gavin

  • Forestry experts say a major reason for massive wildfires is there are too many trees in U.S. forests.
  • The answer to this problem, somewhat paradoxically, is more logging, experts say.
  • “It’s a bit counter-intuitive, but we cut more trees,” one forestry expert said.

Forests are an iconic feature of the western U.S.’s dry, rugged landscape, but the risk of massive wildfires on these lands is growing because of decades of poor management.

It turns out western forests have too many trees. The answer to this problem, somewhat paradoxically, is more logging, according to experts.

“Forests have to be actively managed — logging, road maintenance, tree planting, weeding, animal control, thinning, salvage — in order to avoid these events,” Bob Zybach, a forestry expert, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Logging in government-controlled forests is probably one of the most contentious environmental policy debates. However, one expert recently told Congress that one way we deal with massive wildfires is by harvesting trees.

“It’s a bit counter-intuitive, but we cut more trees,” Elaine Oneil, a forestry management consultant, told the House Committee on Natural Resources in a hearing Wednesday.

“What we are seeing in the western U.S. is an epidemic — of insects and disease and wildfires — brought on in large part by an epidemic of too many trees,” Oneil testified before Congress.

NASA's Operational Land Imager satellite image of Camp Fire burning near Paradise

NASA’s Operational Land Imager satellite image shows the Camp Fire burning at around 10:45 a.m. local time near Paradise, California, U.S., on Nov. 8, 2018. Courtesy NASA/Handout via REUTERS

Federal wildfire statistics show the average number of acres burned every year since 2000 is double what it was the preceding four decades. (RELATED: The Green New Deal Isn’t Just About Energy, It’s Also About Controlling What You Eat)

The hearing was meant to highlight the supposed impacts of global warming on public lands and forests, including increased wildfire risks. However, Oneil’s testimony shined a light on what may need to be done in order to reverse decades of forest mismanagement.

Democrats tend to oppose increased logging, but megafires that gobble up millions of acres of forests and chaparral lands threaten their crusade to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Indeed, Democrats and some scientists argue global warming is behind the recent rise in western wildfires — though that point is hotly debated. Republicans, on the other hand, tend to blame bigger wildfires on poor land management and environmental litigation.

In most cases, healthy forests sequester carbon dioxide, which scientists blame for global warming. However, Oneil said tree mortality in some states is at the point where forests emit more carbon dioxide than they sequester.

California’s devastating 2018 wildfire season, for example, emitted just as much carbon dioxide as producing the entire state’s electricity needs for an entire year, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Not all of these emissions, however, come from burning forests.

Firefighters move debris while recovering human remains from a trailer home destroyed by the Camp Fire in Paradise

Firefighters move debris while recovering human remains from a trailer home destroyed by the Camp Fire in Paradise, California, U.S., Nov. 17, 2018. REUTERS/Terray Sylvester

The Rim Fire that started near Yosemite National Park in 2013 reportedly emitted up to four times more carbon dioxide emissions as California reduced that year to meet its global warming goals.

For many Republicans, however, carbon sequestration is ancillary benefit to what is otherwise just commonsense land management policy. Zybach said active forest management can also be an economic engine for rural America.

“Active management has the additional benefit of producing tax-paying jobs rather than follow the recent model of using taxpayer monies to ‘battle’ these things and ‘mitigate’ the results,” Zybach said in an email.

Wildfire experts say California’s wildfire woes will only get worse if tree mortality continues unchecked. Oneil said not only do diseased and dead trees need to be removed, but the number of trees needs to be reduced, especially in the dry, western states.

The overcrowding in California’s forests is stark. Some forests in California have more than 1,000 trees per acre instead of the more ideal 40 to 60 per acre, according to forestry experts.

U.S. forestry officials reported 27 million trees died in California in the 12 months running up to December 2017. Since 2010, 129 million trees died in state, federal and private California forests, according to a 2018 report by the Little Hoover Commission (LHC).

LHC, which investigates California policies, recommended officials “use more prescribed fire to reinvigorate forests, inhibit firestorms and help protect air and water quality.”

“Tree mortality is related to the number of living trees,” David South, professor emeritus of forestry at Auburn University, told TheDCNF.

U.S. President Donald Trump visits a neighborhood recently destroyed by the Camp Fire in Paradise, California, U.S.

U.S. President Donald Trump visits the Skyway Villa Mobile Home and RV Park, a neighborhood recently destroyed by the Camp Fire, in Paradise, California, U.S., Nov. 17, 2018. REUTERS/ Leah Millis

South pointed out that wildfires were likely worse in the early 20th century, especially during the 1930s, but agreed with Oneil that fires were getting worse because not enough trees were being harvested, along with a lack of active forest management.

“At one time, the U.S. Forest Service was harvesting about 10 billion board feet of timber per year,” South said. “My guess is this rate would make a difference in the risk of crown fires” in the coming decades, he added.

Active management of forests — thinning and prescribed burns — seems to have gained bipartisan support in the wake of California’s 2018 wildfire season. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, proposed spending $305 million to remove debris from state forests and expand wildfire response capabilities.

President Donald Trump is also pushing for more forest maintenance but went a step further and signed an executive order in December allowing more than 4 billion board feet of timber to be logged from federal lands.

Trump also signed legislation in 2018 that included provisions allowing foresters to more quickly remove dead and diseased trees.

Trump’s order allowed for a big boost in federal timber harvests, however, it’s still well below what South and other experts say is needed to bring wildfires back under control.

Congress would also likely need to act in order to greenlight more timber harvesting, though South was doubtful that would happen.

“As long as the public owns the lands, there will be trees dying due to overcrowding,” South said.

Follow Michael on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Source: The Daily Caller

FILE PHOTO: The prototypes for U.S. President Donald Trump's border wall are seen behind the border fence between Mexico and the United States, in Tijuana
FILE PHOTO: The prototypes for U.S. President Donald Trump’s border wall are seen behind the border fence between Mexico and the United States, in Tijuana, Mexico January 7, 2019. REUTERS/Jorge Duenes/File Photo

February 18, 2019

By David Morgan and David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – California will “imminently” challenge President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to obtain funds for a U.S.-Mexico border wall, state Attorney General Xavier Becerra said on Sunday.

“Definitely and imminently,” Becerra told ABC’s “This Week” program when asked whether and when California would sue the Trump administration in federal court. Other states controlled by Democrats are expected to join the effort.

“We are prepared, we knew something like this might happen. And with our sister state partners, we are ready to go,” he said.

Trump invoked the emergency powers on Friday under a 1976 law after Congress rebuffed his request for $5.7 billion to help build the wall that was a signature 2016 campaign promise.

The move is intended to allow him to redirect money appropriated by Congress for other purposes to wall construction.

The White House says Trump will have access to about $8 billion. Nearly $1.4 billion was allocated for border fencing under a spending measure approved by Congress last week, and Trump’s emergency declaration is aimed at giving him another $6.7 billion for the wall.

Becerra cited Trump’s own comment on Friday that he “didn’t need to do this” as evidence that the emergency declaration is legally vulnerable.

“It’s become clear that this is not an emergency, not only because no one believes it is but because Donald Trump himself has said it’s not,” he said. 

Becerra and California Governor Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, have been expected to sue to block Trump’s move.

Becerra told ABC that California and other states are waiting to learn which federal programs will lose money to determine what kind of harm the states could face from the declaration.

He said California may be harmed by less federal funding for emergency response services, the military and stopping drug trafficking.

“We’re confident there are at least 8 billion ways that we can prove harm,” Becerra said.

Three Texas landowners and an environmental group filed the first lawsuit against Trump’s move on Friday, saying it violates the Constitution and would infringe on their property rights.

The legal challenges could at least slow down Trump’s efforts to build the wall but would likely end up at the conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court.

Congress never defined a national emergency in the National Emergencies Act of 1976, which has been invoked dozens of times without a single successful legal challenge.

Democrats in Congress have vowed to challenge Trump’s declaration and several Republican lawmakers have said they are not certain whether they would support the president.

“I think many of us are concerned about this,” Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Trump could, however, veto any resolution of disapproval from Congress.

White House senior adviser Stephen Miller told Fox News on Sunday that Trump’s declaration would allow the administration to build “hundreds of miles” of border wall by September 2020.

“We have 120-odd miles that are already under construction or are already obligated plus the additional funds we have and then we’re going to outlay – we’re going to look at a few hundred miles.”

Trump’s proposed wall and wider immigration policies are likely to be a major campaign issue ahead of the next presidential election in November 2020, where he will seek a second four-year term.

(Reporting by David Morgan and David Lawder; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)

Source: OANN

2020 Dems hit early voting states; Weld explores GOP bid

Several Democratic presidential candidates are spending the long holiday weekend on the campaign trail, while a Republican has announced he’s creating an exploratory committee for a possible 2020 run.

Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Kamala Harris of California are visiting early voting states on Friday that will be critical to securing the Democratic nomination next year.

Former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld, who ran for vice president on the Libertarian Party ticket in 2016, said Friday that he was considering challenging President Donald Trump in a 2020 Republican primary.

A look at midterm campaign activities ahead of Presidents Day weekend:

___

GILLIBRAND

Gillibrand, in New Hampshire, participated in a walking tour of downtown Concord before visiting businesses in Dover and meeting members of the LGBT community in Somersworth.

On Friday, she called Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency to construct a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border "inappropriate" and said Trump manufactured a crisis to justify the move.

The only national emergency, she said, "is the humanitarian crisis that President Trump has created at our border from separating family from children and treating people who need our help inhumanely."

Gillibrand visited a coffee shop in downtown Concord before stopping to listen to a homeless man, Kevin Clark, play a song by Cat Stevens called "Father and Son." She praised his singing and gave him a hug before heading off to a consignment shop, where she bought a vase and a small plate.

Later Friday, Gillibrand spoke at Teatotaller, a cafe in Somersworth that refers to itself as an "oasis of queer, hipster, tea, coffee and pastry goodness."

She told the crowd that she would advocate for the rights of the LGBTQ community and called it "an outrage" for Trump to tell transgender people what bathrooms they can use or whether they are qualified to serve in the military. She said she would support the addition of a non-binary or third gender classification.

Gillibrand also spoke out in favor of the Green Neal Deal, a set of proposed programs that aim to address climate change.

___

HARRIS

Harris, who is campaigning in South Carolina, visited Charleston’s Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the site of the 2015 shooting that killed nine African-American churchgoers.

Speaking to reporters after a lunchtime stop, Harris said she’d visited the church, known as Mother Emanuel, earlier Friday and called it a "very tragic symbol of failure of people, in particular in the United States Congress, to pass smart gun safety laws."

Mother Emanuel is one of the oldest black churches in the South. During her visit, Harris paid her respects and left flowers. The church has been a pillar of African-American and spiritual life in South Carolina.

At a town hall in North Charleston later Friday, the scoreboard overhead in the gymnasium was changed to reflect the date of South Carolina’s Democratic primary: Feb. 29, 2020. The crowd swelled, and some attendees climbed on top of folded bleachers for makeshift seating.

Harris talked about the bill that the Senate passed this week that would explicitly make lynching a federal crime. Harris, one of three black members of the Senate, introduced the bill with Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina. Booker is also running for president.

Harris says lynchings are "a stain on America’s history."

While in South Carolina, she received an endorsement for president from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said on MSNBC: "I think the American people could not do better" than Harris.

___

WELD

Weld, who is little-known on the national stage but well-respected among veterans in the GOP established, announced the creation of an exploratory committee for president on Friday.

The move makes Trump the first incumbent president since Republican George H.W. Bush in 1992 to face a notable primary challenge.

Weld served as Massachusetts governor from 1991 to 1997 and was popular despite being a Republican in a heavily Democratic state. He held the line on spending and taxes but embraced liberal positions on abortion and gay rights.

Trump remains very popular with Republicans so he faces little risk of losing the GOP nomination.

But primary challenges often foreshadow trouble ahead for incumbent presidents. Bush and Democrat Jimmy Carter lost their bids for a second term after facing challenges from inside their own party.

Source: Fox News National

Trump Declares Emergency for Border Wall, First Lawsuit Filed

President Donald Trump on Friday declared a national emergency in a bid to fund his promised wall at the U.S.-Mexico border without congressional approval, an action Democrats vowed to challenge as a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

The Republican president's move to circumvent Congress represented an escalation in his efforts to make good on a 2016 presidential campaign pledge to build a wall to halt the flow into the country of illegal immigrants, who Trump says bring crime and drugs.

Three Texas landowners and an environmental group filed the first lawsuit on Friday challenging the declaration aimed at freeing up billions of dollars to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen said.

The lawsuit, brought in federal court in the District of Columbia, claims the south Texas landowners were told by the U.S. government that it would seek to build a border wall on their properties if money for the project were available in 2019, Public Citizen said in a statement.

Earlier in the day, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee said it had launched an investigation into the emergency declaration.

In a letter to Trump, committee Democrats asked him to make available for a hearing White House and Justice Department officials involved in the action. They also requested legal documents on the decision that led to the declaration, setting a deadline of next Friday.

"We believe your declaration of an emergency shows a reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system," said the letter signed by Chairman Jerrold Nadler and other top Democrats on the panel.

Trump on Friday also signed a bipartisan government spending bill that would prevent another partial government shutdown by funding several agencies that otherwise would have closed on Saturday.

The funding bill represented a legislative defeat for him since it contains no money for his proposed wall – the focus of weeks of conflict between him and Democrats in Congress.

Trump made no mention of the bill in comments to reporters in the White House's Rose Garden.

He had demanded that Congress provide him with $5.7 billion in wall funding as part of legislation to fund the agencies. That triggered a historic, 35-day December-January government shutdown that hurt the U.S. economy and his opinion poll numbers.

By reorienting his quest for wall funding toward a legally uncertain strategy based on declaring a national emergency, Trump risks plunging into a lengthy legislative and legal battle with Democrats and dividing his fellow Republicans – many of whom expressed grave reservations on Friday about the president's action.

Fifteen Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate introduced legislation on Thursday to prevent Trump from invoking emergency powers to transfer funds to his wall from accounts Congress has already committed to other projects.

'EXCLUSIVE POWER'

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House, and top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer swiftly responded to Trump's declaration.

"The president's actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution," they said in a statement. "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.”

New York state's attorney general, Letitia James, said her office would also challenge Trump in court. California's governor, Gavin Newsom, also pledged to file suit.

"We won't stand for this abuse of power & will fight back with every legal tool at our disposal," James wrote on Twitter.

The president acknowledged his order would face a lengthy court fight.

"I expect to be sued. I shouldn't be sued … We'll win in the Supreme Court," Trump predicted.

Trump may have also undermined his administration's argument about the urgency of the situation when he told reporters, "I didn't need to do this. But I'd rather do it much faster."

In their letter to Trump, House Judiciary Democrats said that language had left them "troubled."

Both the House and the Senate could pass a resolution terminating the emergency by majority vote. However, that measure would then go to Trump, who would likely veto it. Overriding the veto would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers.

Trump says a wall is needed to curb illegal immigrants and illicit drugs coming across the border. But statistics show illegal immigration via the border is at a 20-year low and that many drug shipments come through legal ports of entry.

Confronted with those statistics by reporters at the Rose Garden event, Trump said they were "wrong."

Also present were a half-dozen women holding poster-sized pictures of family members killed by illegal immigrants. Trump noted their presence in announcing the emergency declaration.

He estimated his emergency declaration could free up as much as $8 billion to pay for part of the wall. Estimates of its total cost run as high as $23 billion.

As a candidate, Trump repeatedly promised Mexico would pay for the wall. It was one of his biggest applause lines at his campaign rallies. Mexico firmly refused to pay, and now Trump wants U.S. taxpayers to cover the costs.

REPUBLICANS CONCERNED

Some congressional Republicans expressed dismay following Trump's announcement.

Greg Walden, a senior House Republican, said on Twitter he was "deeply concerned about the precedent that this action sets."

Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said in a statement that Trump' declaration was not a solution.

"It wouldn't provide enough funding to adequately secure our borders, it would likely get tied up in litigation, and most concerning is that it would create a new precedent that a left-wing president would undoubtedly utilize to implement their radical policy agenda while bypassing the authority of Congress," Tillis said.

Other Republicans, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, were supportive.

With an emergency formally declared, Trump left Washington to travel to his Mar-a-Lago golf resort in Florida for a holiday break.

Source: NewsMax Politics

Trump Declares Emergency for Border Wall, First Lawsuit Filed

President Donald Trump on Friday declared a national emergency in a bid to fund his promised wall at the U.S.-Mexico border without congressional approval, an action Democrats vowed to challenge as a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

The Republican president's move to circumvent Congress represented an escalation in his efforts to make good on a 2016 presidential campaign pledge to build a wall to halt the flow into the country of illegal immigrants, who Trump says bring crime and drugs.

Three Texas landowners and an environmental group filed the first lawsuit on Friday challenging the declaration aimed at freeing up billions of dollars to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen said.

The lawsuit, brought in federal court in the District of Columbia, claims the south Texas landowners were told by the U.S. government that it would seek to build a border wall on their properties if money for the project were available in 2019, Public Citizen said in a statement.

Earlier in the day, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee said it had launched an investigation into the emergency declaration.

In a letter to Trump, committee Democrats asked him to make available for a hearing White House and Justice Department officials involved in the action. They also requested legal documents on the decision that led to the declaration, setting a deadline of next Friday.

"We believe your declaration of an emergency shows a reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system," said the letter signed by Chairman Jerrold Nadler and other top Democrats on the panel.

Trump on Friday also signed a bipartisan government spending bill that would prevent another partial government shutdown by funding several agencies that otherwise would have closed on Saturday.

The funding bill represented a legislative defeat for him since it contains no money for his proposed wall – the focus of weeks of conflict between him and Democrats in Congress.

Trump made no mention of the bill in comments to reporters in the White House's Rose Garden.

He had demanded that Congress provide him with $5.7 billion in wall funding as part of legislation to fund the agencies. That triggered a historic, 35-day December-January government shutdown that hurt the U.S. economy and his opinion poll numbers.

By reorienting his quest for wall funding toward a legally uncertain strategy based on declaring a national emergency, Trump risks plunging into a lengthy legislative and legal battle with Democrats and dividing his fellow Republicans – many of whom expressed grave reservations on Friday about the president's action.

Fifteen Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate introduced legislation on Thursday to prevent Trump from invoking emergency powers to transfer funds to his wall from accounts Congress has already committed to other projects.

'EXCLUSIVE POWER'

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House, and top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer swiftly responded to Trump's declaration.

"The president's actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution," they said in a statement. "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.”

New York state's attorney general, Letitia James, said her office would also challenge Trump in court. California's governor, Gavin Newsom, also pledged to file suit.

"We won't stand for this abuse of power & will fight back with every legal tool at our disposal," James wrote on Twitter.

The president acknowledged his order would face a lengthy court fight.

"I expect to be sued. I shouldn't be sued … We'll win in the Supreme Court," Trump predicted.

Trump may have also undermined his administration's argument about the urgency of the situation when he told reporters, "I didn't need to do this. But I'd rather do it much faster."

In their letter to Trump, House Judiciary Democrats said that language had left them "troubled."

Both the House and the Senate could pass a resolution terminating the emergency by majority vote. However, that measure would then go to Trump, who would likely veto it. Overriding the veto would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers.

Trump says a wall is needed to curb illegal immigrants and illicit drugs coming across the border. But statistics show illegal immigration via the border is at a 20-year low and that many drug shipments come through legal ports of entry.

Confronted with those statistics by reporters at the Rose Garden event, Trump said they were "wrong."

Also present were a half-dozen women holding poster-sized pictures of family members killed by illegal immigrants. Trump noted their presence in announcing the emergency declaration.

He estimated his emergency declaration could free up as much as $8 billion to pay for part of the wall. Estimates of its total cost run as high as $23 billion.

As a candidate, Trump repeatedly promised Mexico would pay for the wall. It was one of his biggest applause lines at his campaign rallies. Mexico firmly refused to pay, and now Trump wants U.S. taxpayers to cover the costs.

REPUBLICANS CONCERNED

Some congressional Republicans expressed dismay following Trump's announcement.

Greg Walden, a senior House Republican, said on Twitter he was "deeply concerned about the precedent that this action sets."

Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said in a statement that Trump' declaration was not a solution.

"It wouldn't provide enough funding to adequately secure our borders, it would likely get tied up in litigation, and most concerning is that it would create a new precedent that a left-wing president would undoubtedly utilize to implement their radical policy agenda while bypassing the authority of Congress," Tillis said.

Other Republicans, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, were supportive.

With an emergency formally declared, Trump left Washington to travel to his Mar-a-Lago golf resort in Florida for a holiday break.

Source: NewsMax Politics

Trump Tells California to Return $3.5B for High-Speed Rail Line

President Donald Trump wants the $3.5 billion back from California for the high-speed rail line project that would have connected major cities in the north and south of the state following California Gov. Gavin Newsom's announcement he was scaling back the plan, Politico reports.

Trump on Wednesday tweeted that California officials "owe the Federal Government three and a half billion dollars. We want that money back now."

California started construction on the line in 2015, a project backed by $10 billion from the state and $2.5 billion from the federal government. It was most recently projected to cost $77 billion.

Newsom did not officially cancel the project but said it would "cost too much and take too long" as currently planned.

"There simply isn't a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A.," Mr. Newsom said. "I wish there were."

California could be forced to give the money back to the federal government if it misses Central Valley construction by a December 2022 deadline, according to Politico.

Source: NewsMax America

Trump Tells California to Return $3.5B for High-Speed Rail Line

President Donald Trump wants the $3.5 billion back from California for the high-speed rail line project that would have connected major cities in the north and south of the state following California Gov. Gavin Newsom's announcement he was scaling back the plan, Politico reports.

Trump on Wednesday tweeted that California officials "owe the Federal Government three and a half billion dollars. We want that money back now."

California started construction on the line in 2015, a project backed by $10 billion from the state and $2.5 billion from the federal government. It was most recently projected to cost $77 billion.

Newsom did not officially cancel the project but said it would "cost too much and take too long" as currently planned.

"There simply isn't a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A.," Mr. Newsom said. "I wish there were."

California could be forced to give the money back to the federal government if it misses Central Valley construction by a December 2022 deadline, according to Politico.

Source: NewsMax America

Ali Alexander and Gavin McInnes join Rob Dew to talk about his lawsuits against the SPLC and make fun of the latest outrage feminist caught on tape. Dew also takes your phone calls on the hottest topics in the news today from population control to Trump’s rally in El Paso.

GUEST // (OTP/Skype) // TOPICS:
Gavin McIness
Ali Alexander

Source: The War Room

In this star-studded edition of the War Room, Harrison Smith welcomes Roger Stone, Ali Alexander and An0maly to discuss the current state of the world. The Deep State has shown its hand with their treatment of Roger, and the Democrats have revealed the depths of their animosity in the hearing with Matt Whitaker. Ali gives us the inside view as Gavin McInnes gears up to take on the SPLC. An0maly breaks down how open-mindedness can be what is needed to break through the conditioning and free See More people from the Matrix.

GUEST // (OTP/Skype) // TOPICS:
Ali Alexander//In Studio
An0maly//Skype</span>

Source: The War Room

Gavin McInnes: Virginia Unite the Right Rally DISAVOWED Originally Published here: but republished because Twitter WILL NOT ALLOW this link to be published… This is what you get! First Alerted by @Ali article https://medium.com/@ali/why-is-twitter-blocking-this-link-that-exonerates-gavin-mcinnes-and-proud-boys-5f81bd964a3   Gavin McInnes: Virginia Unite the Right Rally DISAVOWED In a rare decision, Gavin McInnes has officially announced that the Unite the Right rally in […]


Current track

Title

Artist