Trump Just Told These Unconstitutional 37 Bi-Partisan Senators To Take A Hike For Violating Americans’ Privacy

Trump To Veto Warrantless FISA Surveillance Of Americans, These 37 Senators Want It Passed

As Nationalist Review just reported, President Trump has promised to veto an unconstitutional legislative package that would allow law enforcement agencies to monitor the electronic communications of American citizens without a warrant. Below is a list of the Senators that voted to continue the warrantless surveillance.

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities, and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.

Republicans (27):

Barrasso, John (R-WY)
Blackburn, Marsha (R-TN)
Blunt, Roy (R-MO)
Boozman, John (R-AR)
Burr, Richard (R-NC)
Capito, Shelley Moore (R-WV)
Collins, Susan M. (R-ME)
Cornyn, John (R-TX)
Cotton, Tom (R-AR)
Fischer, Deb (R-NE)
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC)
Hyde-Smith, Cindy (R-MS)
Inhofe, James M. (R-OK)
Johnson, Ron (R-WI)
Lankford, James (R-OK)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Perdue, David (R-GA)
Portman, Rob (R-OH)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Romney, Mitt (R-UT)
Rubio, Marco (R-FL)
Shelby, Richard C. (R-AL)
Thune, John (R-SD)
Tillis, Thom (R-NC)
Toomey, Patrick J. (R-PA)
Wicker, Roger F. (R-MS)
Young, Todd (R-IN)

Democrats (10):

Carper, Thomas R. (D-DE)
Casey, Robert P., Jr. (D-PA)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Hassan, Margaret Wood (D-NH)
Jones, Doug (D-AL)
Kaine, Tim (D-VA)
Manchin, Joe, III (D-WV)
Shaheen, Jeanne (D-NH)
Warner, Mark R. (D-VA)
Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI)

Breaking: Trump To Veto FISA Bill If Passed By Congress

President Trump declared his intention to veto the FISA Bill if it passes the House tonight.

In a big win for privacy-conscious Americans, President Trump has signaled his intention to veto the FISA bill currently up for a vote in the lower chamber. Earlier, to the universal disdain of almost all political ideologies, the Senate pushed through the now-infamous Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act section of the equally disdained PATRIOT Act.

A brief rundown on what we’re talking about:

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities, and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.

Previously, the Senate pushed through the bill without altering language that allowed the FBI to monitor the internet usage of Americans without first getting a warrant—an invasion of privacy that many feel is also a violation of the 4th Amendment.

On 13 May, the Senate rejected an amendment to the bill which would have required law enforcement to seek a warrant when they wished to monitor the web browsing, electronic communications, and search history of Americans. In a 59-37 vote, the measure fell just shy of the 60 votes needed to pass. Among the Senators who struck down the amendment that would have insulated the privacy rights of their constituents were Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) and Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va).

Now, with the bill headed to the House floor, the President has sent out an explosive warning to the lower chamber: he will not sign it.

“If the FISA Bill is passed tonight on the House floor, I will quickly VETO it,” the president tweeted. “Our Country has just suffered through the greatest political crime in its history. The massive abuse of FISA was a big part of it!”

The House previously reauthorized the PATRIOT Act provisions, sending the bill to the Senate for their input. Upon revisions from the Senate, the bill was returned to the House for further review. The House has begun considering proposals that would alter the language to protect the privacy rights of Americans. This would send the bill back to the Senate if successful.

FISA’s roots trace back to the 1970s during the Watergate-era during which an unfortunate and traitorous ruling by the Supreme Court decided that the privacy rights of Americans didn’t apply when information they transmitted was stored by a third party. Today, that third party often means an internet service provider.

This is a developing story and this article will be updated as more information comes to light.

Dog Catches Car: House Dems Get Impeachment, Now What?

The House Democrats fulfilled a party-wide 2018 campaign promise on Monday afternoon by formally voting to send two Articles of Impeachment of President Trump to the Senate, setting forth just the third Presidential impeachment trial in the nation’s history. As the dust settles from the initial monumental report, a major unanswered question has appeared for the Democrat party: What’s the plan after this?

With a Republican-dominated Senate and a need for 67 votes to remove Trump from office in the most partisan time in Congressional history, the goal of an official unseating of the President appears to be dead before it even arrives at the table. Knowing this, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has threatened to withhold the articles from the Senate until she can guarantee the Senate and its Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will conduct what she considers to be a “fair trial”.

So what exactly is the intent of the Democrats? Do they have a strategy at all? Did they not think they’d ever get this far? Surely they knew they had the votes in the House to push through impeachment, but also were aware that it’s a losing battle once the articles reach the Senate. Their best outcome at this point seems to be something along the lines of the Senate’s impeachment trial being dragged out long enough that it becomes something that the Democrat Presidential candidate can use as campaign fodder against Trump’s reelection, and possibly some campaign speeches—a chance to whine about Congress’ divisiveness as the nation heads into another contentious election cycle. That’s really the only benefit to making such a futile effort.

The most glaring, and to some, unfortunate, truth for Pelosi and the Democrats is that the battle they are fighting is rapidly losing the interest of the public. Media polls have shown a growing disinterest by the American public in the impeachment proceedings. And, at this point, the only people who have kept up with or even still care about the impeachment process are radicalized voters on either side whose minds are already made up. In a time where the pool of centrists is narrower than ever, this strategy doesn’t seem like one that appeals to those stray voters.

To her credit, Nancy Pelosi has been in the American political game long enough that most know better than to accuse her of being politically clueless, and it is well documented that the Democrat Party’s overall strategy is to outwit their opposition with shrewd tactics instead of viable or even appealing policy. This could well be their crowning achievement in that respect, though their path to success is unclear. Regardless, it seems safe to assume that the impeachment saga has only just begun and there will be plenty to watch out for as Congress does all it can to erode its nearly single digit approval rating

Democrat Congressman allegedly in talks with Trump admin about switching parties

Representative Jeff Van Drew, a freshman representative serving in south New Jersey’s 2nd congressional district, is currently in talks with Trump officials about switching parties.

Van Drew, a Democrat who has been ardently opposed to impeachment, is expected to join the Republican Party in the coming days.

Among House Democrats opposed to impeachment, Van Drew is joined by Rep. Collin Peterson. Peterson’s Minnesota district is far more conservative than Van Drew, and the two were the only Democrats to vote against the impeachment inquiry resolution in October.

New Jersey’s 2nd congressional district was previously a Republican stronghold since 1995 until Rep. Frank Lobiondo retired in 2018 and Van Drew defeated the Republican challenger by 8 points. Now, Van Drew is losing favor with Democrats in the district.

For his part, Van Drew previously denied the claims that he intends to switch parties. “I’m not changing anything — just doing my job,” he said in an interview Wednesday. “I’m still a Democrat, right here.” That denial might be old news according to more recent sources.

The rumor mill seems to indicate things have drastically changed since then. POLITICO’s John Bresnahan took to Twitter today claiming to have heard from Democrat sources that Trump is planning to do a Rose Garden event with Van Drew next week. His colleague, Heather Caygle, recently reported that Van Drew has informed his staffers about the upcoming switch:

Van Drew’s congressional, campaign staff and other members of the New Jersey delegation were informed he was planning to switch parties on Saturday, according to Democratic sources. The question now was when, not if, Van Drew was joining the Republican Party, according to several Democrats with knowledge of the ongoing conversations.

As of Saturday afternoon, it was still unclear if Van Drew would make the announcement before the House votes on impeachment, which is expected Wednesday.

“It was supposed to be bipartisan, it was supposed to be incontrovertible. It was supposed to be something that was always on the rarest of circumstances,” Van Drew told reporters about impeachment earlier this week. “Well it’s not bipartisan.”

Republicans were excitedly touting the news on Saturday, describing it as a huge blow to Democrats’ effort to impeach the president, which Trump and other GOP leaders have repeatedly decried as a “partisan witch hunt.” The move is also certain to score major points with Trump, whose support could be crucial in a crowded GOP primary. Trump and Van Drew are expected to hold an event together next week, according to sources on Capitol Hill.

Yesterday, we published a list of Democrats that are currently pushing for impeachment and currently representing districts Trump won in 2016. We highly encourage our readers to contact the office numbers provided to let them know how their feelings on the situation before the vote on the House floor this Wednesday.

Here’s a list of every Dem rep voting for impeachment in districts Trump won…and how to contact them!

Are these your representatives? CALL THEM!

You have until next Wednesday to make your case to these lawmakers. The House Judiciary Committee has voted to approve two articles of impeachment against President Trump. The next step is a vote on the House floor on 18 December.

Below you will find a list of all 31 Democrat House members that are currently representing a district that Trump won during the 2016 election. They are all planning to vote for impeachment. Special thanks to Comfortably Smug for putting this list together.

Please consider calling these members of Congress if you care about putting election pressure on Democrats. Let them know you’ll be showing them how you feel at the voting booths if they don’t take your words seriously today.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.comBecome a Patron!

Update: These two Democrats plan to vote against impeachment

Jeff Van Drew
@CongressmanJVD@VanDrewForNJ (202) 225-6572

Collin Peterson
@CollinPeterson (202) 225-2165

Democrats below are still on the field of play:

Tom O’Halleran
@RepOHalleran @TomOHalleran (202) 225-3361

Lucy McBath
@RepLucyMcBath @LucyMcBath (202) 225-4501

Lauren Underwood
@RepUnderwood@LaurenUnderwood (202) 225-2976

Cheri Bustos
@RepCheri@CheriBustos (202) 225-5905

Abby Finkenauer
@RepFinkenauer@Abby4Iowa (202) 225-2911

Dave Loebsack
@DaveLoebsack@DaveForIowa (202) 225-6576

Cindy Axne
@RepCindyAxne@Axne4Congress (202) 225-5476

Jared Golden
@RepGolden@Golden4Congress (202) 225-6306

Elissa Slotkin
@RepSlotkin@ElissaSlotkin (202) 225-4872

Haley Stevens
@RepHaleyStevens@HaleyLive (202) 225-8171

Angie Craig
@RepAngieCraig@AngieCraigMN (202) 225-2271

Susie Lee
@RepSusieLee@SusieLeeNV (202) 225-3252

Chris Pappas
@RepChrisPappas@ChrisPappasNH (202) 225-5456

Andy Kim
@RepAndyKimNJ@AndyKimNJ (202) 225-4765

Josh Gottheimer
@RepJoshG@JoshGottheimer (202) 225-4465

Mikie Sherrill
@RepSherrill@MikieSherrill (202) 225-5034

Xochitl Torres Small
@RepTorresSmall@XochforCongress (202) 225-2365

Max Rose
@RepMaxRose@MaxRose4NY (202) 225-3371

Sean Patrick Maloney
@RepSeanMaloney@MaloneyforNY (202) 225-5441

Antonio Delgado
@RepDelgado@DelgadoforNY19 (202) 225-3665

Anthony Brindisi
@RepBrindisi@ABrindisiNY (202) 225-3665

Kendra Horn
@RepKendraHorn@HornForCongress (202) 225-2132

Matt Cartwright
@RepCartwright@CartwrightPA (202) 225-5546

Conor Lamb
@RepConorLamb@ConorLambPA (202) 225-2301

Joe Cunningham
@JoeCunninghamSC (202) 225-3176

Ben McAdams
@RepBenMcAdams@BenMcAdams (202) 225-3011

Elaine Luria
@RepElaineLuria@ElaineLuriaVA (202) 225-4215

Abigail Spanberger
@RepSpanberger@SpanbergerVA07 (202) 225-2815

Ron Kind
@RepRonKind@KindForCongress (202) 225-5506

Will peace finally arrive in Yemen? Only if the West cracks down on Saudi Arabia says Rand Paul

The rocket blasts will stop—at least for now—and the Shia muslims that comprise the Houthi coalition are expressing an interest in a broader cease fire agreement with the Saudi forces that they have been pitted against in bloody and desperate battles that have brought the already impoverished nation to its knees.

The announcement comes following demands from the United Nations, and Houthi rebels have agreed to stop shelling Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in response. But it remains to be seen whether the Saudi crown will relent in its efforts to transform Yemen into a docile puppet state. Already, Saudi Arabia is responsible for numerous documented war crimes, many doled out in official orders. On at least three occasions they attacked Doctors Without Borders, threatening the lives of Western aid workers.

But there are some signs of progress. Despite a round of negotiations failing in September with Houthis refusing to attend, both parties seem willing to come to the table this time.

Speaking to the UN Security Council, UN special envoy Martin Griffiths had this to say:

“I have received firm assurances from the leadership of the Yemeni parties … that they are committed to attending these consultations. I believe they are genuine.”

Senator Rand Paul calls for Saudi arms deals to be rescinded

“Really, the only thing they understand over there is strength. I think they will see sanctions as weakness on the part of the president and if the president wants to act strongly he should cut off the arms sale,” Senator Paul said.

Last week, Secretary Pompeo warned the Saudi government to stop bombing civilians. There have been 200 bombing campaign on residential areas since then according to Paul.

The war crimes of Saudi Arabia

Yemen has faced one of the worst famines in years and the Saudis are largely responsible for causing it. Saudi forces had blockaded all Yemeni ports and the result was devastating. Human rights groups reported that 78% of Yemen’s population was struggling to eat, find clean water, and medical supplies.

While aid ships have been allowed to pass through the blockade, there’s simply not enough supplies on these boats to furnish all of the noncombatants with what they need. Since the blockade has restricted refined fuel from entering the region, these people have little recourse other than to tough it out during the struggle. Fleeing is not an option.

On at least one occasion, Saudi forces bombed an airport to prevent NGOs from using it to provide aid. Severe shortages of food have resulted in 13 million people living in conditions of famine and the severe shortage of potable water has caused a cholera outbreak. According to UNICEF, every 10 minutes a child dies in Yemen as a result of preventable diseases that are left untreated due to the blockade and war. 

Saudi forces have repeatedly and explicitly engaged in war crimes that violate the laws of war including targeting, in official orders, the entire city of Sa’dah rather than pinpointing separate legitimate military targets.

From an American perspective, this is perhaps the most horrendous feature of the conflict. It isn’t Saudi-made bombs that are being used for this purpose, but arms that they purchased from the United States. By no means did we intend for these weapons to be used with such complete disregard for human life and the Saudi atrocities violate the most basic human principles of honor. The Trump administration is on record condemning the use of our weapons to wreak such chaos to noncombatants.

Following an airstrike that struck an ambulance being operated by Doctors Without Borders, the French NGO issued the following statement:

“The way war is being waged in Yemen is causing enormous suffering and shows that the warring parties do not recognise or respect the protected status of hospitals and medical facilities. We witness the devastating consequences of this on people trapped in conflict zones on a daily basis. Nothing has been spared – not even hospitals, even though medical facilities are explicitly protected by international humanitarian law.”

In response, Saudi Arabia told aid workers to leave the region.

Secret prison facilities have been set up throughout the United Arab Emirates and the Saudi coalition has spirited away religious scholars for detention and torture. In one instance, a video of a dead torture victim was leaked to the press.

More migrants or more effort, the West must decide

This is another Middle East dispute that we decided to dip our toes in foolishly, and maybe we’ll never learn. But if the United States and the Western coalition that has been providing arms to Saudi Arabia don’t figure out a plan to stop this behavior from the House of Saud, there’s no telling what happens when Saudi Arabia gets bored with their new toy. In the worst case, an openly armed conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia might not be too far off. The Middle East is a powderkeg and these conflicts are just a sideshow at present.

Rather than repeatedly sparking the match, its time for Western leaders to douse the flames.

Just one more thing before you go…