Will America Break Up?

[Ryan Ruck]

Liberal Preppers Stock Up On Guns, Food As Trumpocalypse Looms

With Trump on the horizon, the survivalist movement — long a pastime of the right — is picking up progressive converts fast

January 17, 2017

Colin Waugh bought a shotgun four weeks before November’s election.

An unapologetic liberal, he was no fan of firearms. He had never owned one before. But Waugh, a 31-year-old from Independence, Missouri, couldn’t shake his fears of a Donald Trump presidency — and all of the chaos it could bring. He imagined hate crimes and violence waged by extremists emboldened by the Republican nominee’s brash, divisive rhetoric. He pictured state-sanctioned roundups of Muslims, gays, and outspoken critics.

“I kept asking myself, ‘Do I want to live under tyranny?'” said Waugh, who supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary and later backed Hillary Clinton. “The answer was absolutely not.”

With Trump now days away from assuming the White House, Waugh’s preparing for the worst. He’s made “bug-out bags” stuffed with ammo, energy bars, and assorted survival gear for his wife and their three cats. He’s begun stowing water and browsing real estate listings in Gunnison County, Colorado, which he’s determined to be a “liberal safe-haven.” Last month, Waugh added a 9mm handgun to his arsenal.

His advice to others on the left fearful of the next four years? “Get ready. Pay attention. Keep your wits about you.”

Waugh’s not alone. He is among a new cadre embracing extreme self-reliance in the wake of Trump’s surprising victory. Long a calling among conservatives spooked by big government boogymen and calamitous natural disasters, the so-called prepper movement is gaining a decisively liberal following.

“We’re tired of being perceived as wusses who won’t survive when shit hits the fan,” said Stacy, a Texas Democrat who recently caught the prepper bug. She spoke with Vocativ on the condition we not publish her last name. “I, for one, don’t like to be thought of as some precious snowflake.”

After years cast as a fringe survival group, preppers entered a kind of golden age during the Obama presidency. A horrific housing crash and the spectacle of Hurricane Sandy helped give rise to reality television shows like Doomsday Preppers and Doomsday Bunker, and fueled a multi-billion dollar survival industry. Branded by some as a foreign-born, gun-grabbing socialist, Obama aroused deep suspicion among the patriot groups, right-wing conservatives, and apocalyptic Christians at the center of the growing movement.

Trump’s provocative posturing and unpredictability is now inspiring a fresh wave of panic on the left. Those who spoke with Vocativ have envisioned scenarios that could lead to military coups led by loyalists of the president-elect and internment camps packed with political opponents, bloody social unrest and an all-out civil or nuclear war. Sound bonkers? Perhaps. But, for many, so was the prospect of a President Trump.

“It’s the nature of the political beast,” said Kevin O’Brien, a conservative prepper and realtor who specializes in off-the-grid properties in eastern Tennessee. “Obama had many on the right really wound up. Now it’s the left’s turn.”

The signs of change are surely in the air. Groups that cater to gun-toting bleeding hearts — such as the aptly named Liberal Gun Club — say they’ve seen a surge in paid membership since the election. Candid talk of disaster preparedness among progressives is showing up on social media. Even companies that outfit luxury “safe rooms” — which protect their wealthy owners from bombs, bullets, and chemical attacks — attribute recent boosts in business to the incoming administration.

“I don’t think we’d have the same level of interest if Hillary had been elected president,” Tom Gaffney, whose fortified home shelters at Gaffco Ballistics run as high as $400,000, told Vocativ in an interview.

Looking for likeminded folks to weather the Trumpocalypse, Waugh started a private Facebook group called the Liberal Prepper shortly after the election. In nine weeks, it’s drummed up more than 750 members, all of whom are individually screened and vetted, Waugh said. Dozens more flock to it daily.

Few are wasting precious time. They trade tips on survival swag and solicit recommendations for solar panels, firearms, and raising chickens. There are discussions on homesteading and home safety. Links to news stories about the president-elect or signs of instability around the globe are never in short supply.

Occasionally, posts on the Liberal Prepper seem to veer close to parody. One debate thread last week centered around the merits of stocking up on recycled toilet paper rolls versus buying Angel Soft, a brand produced by Koch industries, a notorious climate change foe. And in another discussion, vegetarian and vegan members talked about the best meat- and dairy-free food supplies to have during a sustained crisis.

In a smaller Facebook group, Progressive Liberal Preppers, members who blacksmith, bow hunt, and operate ham radios are eager to teach their skills with others, said one the site’s administrators, who goes by the name of Blythe Bonnie. “The next thing we’re going to do is a class on home brewing and winemaking,” said Bonnie, a lifelong Democrat and 70-year-old now living in Arkansas.

While most of these liberal preppers say they are readying for any disaster — natural, manmade, or even zombie — a doomsday scenario at the hands of a President Trump continues to be a primary concern.

“With the new administration I worry about Nazi-style camps that would include my wife, our twins and myself,” said Melissa Letos, who lives with her family on a five-acre spread near Portland, Oregon. In a recent interview, she said she raises chickens, strives to keep a year’s supply of canned food, and is able to hold her own with a firearm. She and her family plan to a build a bunker-style basement in the future.

Even as Letos and other liberals brace for bedlam, some longtime preppers worry that others in the movement have let their guard down. Michael Snyder, author of The Economic Collapse blog, recently warned against those on the right who seemed overly optimistic about a Trump presidency. “Everyone is feeling so good about things, very few people still seem interested in prepping for hard times ahead,” he wrote, raising the specter of financial instability in Europe and a potential trade war with China. “It is almost as if the apocalypse has been canceled and the future history of the U.S. has been rewritten with a much happier ending.”

For Waugh and his liberal peers, the apocalypse may have just begun. “Fear is an unfortunate catalyst for a lot of folks,” he said. “But there are still too many caught up in the idea that the system is infallible and that it will persevere and prevail.”

[Malsua]

I'm seeing this already....

I'm seeing lefties joining my NJ gun forum and asking about purchases and such.

[Ryan Ruck]

I hope you've advised them on only the finest Hi-Point, Jimenez, and Raven offerings available.

Let them buy all the 12 gauges and .22s they want. Joke's on them! Some of us can see in the dark...



On the topic of the thread, saw this earlier...

California Strikes a Bold Pose as Vanguard of the Resistance

January 18, 2017

In the months since the election of Donald J. Trump, California has turned into a laboratory of resistance — championing legal, legislative and political strategies to counter Republican policies while pressing the kind of new Democratic policies that presumably will not be coming out of Washington anytime soon.

The state lieutenant governor, Gavin Newsom, who is running for governor, said California could use its stringent environmental protection law to block Mr. Trump from building a wall along the Mexican border. In Sacramento, Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers are pressing bills to expand environmental protections, provide legal assistance for immigrants facing deportation and raise gasoline taxes to pay for highway construction.

“An earned-income tax credit,” said Anthony Rendon, the speaker of the Assembly. “Huge infusions for early-childhood education. Those types of things are certainly things that we are interested in doing.”

Democratic members of the California delegation to Congress are lining up to announce they will not attend the inauguration of Mr. Trump. And in Los Angeles, Sheila Kuehl, a member of the powerful county board of supervisors, has started what she has called “Operation Monkey Wrench,” urging people, including state and federal government workers, to systematically disrupt Trump policies that run counter to California laws and policies.

“I am encouraging people to engage in any way they can to slow down anything that might come from the federal departments and Congress,” she said. “You can’t just be dormant when fascism is growing.”

It may not be “Calexit” — the name of a decidedly quixotic campaign for California to withdraw from the union — but it is turning into what is, for all intents and purposes, a slow-motion secession.

California is becoming to Mr. Trump what Texas — which is as Republican as California is Democratic — was to President Obama: a sea of defiance and a potential source of unending legal and legislative challenges. Texas sued the federal government more than 40 times in recent years, moving to block an influx of Syrian refugees and to stymie air pollution regulations and Mr. Obama’s health care plan. Earlier this month, Democrats in the California state legislature hired Eric H. Holder, the former attorney general, in anticipation of a run of legal battles with the Trump White House.

“We will definitely not sit by idly as the Trump administration tries to deport immigrants, throw people off health care, ignore climate change and steal our water,” said Scott Wiener, a former member of the San Francisco board of supervisors who was just elected to the State Senate. “It’s about playing defense to whatever the administration throws at us — but also offense in terms of continuing California’s push for progressive social change.”

Antonio R. Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles who is running for governor, said threatening to actually secede was the wrong response to what he described as policies that could be devastating for this state.

“I hear a lot of talk about Calexit,” he said. “The last time a state tried to leave the union there was a civil war. I think it would be a lot more productive for us just to double down on what we do well.”

For all the talk of defiance, and political considerations are certainly at play in the early war footing taken by leaders in an overwhelmingly Democratic state, there are great risks to assuming this confrontational stance from the outset.

For one thing, it could invite retribution from Mr. Trump, who has not seemed inclined to turn the other cheek.

For another, California could find itself at the end of the line should Mr. Trump proceed with the extensive infrastructure program he has pledged. It might also find itself in a difficult position in the event of the kind of natural disaster where states need to turn to the federal government for assistance; some Republicans in Congress opposed giving federal aid to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

“You don’t want to paint yourself into a corner where you lose your ability to negotiate,” said Ted Gaines, a Republican senator who represents a rural district east of Sacramento. “They’d be better off offering an olive branch rather than setting down a pathway that may make it difficult to back off.”

“I think it’s premature,” Mr. Gaines said. “If they want to come out fighting, I think that hurts the relationship in the long term.”

Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a former aide to Pete Wilson, a Republican governor, said that he thought Democrats were “playing to the crowd.” But he described the approach as a short-term strategy with risky long-term implications.

“Trump likes to bully. He does not like to be bullied. And he likes to have the last word,” he said. “There are going to be millions of dollars to be spent across the country on infrastructure. Why would you want to end up on Donald Trump’s blacklist? You could end up on that list anyway. But why pick a fight?”

All of this has unnerved some in the business community.

“This is all based on the president-elect’s campaign messaging,” said Allan Zaremberg, the chief executive of the California Chamber of Commerce. “We don’t know how that is going to manifest in action.”

Jimmy Gomez, a Democratic assemblyman running for Congress, said he was not worried about any kind of retribution. “That would be an overreach for one president to punish one state,” he said. “When they do political payback not based on policy, but based on whether you are with them or against them, we will use that against them. If California doesn’t do well economically, the country doesn’t do well economically.”

California’s economy is the sixth-largest in the world.

There are parts of this state, however, that showed considerable support for Mr. Trump, and that would applaud efforts, for example, to roll back air pollution regulations.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District — which regulates air quality in one of the dirtiest areas of the nation — is looking to President Trump’s transition team to amend the federal Clean Air Act, said Mark Keppler, a professor of public affairs at the California State University in Fresno, noting one example.

And there are limits to what the state can do. Mr. Brown, in a budget he presented last week, projected a $1.6 billion shortfall by next summer, which means it will be difficult for California to promote the kind of spending program lawmakers want to make up for cuts in Washington, particularly on health care. The legal efforts being threatened — by Mr. Holder for the legislature and by Xavier Becerra, whom Mr. Brown just tapped to be attorney general — could delay some actions by the Trump White House, but won’t necessarily block them.

Still, Democrats overwhelmingly control California, and the thinking about Mr. Trump appears to be uniform: The state is entering rough waters. Mr. Trump could move to cut off funds for so-called sanctuary cities accommodating illegal immigrants, such as San Francisco; sharply cut federal aid that was part of President Obama’s health care program; or use regulatory powers to try to halt this state’s aggressive policies to reduce carbon emissions.

“The impact of anything coming out of Washington is going to be so difficult for California that we are almost thrown into survival mode,” said Ms. Kuehl, who has been in public office since 1994. She said she had urged people — “everyone: local and state governments, staff of federal agencies, nonprofits, neighborhood groups” — to aggressively try to impede any policies pushed by Mr. Trump that undercut California laws or policies.

“I said ‘If you have to lie, cheat and steal, do it,’” Ms. Kuehl said. “Take federal money and just tell them you are going to do whatever they want.”

[Ryan Ruck]

America’s Second Civil War

We’re in a fight over basic values.

January 24, 2017
By Dennis Prager

It is time that our society acknowledge a sad truth: America is currently fighting its Second Civil War.

In fact, with the obvious and enormous exception of attitudes toward slavery, Americans are more divided morally, ideologically, and politically today than they were during the Civil War. For that reason, just as the Great War came to be known as the First World War once there was a Second World War, the Civil War will become known as the First Civil War when more Americans come to regard the current battle as the Second Civil War.

This Second Civil War, fortunately, differs in one other critically important way: It has thus far been largely non-violent. But given the increasing left-wing violence such as riots, the violent taking over of college presidents’ offices, and the illegal occupation of state capitols, non-violence is not guaranteed to be a permanent characteristic of the Second Civil War.

There are those on both the left and the right who call for American “unity.” But these calls are either naïve or disingenuous. Unity was possible between the Right and liberals, but not between the Right and the Left.

Liberalism – which was anti-Left, pro-American, and deeply committed to the Judeo-Christian foundations of America, regarded the melting pot as the American ideal, fought for free speech for its opponents, regarded Western civilization as the greatest moral and artistic human achievement, and viewed the celebration of racial identity as racism – is now affirmed almost exclusively on the right and among a handful of people who don’t call themselves conservative.

The Left, however, is opposed to every one of those core principles of liberalism.

Like the Left in every other country, the Left in America sees America as essentially a racist, xenophobic, colonialist, imperialist, war-mongering, money-worshipping, moronically religious nation.

Just as in Western Europe, the Left in America seeks to erase America’s Judeo-Christian foundations. The melting pot is regarded as nothing more than an anti-black, anti-Muslim, anti-Hispanic meme. The Left suppresses free speech, wherever possible, for those who oppose it, labeling all non-Left speech “hate speech.” To cite only one example, if you think Shakespeare was the greatest playwright, or Bach the greatest composer, you are a proponent of Dead White European Males and therefore racist.

Without any important value held in common, how can there be unity between Left and non-Left? Obviously, there cannot.

There will be unity only when the Left vanquishes the Right or the Right vanquishes the Left. Using the First Civil War analogy, American unity was achieved only after the South was vanquished and slavery abolished.

How are those of us who oppose left-wing nihilism – there is no other word for an ideology that holds Western civilization and America’s core values in contempt – supposed to unite with “educators” who instruct elementary-school teachers to cease calling their students “boys and girls” because that implies gender identity? With English departments that don’t require reading Shakespeare in order to receive a degree in English? With those who regard virtually every war America fought as imperialist and immoral? With those who regard the free market as a form of oppression? With those who want the state to control as much of American life as possible? With those who repeatedly tell America and its black minority that the greatest problems afflicting black Americans are all caused by white racism, “white privilege,” and “systemic racism”? With those who think that the nuclear-family ideal is inherently misogynistic and homophobic? With those who hold that Israel is the villain in the Middle East? With those who claim that the term “Islamic terrorist” is an expression of religious bigotry?

The third significant difference between the First and Second Civil Wars is that one side has been doing nearly all the fighting. That is how it has been able to take over schools – from elementary schools to high schools to the universities – and indoctrinate America’s young people; how it has taken over nearly all the news media; and how it has taken over the entertainment media.

The conservative side has lost on every one of these fronts because it has rarely fought back with anything near the ferocity with which the Left fights. Name a Republican politician who has run against the Left, as opposed to running solely against his or her Democratic opponent. And nearly all American conservatives, people who are proud of America and affirm its basic tenets, readily send their children to schools that indoctrinate their children against everything the parents hold precious. A mere handful protest when their child’s teacher ceases calling their son a boy or their daughter a girl, or makes “slave owner” the defining characteristic of the Founding Fathers.

With the defeat of the Left in the last presidential election, the defeat of the Left in two-thirds of the gubernatorial elections and in a majority of House and Senate elections, this is likely the last chance liberals, conservatives, and the Right have to defeat the American Left. But it will not happen until these groups understand that we are fighting for the survival of America no less than the Union troops were in the First Civil War.

[Ryan Ruck]

[Malsua]

Oh, look at the precious snowflake, wants to take back his country...from what exactly?

[Ryan Ruck]

Oh, look at the precious snowflake, wants to take back his country...from what exactly?

From the backwater, gun-toting, bible-thumping, cis-normative, homophobic, xenophobic, racist, womyn-hating, inbred, shit lords that are keeping us from progressing and joining the world community.

(Did I get a Buzzword Bingo?)



And in other news...

More Californians Dreaming Of A Country Without Trump: Poll

January 24, 2017

The election of Republican businessman Donald Trump as president of the United States has some Californians dreaming - of their own country.

One in every three California residents supports the most populous U.S. state's peaceful withdrawal from the union, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, many of them Democrats strongly opposed to Trump's ascension to the country's highest office.

The 32 percent support rate is sharply higher than the last time the poll asked Californians about secession, in 2014, when one-in-five or 20 percent favored it around the time Scotland held its independence referendum and voted to remain in the United Kingdom.

California also far surpasses the national average favoring secession, which stood at 22 percent, down from 24 percent in 2014.

The poll surveyed 500 Californians among more than 14,000 adults nationwide from Dec. 6 to Jan. 19 and has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of one percentage point nationally and five percentage points in California.

The idea of secession is largely a settled matter in the United States, though the impulse to break away carries on in some corners of the country, most notably in Texas.

While interest has remained about the same nationwide, it has found more favor in California and the concept has even earned a catchy name - "Calexit."

"I don't think it's likely to happen, but if things get really bad it could be an option," said Stephen Miller, 70, a retired transportation planner who lives in Sacramento and told pollsters he "tended to support" secession.

During the campaign, Trump alienated many in the Democratic-leaning state with his promises to crack down on illegal immigration, threats of creating a Muslim registry, remarks women found offensive and vows to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

"There's such hostility towards Trump that many citizens believe it would be smarter to leave than fight," said Democratic political consultant Steve Maviglio, who last year ran the campaign against a proposed ballot initiative to break California into six states.

ANTI-TRUMP PROTESTS

With 39 million residents and the sixth-largest economy in the world, California is already a nation-state, Maviglio said. In November's election, the state broke nearly two-to-one in favor of Trump's Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.

In practice, secession is highly unlikely, facing political, legal and possibly even military obstacles, considering that the United States fought the Civil War over the secession of the South, Maviglio and others said.

Trump's election gave a huge boost to the quixotic campaign to remove California from the United States called Yes California, run by a former conservative turned progressive who now lives in Russia.

Dubbed "Calexit" by pundits comparing the effort to "Brexit" - Britain's vote to withdraw from the European Union - Yes California's email list jumped from fewer than 2,500 before the election to 115,069 currently, the group's president, Louis Marinelli, said in a telephone interview.

Marinelli, who moved to Yekaterinburg, about 1,000 miles (1,600 km) east of Moscow, in September and has lived in Russia on and off for several years, said he became disenchanted with the United States after difficulties arose with the immigration process for his Russian-born wife.

On Friday, activists from the group waved signs saying "California out of the United States" and "U.S. out of California" at anti-Trump protests in Los Angeles and San Francisco, Marinelli said. They have requested approval from the state to begin collecting signatures for a pro-secession ballot initiative.

In Lodi, California, Democratic party activist Bruce Rubly, who told Reuters/Ipsos pollsters that he "strongly supported" California secession, said he thinks it could happen if Trump and the Republicans who dominate the U.S. Congress impose conservative policies on such issues as the environment, immigration and marijuana legalization.

"There's a whole series of things that are going to get Californians riled up," said Rubly, 68. "And if he pushes those buttons in the wrong way, there's going to be hell to pay."

I don't see why we couldn't just make that wall hang a right at the end of Arizona and head north...

[vector7]

California Threatens To Cut Off Funds To Washington

by Tyler Durden
Jan 28, 2017 4:45 PM

With secession threats looming, the state of California is reportedly studying ways to suspend financial transfers to Washington after the Trump administration threatened to withhold federal money from sanctuary cities.

With California counties among the Top 10 who stand to lose tax-payer funding for providing sanctuary to illegal immigrants...



KPIX5 reports that officials are looking for money that flows through Sacramento to the federal government that could be used to offset the potential loss of billions of dollars’ worth of federal funds if President Trump makes good on his threat to punish cities and states that don’t cooperate with federal agents’ requests to turn over undocumented immigrants, a senior government source in Sacramento said.

The federal funds pay for a variety of state and local programs from law enforcement to homeless shelters.

“California could very well become an organized non-payer,” said Willie Brown, Jr, a former speaker of the state Assembly in an interview recorded Friday for KPIX 5’s Sunday morning news.

“They could recommend non-compliance with the federal tax code.”

California is among a handful of so-called “donor states,” which pay more in taxes to the federal Treasury than they receive in government funding.



http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-28/california-threatens-cut-funds-washington

[Ryan Ruck]

Poll Reveals 1 In 3 Californians Support 'Calexit'

January 24, 2017

A new poll suggests one in three California residents would support a possible secession from the U.S. because of their opposition to President Donald Trump.

"There's such hostility towards Trump that many citizens believe it would be smarter to leave than fight," Democratic political strategist Steve Maviglio told Reuters.

Maviglio ran a campaign in 2016 against an initiative to break California into six separate states.

A Reuters survey revealed Monday that 32 percent support the so-called “Calexit,” an increase of 12 percent since the last poll was conducted in 2014 – during the same time Scotland held its independence referendum and chose to stay in the United Kingdom.

National poll results revealed 22 percent favored secession, down from 24 percent in 2014.

According to Reuters, the poll questioned 500 Californians among more than 14,000 others nationwide from Dec. 9 to Jan. 19. The poll’s margin of error in California was 5 percentage points and 1 percentage point among nationwide adults.

Yes California, a group promoting the idea of a peaceful secession from the union, submitted a measure in November to the state attorney general’s office in hopes a referendum could reach the 2018 election.

The Los Angeles Times reported the group says that Californians are “culturally different” from the rest of the U.S. and that the media and other organizations hammer Californians for being “out of touch.”

“We always thought that if we just connected with the people who thought about this, but didn’t tell their friends and family because they would be seen as kooky and weird, that the quiet population would become vocal,” Marcus Evans, vice president of Yes California, told the Sacramento Bee.

He added that if California would to successfully secede, it would be the sixth largest economy in the world.

Without going back in the thread, I think that's a higher percentage than of Texans who want to secede which, if I recall, was about 25%.

[vector7]

[Ryan Ruck]

Shotgun




ETA: Obligatory Tombstone pic...

[vector7]

California To Become a Sanctuary State

SACRAMENTO (CBSLA.com/AP) — California may prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration authorities, creating a border-to-border sanctuary in the nation’s largest state as legislative Democrats ramp up their efforts to battle President Donald Trump’s migration policies.

The legislation is scheduled for its first public hearing Tuesday as the Senate rushes to enact measures that Democratic lawmakers say would protect immigrants from the crackdown that the Republican president has promised.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2017/...ide-sanctuary/

[vector7]

Officials announce proposal that would establish California as separate nation

Officials announce proposal that would establish California as separate nation

Published January 27, 2017 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print

A proposal in California has been submitted to the Secretary of State’s Office on Thursday campaigning for the state to secede from the United States.

The proposed “Calexit” initiative would ask voters to repeal part of the state constitution that declares California an inseparable part of the U.S.

A recent poll suggested that one in three California residents would support a possible secession from the U.S. due to their opposition to President Donald Trump. No mention has been made of the president in the proposal.

If the proposal qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it could be a step to a future vote on whether the state would break away from the rest of the nation.
More on this...

Poll reveals 1 in 3 Californians support 'Calexit'
UK official won't make promises on timing of Brexit plan

Secretary of State Alex Padilla said the group behind the proposal, Yes California Independence Campaign, was cleared to begin attempting to collect nearly 600,000 voter signatures needed to place the plan on the ballot.

The Los Angeles Times reported that the supporters of the proposal have said California does not share the same cultural ideas as the rest of America.

Similar attempts to establish California as a nation, or break it into multiple states, have failed.

The proposed constitutional amendment, titled California Nationhood, would also ask voters to repeal language that states the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law. If approved, it calls for scheduling a vote in 2019 to ask voters, "Should California become a free, sovereign and independent country?"

"America already hates California, and America votes on emotions," Marcus Evans, vice president of Yes California told to the Los Angeles Times. "I think we'd have the votes today if we held it."

The campaign must submit the valid voter signatures by July 25 to qualify for the ballot.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...te-nation.html

[Ryan Ruck]

The Los Angeles Times reported that the supporters of the proposal have said California does not share the same cultural ideas as the rest of America.

You are goddamned right!

[vector7]

California Dems Pass Bill to ‘Freeze Out ICE’ Passes Committee

SB 54 specifically prohibits almost all cooperation and communication with federal immigration authorities.

---

By Katy Grimes —— Bio and Archives February 2, 2017
4 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

​In​ ​t​​​he California State Senate​ Monday​,​ ​Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Léon (D-Los Angeles) and fellow Democrats passed Senate Resolution 16, condemning President Donald J. Trump’s recent executive order restricting travel from terror-prone countries and suspending the refugee program.

The text of the resolution declares that Trump’s executive order “desecrates our American values and panders to fears and nativist instincts that have resulted in some of our nation’s most shameful acts.”

Trump’s executive order temporarily halts refugee admissions for 120 days to research and improve the vetting process, and caps refugee admissions at 50,000 for the iscal year 2017. There is no mention of Muslims anywhere in the executive order, which seeks “to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States.” It also restricts travel for 90 days for most entrants from seven terror-prone countries previously identified by the Obama administration.

Sen. Hannah BethJackson (D-Santa Barbara), a lawyer, said the executive order “is a violation of the Constitution,” claiming it violates religious freedoms. “Only in a dictatorship or totalitarian state does this happen,” Jackson said. “This is how we end up with fascism.”

Opportunistic California Democrats are presenting bills to refute the recent immigration executive orders of President Donald J. Trump, to protect Americans.

Tuesday,​ ​Sen. De Leon, D-Los Angeles,​ ​presented​ ​SB 54​ t​o the Senate public Safety Committee​, and​ ​said, ”immigrants are valuable and essential members of the California community” and all attempts to enforce immigration laws create fear of the police among “immigrant community members” who fear “approaching police when they are victims of, and witnesses to, crimes.”
Despite the wave of refugees coming to the United States from Syria and Iraq under the Obama administration, California Democrats are denying national security issues, in favor of political opportunism. California is home to the largest illegal-alien population in the country, with 35 sanctuary cities. President-elect Trump has vowed to build a border wall and deport immigrants that have a criminal record, which he estimates to be two-three million.

Several bills authored by Senate Democrats in the California State Legislature are meant to be a thumb in the eye of President Donald J. Trump over immigration laws.

California’s long-standing history of welcoming immigrants overrides illegal immigration enforcement

SB 6 by Sen. Ben Hueso would create a state program to fund legal representation for illegal aliens facing deportation, and AB 3 by Assemblyman Rob Bonta to create taxpayer-funded training for defense attorneys and public defenders on immigration law for illegal aliens.

The third bill, SB 54 by Sen. Pres. Pro Tem Kevin de León, heard Tuesday in the Senate Public Safety Committee, seeks to restrict local police and sheriffs from working with federal immigration enforcers. SB 54 prohibits law enforcement from responding to federal requests for notification when a jail houses someone who might be the subject of an immigration enforcement action. Whether the immigrants are here legally or not, and whether they have committed crimes in the United States, this bill effectively prohibits communications between local law enforcement and federal authorities.

SB 54 specifically prohibits almost all cooperation and communication with federal immigration authorities.

Sen. Pres. Pro Tem Kevin de León and California Democrats essentially want to bar state and local resources from being used for immigration enforcement. De León said Tuesday the cost to California to help U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detail suspected illegal immigrants is $65 million.

Proponents of SB 54 claimed the Trump administration’s Executive order is just more racial profiling, and California’s long-standing history of welcoming immigrants overrides illegal immigration enforcement.

Concerned about releasing criminal illegal aliens back into society, Sen. Jeff Stone, R- Temecula, asked repeatedly for assurances that the bill would not allow this. “When we have dangerous felons, undocumented fellons, in prison, should they NOT be deported and prosecuted under the law?” Stone asked de León. Stone said he was concerned they will be released back into communities and cause heinous crimes, similar to what happened to Kate Steinle, who was murdered by a five-time deported criminal illegal alien.

Stone said the bill was making California a Sanctuary State, if passed in its virgin form. Stone tried to get de León to agree to an amendment regarding criminal illegal aliens, but de León resisted.

The bill decouples criminal acts from immigration statute

“The bill decouples criminal acts from immigration statute,” de León said. “It doesn’t stop ICE from doing their job,” dodging the question.

Stone questioned de León again, asking if he would “be supportive of any amendment to allow local law enforcement to pick up dangerous criminal immigrants.”

“It’s not necessary,” de León said. “There is nothing stopping ICE from getting the individual.”

Another dodge from Stone’s question, splitting hairs. Stone asked if local law enforcement would be able to assist ICE only in cases of criminal illegal aliens, and de León replied, there is nothing stopping ICE from doing this – no mention of local law enforcement assistance.

“What is particularly alarming is a very false dichotomy, fueled by hyperbole and rhetoric,” said Committee Chairwoman Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley. “All of us want hardened criminals prosecuted under the law. We are watching now a pitting of the people against each other – of immigrants. That is not right.” Skinner talked again, for the third or fourth time in two days about “easily manipulatable fear,” and said “the state of California will not be compliant with authoritarian policies.”

Cynthia Buiza of the California Immigrant Policy Center, a witness at the hearing in support of SB 54, launched into an out-of-order editorial, calling Trump’s order “anti-immigrant, zenophobic and propaganda,” explains more from her organization’s website: “The California Values Act answers the ugly slurs of xenophobia with a simple but profound truth: all people are created equal. Against Trump and other forces who seek to demonize and persecute immigrants, the Golden State must embrace and defend our common humanity and deepest values. Getting law enforcement out of painful deportations, protecting the integrity of public spaces, and rejecting any registry which target Muslims will send a potent message to the nation – and the world.”

From the Bill:

SB-54 would, among other things, prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies and school police and security departments from using resources to investigate, detain, detect, report, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, or to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal program requiring registration of individuals on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or national or ethnic origin, as specified. The bill would require state agencies to review their confidentiality policies and identify any changes necessary to ensure that information collected from individuals is limited to that necessary to perform agency duties and is not used or disclosed for any other purpose, as specified. The bill would require public schools, hospitals, and courthouses to establish and make public policies that limit immigration enforcement on their premises and would require the Attorney General, in consultation with appropriate stakeholders, to publish model policies for use by those entities for those purposes.

SB 54 passed the Senate Public Safety Committee along party lines.

​The Resolution​

On the heels of demanding the White House release First Lady Melania Trump’s immigration documents, Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) accused legislative Republicans of “playing fast and loose with the facts.” Skinner then claimed that President Trump has financial interests in Middle Eastern countries not included in the order.

Other Democrats were critical of the order being announced on International Holocaust Remembrance Day. Several quoted the poem by Martin Niemöller, the Protestant pastor who was an outspoken foe of Adolf Hitler.

Prior to voting on the resolution, Sen. Pres. De Léon recited his own version of

Niemöller’s poem:

First they came for the Muslims, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the immigrants, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the teachers, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the environmentalists, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the LGBT, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for the strong women, and I did not speak out—
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

The resolution also passed on a party line vote, 26-11.


http://canadafreepress.com/article/california-dems-pass-bill-to-freeze-out-ice-passes-committee

[vector7]

California Dems tap Eric Holder to fight Trump in court

By David Wright and Kyung Lah, CNN

Updated 3:40 PM ET, Wed January 4, 2017



Source: CNN

California Democrats ready to fight Trump 02:40

• Former attorney general Eric Holder will serve as legal counsel to California Democrats
• The move comes as California Democrats prepare for a series of legal battles with Trump

(CNN)Democratic leaders of the California state legislature have hired Eric Holder, the former attorney general during the Obama administration, to serve as outside legal counsel as they prepare for a series of court battles with President-elect Donald Trump's White House.

In a statement released Wednesday, California Senate President Kevin de Leon and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon -- both Democrats -- announced they had "hired outside legal counsel to advise on potential legal challenges with the incoming Trump administration."

"With the upcoming change in administrations, we expect that there will be extraordinary challenges for California in the uncertain times ahead," the state leaders said. They vowed to protect "California's economy and our sensible policies on climate change, health care, civil rights, and immigration."

To accomplish that goal, the legislature said it retained the Covington & Burling law firm, led by Holder.
RELATED: California Dems ready to fight Trump's immigration plans

"Mr. Holder and his team will serve as outside legal counsel to the Legislature, advising us in our efforts to resist any attempts to roll back the progress California has made."

CNN has reached out to the Trump transition team for comment and have not yet received a response.
In the statement, Holder said that he was "honored" that his legal firm had been tapped by the California legislature, and said he is "confident that our expertise across a wide array of federal legal and regulatory issues will be a great resource."

The California legislature's move to hire Holder, a high-profile Obama alum, adds to the deep-blue state's reputation as the center of liberal opposition to the new Trump administration.

"This is a critical moment in the history of our nation. We have an obligation to defend the people who elected us and the policies and diversity that make California an example of what truly makes our nation great," the state's Democratic leaders said.

State Democratic leaders have promised to fight to maintain "sanctuary cities" -- something Trump pledged to fight during his presidential campaign -- and De Leon, with Rendon, introduced sweeping state legislation in late December to blunt Trump's expected immigration policies. The measures, expected to pass early this year, would offer undocumented immigrants more access to legal help and would further spell out the limits of local law enforcement's cooperation with federal immigration agents.

De León, California's first Latino elected leader of the state Senate in more than a century, has been signaling his willingness to fight Republicans since Trump was elected.

"We don't want to fight," he said in December. "We're not looking for a fight. But if necessary, we will fight to protect the values of California. Given what I've seen so far with regard to the Cabinet selections, there probably is going to be a fight around the corner very, very soon."

U.S. Government vs. California – Let The Battle Begin!

27
Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press

by Jon Fleischman9 Feb 201751

On Tuesday, former Attorney General Eric Holder, one of President Barack Obama’s longest serving Cabinet members, paid a visit to one of his newest clients: the California State Legislature.

Holder, who returned back to private practice as a partner with the law firm of Convington and Burling in the fall of 2015, was hired by the California legislature as part of an aggressive posturing by California’s Democratic leaders against the presidency and policies of Donald Trump.

On November 9, the day after Trump won the election, State Senate President Kevin De Léon and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon issued a strong joint statement that began with them saying that they “… woke up feeling like strangers in a foreign land …”.

The statement went on to say, in part, “While Donald Trump may have won the presidency, he hasn’t changed our values. America is great than any one many or party.

We will not be dragged back into the past. We will lead the resistance to any effort that would shred our social fabric or our constitution.”

In January, as the legislature was hiring Holder, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown delivered a fiery State of the State Address, issuing a de facto broadside against the then-President-elect, making it clear that the State of California would defend itself against efforts by the federal government to encroach on the Golden State’s ability to protect illegal aliens, preserve government healthcare, and continue programs designed to combat global warming.

When the hiring of Holder was announced in early January, it was revealed that his firm would be paid $25,000 a month. But it remains unclear exactly what Holder will be doing for that hefty compensation. And whatever he is doing is apparently being kept under wraps.

At the State Capitol on Tuesda,y Holder, along with a phalanx of lawyers from his office, spent the morning in separate meetings with the State Senate and State Assembly Democratic Caucuses – and then in the afternoon they met with Governor Brown, De Léon and Rendon behind closed doors (with newly-appointed Attorney General Xavier Bacerra not present, but calling in).

It is noteworthy that the legislature’s minority Republican members were specifically excluded from the meetings that Holder had with Democrats — which is concerning, because Holder and his firm are being paid with taxpayer funds.

Holder made a brief appearance outside of the governor’s office to make a statement to the press. He said: “I’m here just to assist these gentlemen and the people they serve in trying to protect the interest of the people of California.”

But when questioned further on how he would do that, Holder coyly responded, “Well…”.
The strong posturing by California Democrats is setting the table for a major battle between President Trump and the Republican Congress on the one hand, and the ideologically left-wing leaders of the largest state in the union.

Yesterday’s confirmation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a harbinger for what will likely be the first point of confrontation. Sessions, like President Trump, is an immigration hard-liner, and we can expect the Justice Department to start cracking down on “sanctuary cities” (many of which are in California) right away, which can mean cuts in federal funding. There are other, even more controversial tools available to Session to deal with those flaunting American laws.

The response to this threat to sanctuary cities Democrats in the legislature? De Léon has introduced and fast-tracked Senate Bill 54, which would in essence make California a sanctuary state, by restricting all local law enforcement agencies throughout the state from cooperating with the federal immigration authorities.

Of course, no state in the union is more invested in Obamacare than California, and Democrats fear (for good reason) that Republicans in Washington will soon be removing the federal funding for this program, leaving Sacramento Democrats with a massive hole (estimated to be more than $15 billion dollars) in their considerable state budget, as well as considerable heartache.

As President of the United States, Donald Trump is America’s leader and Commander-in-Chief. He will face many foreign policy challenges all around the globe. But many of those may pale in comparison to the policy war that is about to take place between the United States of America and her largest state.

This promises to be one hell of a match, with the fighters having taken their corners.

Jon Fleischman is Politics Editor for Breitbart California. His columns appear regularly on this page. He has been a participant and observer of California politics and policy for nearly three decades. You can follow him on Twitter here.

[vector7]

California Goes Confederate

Victor Davis Hanson |Posted: Feb 09, 2017 12:01 AM
Comments 444



Over sixty percent of California voters went for Hillary Clinton -- a margin of more than 4 million votes over Donald Trump.

Since Clinton's defeat, the state seems to have become unhinged over Trump's unexpected election.

"Calexit" supporters brag that they will have enough signatures to qualify for a ballot measure calling for California's secession from the United States.

Some California officials have talked of the state not remitting its legally obligated tax dollars to the federal government. They talk of expanding its sanctuary cities into an entire sanctuary state that would nullify federal immigration law.

Californians also now talk about the value of the old Confederate idea of "states' rights." They whine that their state gives far too much revenue to Washington and gets too little back.

Residents boast about how their cool culture has little in common with the rest of the U.S. Some Californians claim the state could easily go it alone, divorced from the United States.

Sound a bit familiar?

In December 1860, South Carolina seceded from the Union in furor over the election of Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln did not receive 50 percent of the popular vote. He espoused values the state insisted did not reflect its own.

In eerie irony, liberal California is now mirror-imaging the arguments of reactionary South Carolina and other Southern states that vowed to go it alone in 1860 and 1861.

Like California, South Carolina insisted it could nullify federal laws within its state borders.

Like California, South Carolina promised to withhold federal revenues.

Like California, South Carolina and other Confederate states bragged that their unique economies did not need the Union.

They boasted that "King Cotton" had created the wealthiest class in the United States. Silicon Valley now often assumes that Google, Facebook, Apple and others are near-trillion-dollar companies that are a world unto their own.

Slavery and the extravagant income from cotton warped the Southern economy and culture. A wealthy plantation elite, with its millions of exploited slaves, ensured that there would be virtually no middle, working or small-business class.

Huge estates were surrounded by the impoverished shacks of servants. Hardscrabble farmers or small businessmen often fled westward to escape the shackles of wealth disparity.

The export-dependent Southern elite demanded unfettered free trade. It offered bitter resistance to Northern protectionism.

South Carolina elites were opposed to federal infrastructure projects such as the building of roads, canals, bridges and reservoirs, and other such unwelcome "progress."

Confederates boasted that their antebellum culture was more romantic, natural, pristine, healthy and moral than was the bustle, grime and hyper-capitalism of Northern industrialism.

Southern aristocrats believed that they were culturally superior -- in terms of music, art and literature -- to other Americans.

Of course, this is 2017, not 1860, and California is super-liberal, not an antebellum slave-owning society.

Nonetheless, what is driving California's current efforts to nullify federal law and the state's vows to secede from the U.S. are some deeper -- and creepy -- similarities to the arrogant and blinkered Old South.

California is likewise becoming a winner-take-all society. It hosts the largest numbers of impoverished and the greatest number of rich people of any state in the country. Eager for cheap service labor, California has welcomed in nearly a quarter of the nation's undocumented immigrants. California has more residents living in poverty than any other state. It is home to one third of all the nation's welfare recipients.

The income of California's wealthy seems to make them immune from the effects of the highest basket of sales, income and gas taxes in the nation. The poor look to subsidies and social services to get by. Over the last 30 years, California's middle classes have increasingly fled the state.

"Gone With the Wind"-like wealth disparity in California is shocking to the naked eye. Mostly poor Redwood City looks like it's on a different planet from tony nearby Atherton or Woodside.

The California elite, wishing to keep the natural environment unchanged, opposes internal improvements and sues to stop pipelines, aqueducts, reservoirs, freeways and affordable housing for the coastal poor.

California's crumbling roads and bridges sometimes resemble those of the old rural South. The state's public schools remain among the nation's poorest. Private academies are booming for the offspring of the coastal privileged, just as they did among the plantation class of the South.

California, for all its braggadocio, cannot not leave the U.S or continue its states'-rights violations of federal law. It will eventually see that the new president is not its sickness, nor are secession and nullification its cures.

Instead, California is becoming a reactionary two-tier state of masters and serfs whose culture is as peculiar and out of step with the rest of the country as was the antebellum South's. No wonder the state lashes out at the rest of the nation with threatened updated versions of the Old Confederacy's secession and nullification.

But such reactionary Confederate obstructionism is still quite an irony given California's self-righteous liberal preening.

[Ryan Ruck]

Good piece by VDH!

[Ryan Ruck]

The chances our differences will be resolved without bloodshed are diminishing...





I know it's always easy to MMQB but I can honestly say this is one instance I wouldn't have a problem engaging someone with a rifle (well an AR pistol) with a handgun since Mr. Whirlstar is busy trying to juggle his phone, AR pistol, and pilfered Trump flag all at the same time.

And I can also honestly say that as soon as that AR pistol came out, I'd be clearing leather and engaging. Just remember, private citizens don't have to issue verbal warnings in a deadly force situation.

Really hope I never have to face this scenario...

[vector7]

That's scary!!! ^^^


Stop LYING to yourself: The Left wants you DEAD!

ThePatriotNurse

Published on Feb 17, 2017

The NY Post has owned that Obama is running a shadow government that is fomenting a coup, and THIS WEEK we have video this week of a Trump supporter being threatened by a man wielding a rifle in public:



Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDhSo08_b0c