost, if Trump’s interview with The Washington Post last month is any indication.

“I don’t care,” Trump said. “He can be there if he wants.”

How many Republicans will take Romney’s lead and refuse to support Trump?

Ready to Take on Hillary?: In a conversation with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday, the businessman noted how embarrassing it is for Clinton to still be battling for the Democratic nomination. He compared it to a football team that couldn’t get the football over the end zone. He has also slammed her for using the “woman card.” If she wasn’t a woman, he said, she would be nowhere near the presidency. His rhetoric indicates he’s more than ready to take on the struggling female candidate.

VP Rumors: Sen. Marco Rubio? Gov. Susana Martinez? Both names have been thrown around by pundits. Could the Florida senator, however, accept the title, after being dismissed by Trump as “Little Rubio” on the campaign trail? Why not? Ben Carson is now a Trump surrogate even after the business mogul mocked his violent childhood. As for New Mexico Gov. Martinez, the media notes she could help his image both with women and Latinos. Other names that are surfacing include Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee and John Kasich, the last of whom Trump said he’d be “interested” in vetting.

We don’t know who Trump will choose as his running mate, but we do know who’s going to help vet the candidates. Dr. Carson will be on the vice presidential selection committee.

Democratic Primary

Hillary Clinton: Clinton called Trump a “loose cannon” a handful of times during her interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday. Electing him, she said, would pose a danger to the country. She also had some criticism for the media, whom she said has failed to ask Trump any tough questions. 

Bernie Sanders: Several Thursday headlines feature the word “why” in reference to Sanders’ never-ending campaign. Yet, despite his superdelegate deficit, Sanders is not quitting. He told CNN he will continue his “uphill” battle against the establishment candidate. 

Primary Schedule

Saturday, May 7 - Democratic caucus in Guam

Precious Snowflakes Targeted Black Cartoonist For Criticizing Black Lives Matter

Oh, here we go again. Precious snowflakes in college griping about how they’re offended and expect the school’s administration to do something about it because they’re ignorant of free speech. It’s a typical tale, and this one from Wesley College in Dove, Delaware isn’t any different. In this case, a black cartoonist criticized Black Lives Matter (oh yeah, the kid went for the gold on this one), which initiated a cupcake nation alert that led to the illustrator being labeled a…racist. So, progressive softies tried to make the case that a black person is racist for going against the grain and offering some criticism of the Black Lives Matter movement—sadly, this seems in keeping with their authoritarian mindset (via Campus Reform):

Bryheim Muse, a black student, published two cartoons in the Whetstone, one critical of what he calls the Black Lives Matter movement’s hypocrisy on abortion, and one of a black man making a comment on attire.

“I was trying to make a point, showing the hypocrisy behind the Black Lives Matter,” Muse told WDEL, explaining that “in one way we’re saying ‘Black Lives Matter, but in another way, we’re aborting our children and we’re saying it’s okay.”

The other cartoon, he says, was based off a Biblical scripture about being known by your clothes.

“I was making a point that the way you dress defines who you are,” he stated.

His main point is that “Black Lives Matter is not the solution to our problems, protesting, begging other people to fix our problems, the solution to our problem is keeping God’s commandments. Black-on-black crime, if we kept the law on ‘love thy neighbor as thyself,’ we wouldn’t have that.”

Senior Tiffany Griffin disagreed, saying that BLM and abortion are two separate issues.

Griffin alleges that there is a strong racial divide on campus, citing an incident in which separate cookouts for white and black students were allegedly held by the college. Muse disagrees and says there is no racial divide.

Following the release of the cartoons, the college held an open discussion forum.

Muse feels he was targeted at the event, saying that the students were there to just talk about how they hated the cartoon, and they only showed up to argue.


“We have worked hard, especially black women, to defy and break down all of the stereotypes that were thrown at us,” Shaylynn Bivens told HuffPost. “It is humiliating to know that we were dehumanized by a fellow African-American male. He essentially gave the white students a reason to disrespect and think less of us. That comic promotes hate speech.”

Reform added that Griffin and a few other snowflakes demanded that first-year president Richard Clarke II condemn the cartoon, which he did, and increase the percentage of black staff and faculty at the school by 10 percent. Right, because that will totally make everything better. There’s no issue here. None. Zip. A kid drew a cartoon he didn’t like—get over it. This is in no way similar to the “slap a Jap” posters drawn during World War II. That was legitimate racism. Regardless, the fact that the cupcake legions used this to push a diversity initiative says all there is about campus progressives. Demonize conservatives, blame the administration for allowing them to exercise their right to free speech, complain, and then demand the administration increase the level of diversity within the faculty. Some schools, like Mizzou, even have required “diversity intensive” courses that are needed to graduate. I say well done, Mr. Muse for challenging the vicious nature of American progressivism, and that of the Black Lives Matter movement. You had an opinion, you put that to paper, and the pitchforks came out. That means you have to draw another one soon. Don’t let these snowflakes scare you; for God’s sake your classmate thinks that black deaths by abortion isn’t as big an issue (certainly not on the same level, which is sad) as a death at the hands of law enforcement. For liberals, the latter is just a much more juicier fruit to sink your teeth into than abortion.

Muy Malo: Outrage Over "Insensitive" Language Used in Cinco De Mayo DUI Memo, Cops Apologize

Today is Cinco de Mayo, the day that marks the 1862 Battle of Puebla. It is not Mexican Independence Day. It's become a holiday celebrated heavily in America, not in Mexico, and used as an excuse to party. It's on par with St. Patrick's Day in terms of cultural authenticity. People of all ethnic backgrounds tend to make poor choices on Cinco de Mayo...like drinking and driving. As a result, police all over the country set up additional DUI checkpoints to keep drunk people from hurting or killing others. They also send out notices to the community as a warning.

Cue the outrage. 

The Oakland Police Department has issued a retraction and apology after announcing additional DUI checkpoints would be set up around the city because it's Cinco de Mayo. They used Spanish in the release, which apparently was a mistake. Some took this as "insensitive" and "racist" toward Mexicans.

First, part of the original press release

“Community: Cinco de Mayo: Fiesta Time or Jail Time? Buzzed Driving Is Drunk Driving - ¡Manejar Entonado Es Manejar Borracho!

“In the United States, Cinco de Mayo has become synonymous with festive fiestas and salty margaritas. Historically, the fifth of May commemorates Mexico’s 1862 victory over France at the Battle of Puebla during the Franco-Mexican War, but present-day celebrations often lead to drunk driving—and there’s no victory in that.

“If you are planning to party this Cinco de Mayo, keep this number in mind: nationwide, 343 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes over the Cinco de Mayo holiday weekend in 2014. And drunk driving was the cause of 116 (34%) of these fatalities. Furthermore, many of the drivers in those crashes weren’t just a little drunk. Sadly, almost one out of five (17%) of all the drivers in fatal crashes that weekend had blood alcohol concentrations of 0.15% or higher—almost two times the legal limit in every state.

“The Oakland Police Department is continuing its ongoing efforts to stop and arrest impaired drivers, deploying extra officers on DUI saturation patrols May 5 to lower deaths and injuries. The DUI operation will be operational from 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. this coming Thursday.

“In the rush of party preparations and getting dressed up for a night out, it’s easy to forget the most important Cinco de Mayo plan of all: designating a sober driver. Some fiesta-goers think they can play it by ear and wait until after the party has started to decide whether they’re ‘okay to drive.’ By this point, it’s too late. Going out for a night of drinking without a plan to get home safely is a recipe for disaster.

And the apology after outrage: 

The Oakland Police Department apologized Tuesday and retracted a community message they acknowledged used “insensitive” language regarding DUI saturation patrols for the upcoming Cinco de Mayo holiday.

“The Oakland Police Department would like to apologize for the recent press release addressing traffic safety enforcement during the Cinco de Mayo holiday,” the department said in a statement. “We acknowledge that the language in the message sent was completely insensitive to the cultural holiday.”

It was unclear how many people had contacted the department about the message, but on social media some groups were clearly not happy.

“Oakland Police has posted on their Twitter account they’re going to put out Extra Patrols for you drunk Mexicans on Cinco de Mayo,” someone wrote on the Facebook page Oakland Latinos United. “How does it feel. As a Mexican Chicano I wonder if OPD will be posting DUI PSAs for every ethnic & culturally based holiday?”

For the record, police set up extra DUI checkpoints during every major celebration throughout the year including: July 4, Christmas, Thanksgiving, St. Patrick's Day, college graduation, after concerts, after football games, etc. Keeping drunk drivers off the road isn't about race, it's about safety. And by the way, the cops are doing the community a favor by warning partiers ahead of time that they will be arrested and jailed if they make bad decisions.

This gringa is headed for a margarita after work and will be taking a cab home. Hopefully I won't get accused of cultural appropriation at the bar.

H/T Jon Justice

FDA Drops the Hammer: Now Regulates All Tobacco Products, E-Cigarettes, and Cigars

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it will regulate all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, cigars, hookah tobacco and pipe tobacco, among others.  Until now, the FDA could only regulate cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.

In addition to ending sales of tobacco products and e-cigarettes to people under age 18, the FDA will impose other restrictions, including:

  • A prohibition on distribution of free samples
  • A ban on selling e-cigarettes in vending machines unless they are in secure places that never admit young people
  • A requirement that e-cigarettes carry warnings that they contain nicotine, which is addictive

The FDA attempted to ban the sale of e-cigarettes following a 2009 study that found detectable levels of carcinogens and toxic chemicals in e-cigarette samples. But a court ruled in 2010 that the FDA had not cited evidence of harm.

"This action is a milestone in consumer protection -- going forward, the FDA will be able to review new tobacco products not yet on the market, help prevent misleading claims by tobacco product manufacturers, evaluate the ingredients of tobacco products and how they are made, and communicate the potential risks of tobacco products," the FDA said in announcing the changes.

It is amazing how far we have declined as a free society.  Advertisement for the product that put this country on its feet is now banned, barred, and expunged like most of our rich history.  It was only a short time ago that we as a free people were allowed to advertise our tobacco products. But our parental government has outlawed those harmful activities and has therefore outlawed vast majorities of America.  


The White House is Lying About U.S. Troops in Combat and This Video Proves It

Since 2014, three U.S. service members have been killed in the war against ISIS in Iraq. Earlier this week, the Pentagon confirmed Navy SEAL Charles Keating IV was killed during operations with peshmerga fighters. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter specifically referred to the loss of life as a combat death. 

Despite Americans being killed on the battlefield with ISIS, the White House has maintained U.S. troops are simply acting as advisors in a dangerous region but are not involved in combat. 

"What I think is true is that Iraq and Syria are dangerous places and our men and women in uniform, who are engaged in a mission to offer training, advice and assistance to Iraqi forces that are fighting for their own country, are doing dangerous work. They are taking grave risks to protect our country. We owe them a deep debt of gratitude. Today's incident is a vivid reminder of the risks our service members are taking and some of them, three of them now, have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country," Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday. "But the President has been clear, time and time again, exactly what their mission is. That mission is to support Iraqi forces on the ground who are taking the fight to ISIL on the front lines." 

But new video obtained by The Guardian proves U.S. troops are in fact engaged in heavy combat on the front lines with ISIS, where Keating was killed.

Video footage obtained by the Guardian shows the grueling firefight between US special forces, Kurdish commandoes and Islamic State fighters this week, in which a US Navy Seal was killed.

The footage – filmed on a cellphone during the battle, which lasted more than half a day – reveals the extent to which the US military is once again engaged in intense combat in Iraq.

Provided to the Guardian by the lieutenant of an elite Kurdish peshmerga unit, the video shows a convoy of four by four vehicles coming under fire near Tel Osqof, a Christian town about 30km north of Mosul.

Amid the crackle of gunfire, peshmerga fighters and at least six US troops take cover behind an unarmored pickup truck on an arterial road leading into the town. 

The embed for the video isn't available, but you can click the image below to watch. 

U.S. troops are engaged in combat in Iraq and they're dying. The commander-in-chief and his administration are lying about it for political purposes.

NYT: Obama Misled Public on Iranian ‘Moderation’ to Pass Nuclear Deal

A new piece in The New York Times Magazine reveals confirms that the Obama administration knowingly misled the public to pass the Iranian nuclear deal. Our president knew full well that Iranian leadership had not adopted “moderate” policies, but the notion was a politically useful one.

When Hassan Rouhani was selected as the new president of Iran, he was heralded as a more tolerant kind of leader. TIME magazine referred to him as a “moderate politician” when he was voted runner up for 2015’s Person of the Year. (This is why that title deserves to be in quotes.) 

Yet, as the NYT piece notes, the Obama administration’s negotiations with Iran began well before President Rouhani and his advisors assumed leadership. 

National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes knew the narrative was more important than the truth. The NYT describes how this “storyteller” flowered the facts to gain public support.

The idea that there was a new reality in Iran was politically useful to the Obama administration. By obtaining broad public currency for the thought there was a significant split in the regime, and that the administration was reaching out to moderate-minded Iranians who wanted peaceful relations with their neighbors and with America, Obama was able to evade what might have otherwise been a divisive but clarifying debate over the actual policy choices that his administration was making.

The administration’s presentation of the Iran deal, the Times concludes, was largely “manufactured” for the purpose of selling the deal.

In other words: 

Exactly. President Obama and his advisors ignored the warnings of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and foreign policy experts when pushing through his nuclear agreement. Iran has no interest in playing by the rules, they argued. Since the deal has been signed, we've had plenty of proof. In February, Iranians took 10 American sailors hostage and paraded their capture. Then, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini denounced the U.S. for being too hostile and for trying to halt Iran's missile production, which he argued they use for defense purposes. So much for the peaceful relationship Obama promised the deal would produce.

In case you were surprised by The New York Times exposing the administration for deceiving Americans, their liberal bias came through when they referred to the White House's strategy of passing the nuclear deal as “innovative.”

Romanian Hacker: Yes, I Penetrated Hillary's Emails, And It Was Pretty Easy, Too

The Romanian hacker known as "Guccifer" who was extradited to the United States, apparently in connection to the FBI's criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's national security-compromising email scheme, tells Fox News that he accessed the former Secretary of State's email server on multiple occasions. Clinton's unsecure server contained more than 2,000 classified emails, including at least 22 that contained sensitive information at the level of "top secret" and above:

The infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer,” speaking exclusively with Fox News, claimed he easily – and repeatedly – breached former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal email server in early 2013. "For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held. Guccifer’s potential role in the Clinton email investigation was first reported by Fox News last month. The hacker subsequently claimed he was able to access the server – and provided extensive details about how he did it and what he found – over the course of a half-hour jailhouse interview and a series of recorded phone calls with Fox News...

Lazar emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used. In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server. "As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said. With no formal computer training, he did most of his hacking from a small Romanian village. Lazar said he chose to use "proxy servers in Russia," describing them as the best, providing anonymity. Cyber experts who spoke with Fox News said the process Lazar described is plausible.

This experienced hacker says his relatively rudimentary methods were sufficient to penetrate Clinton's emails -- and claims that "up to 10" IP addresses had accessed her system.  Data security experts told Fox that Guccifer's account of how he went about breaking into the unsecure emails of America's top diplomat checks out; this isn't forensic confirmation that he's telling the truth, but it's plausible on a technological level.  It is confirmed, however, that Guccifer did illegally access unofficial Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal's private emails, which is how the public discovered that she withheld official emails from public scrutiny.  That hack exposed two lies: That Clinton had turned over every single work-related message on her server (she hadn't), and that Blumenthal had not acted an adviser to the Secretary of State in any capacity (he had).  Clinton and her team have repeatedly asserted that her emails were not hacked.  If the Romanian's story is confirmed, this will be yet another lie, of which there have been many over the course of this scandal.  They're denying it:

In response to Lazar’s claims, the Clinton campaign issued a statement Wednesday night saying, "There is absolutely no basis to believe the claims made by this criminal from his prison cell. In addition to the fact he offers no proof to support his claims, his descriptions of Secretary Clinton's server are inaccurate. It is unfathomable that he would have gained access to her emails and not leaked them the way he did to his other victims.”

Several former Obama administration officials, including the CIA's deputy director and the Secretary of Defense have stated that it's very likely that hostile foreign powers -- such as Russia, China and Iran -- were able to access Clinton's classified emails.  Clinton was personally and specifically warned by State Department security that her set-up wasn't secure and could put national security secrets at risk.  She acknowledged the memo, then carried on with her risky conduct anyway.

Army Captain Sues Obama: No Authority to Fight ISIS

Capt. Nathan Michael Smith of the U.S. Army sued Barack Obama in district court on Wednesday, on grounds that that he does not have the proper congressional authority to wage war against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria.

This news comes only one day after a Navy SEAL was killed in combat in Iraq, the third since a U.S.-led coalition launched its campaign against the Islamic State in the summer of 2014.

Smith wants the court to tell Obama that he needs to ask Congress for a new authorization for the use of military force.

Obama has been relying on congressional authorizations given to President George W. Bush for the war on terrorism passed in 2001. Yet, some say the White House's use of 9/11 congressional authorizations is a legal stretch at best.

The White House has claimed it has all the authority it needs to wage the war against ISIS, but says if an authorization tailored specifically for ISIS passed Congress with bipartisan support, it would send a clear signal of unity to U.S. troops and those groups they are fighting. 

Smith is asking the court to find that the war against ISIS violates the War Powers Resolution of 1973 because Congress has not declared war or given the president specific authorization to engage.

The White House has not commented on the lawsuit.  

DOJ To North Carolina: Your Bathroom Bill Violates The Civil Rights Act

Bruce Springsteen, Ringo Starr, and Pearl Jam fired the initial salvos in North Carolina’s transgender bathroom bill drama. Now, the Department of Justice has made a call too—the bill violates the Civil Rights Act (via Associated Press):

A North Carolina law limiting protections to LGBT people violates federal civil rights laws and can't be enforced, the U.S. Justice Department said Wednesday, putting the state on notice that it is in danger of being sued and losing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding.

The law, which requires transgender people to use public bathrooms that conform to the sex on their birth certificate, has been broadly condemned by gay-rights groups, businesses and entertainers. Some have relocated offices or canceled shows in the state. Several other states have proposed similar laws in recent months limiting protections to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

In a letter to Gov. Pat McCrory, the Justice Department said federal officials view the state law as violating federal Civil Rights Act protections barring workplace discrimination based on sex. Provisions of the state law directed at transgender state employees violate their anti-discrimination protections, the letter said.

"The State is engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against transgender state employees and both you, in your official capacity, and the state are engaging in a pattern or practice of resistance" of their rights, the letter said.

I really don’t see what the problem is with this bill. It’s as if no one on the political left actually read it. It does not strip protections from anyone, businesses can adopt stricter nondiscrimination standards (or honor the ones currently on the books), and they are free to establish single use bathrooms. What about those transgender persons who have undergone a sex change? The law states that you must use the restrooms that correspond with the gender on your birth certificate, which can be changed if someone in the trans community has successfully undergone the procedure.

So, what’s the problem here? No protections are being undercut, businesses and localities are free to accept the current nondiscrimination standards on the books, or adopt new, stricter standards. This appears to be just another political stunt to satisfy the blood thirst with left-wingers on this issue.

Concerning image, it also doesn’t help that a transwoman seems to have lied about being confronted by a custodian at a Transit Center in North Carolina for using the woman’s bathroom. The transgender woman planned on taking a selfie inside. She claims to have been escorted out by security, which was a humiliating experience. The problem is that the security camera footage doesn’t show her being escorted out. When confronted, she pretty much said you just had to be there. That’s not how this works.

The possible loss of federal funds will surely hurt North Carolina’s economy, which has been the fastest growing since 2013. All of this because North Carolina decided to give their residents a sense of privacy in the restroom areas, in order to prevent some male creepers have dressed as women in order to record unsuspecting females in those facilities. Again, no rights were stripped from transgender people; the same protections that existed then, exist now. Birth certificates can be changed. Lastly, it seems progressives are all for bashing North Carolina’s law, and others that make sure people with gender-specific anatomy use the restrooms that are meant for them, until a man not wearing a wig says he’s going to use the ladies room. You see the discomfort in their faces and prolonged silence, as MRCTV’s Dan Joseph demonstrated in this video.