Your Friend Ivanka

 

ivanka
Photo by: Matt Furman Forbes

Ivanka Trump, a successful business woman, very classy with impeccable taste, and a big heart. What’s not to like? She’s been under scrutiny since her father first started his campaign for president and it’s just gotten worse since he won the election. Should she be punished by the media and the left because of their hate for her father? Or should they try to embrace her as an ally, because of the major influence she has on her dad? I think it’s the latter.

Ivanka has already been in her father’s ear about continuing former President Obama’s LGBT Rights Executive Order. (President Donald J. Trump Will Continue to Enforce Executive Order Protecting the Rights of the LGBTQ Community in the Workplace) She also helped organize a meeting this week, with the President, Prime Minister of Canada and some very power successful women to address some of the women’s right issues that have been a concern of the left recently, Canada-United States Council for Advancement of Women Entrepreneurs.

Ms. Trump could have a very powerful impact on the direction of President Trump’s Administration. The President has already said that she always encourages him to ‘do the right thing.’ Her guidance, and caring heart may be just what us women need in the White House. I would suggest we try and “make nice” with her.

It’s a VERY popular theory, and many consider it fact, that President Donald J. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump’s brand has been dropped by many retailers, because of a sales decrease. However, if you do a little digging that might not be the whole story.

As Online Boycott Grows Study Shows Millennial Women Stick With Ivanka Trump’s Brand  OCT 26, 2016 @ 08:00 AM -via Forbes

Each woman surveyed was asked: “In light of Ivanka Trump’s involvement with the Trump campaign for president, how likely would you be to consider buying her line of shoes or clothing?”
They responded as follows:
Extremely Likely 18%
Very Likely 33%
Somewhat Likely 32%
Not Very Likely 11%
Not At All Likely 6%
Meanwhile, a campaign calling for a boycott of all things Trump, including Ivanka’s apparel and shoe lines, has been gathering social media steam.

Inside Ivanka, Inc: $100M Apparel Sales, And A Bid To Move Some Manufacturing Back From China 7/21/2016 @ 12:24PM -via Forbes

The company doesn’t include a breakdown of revenues by brand in its financial filings, but its 2016 annual report notes a $29.4 million increase in sales of Ivanka Trump’s fashion line from the year before.

Most articles paint a dreary picture of a decline in sale at Nordstrom’s and several other companies. They are mostly copy paste articles that use almost the same exact language. I see that kind of thing a lot. Many news sources will pick up the same story and they will basically copy/paste it and then it ends up coming from 10 different places. (But no matter how many pick up the story and publish it, that doesn’t make it true. That is why finding the truth is so hard these days.)

There are reports of a significant gains in sales at stores such as Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s. There is also information from the brand itself claiming to have a significant rise in overall sales.

Sales Of Ivanka Trump’s Clothing Line Declined In 2016 February 11, 2017 -via Opposing Views

Nordstrom saw $14.3 million in sales in the fiscal year that ended in January, down from $20.9 million the year before.

Nordstrom is not the only store in which sales of Ivanka Trump’s products are down, according to CNBC. An analysis of email receipts by Slice Intelligence reveals sales of Ivanka’s line are down in a number of online stores, most notably following the 2016 presidential election. Online sales of her products fell 26 percent in January 2017 from January 2016.

Ivanka’s line did see sales growth in a handful of retailers. Online sales from Macy’s grew 30 percent, while sales from Bloomingdales.com grew 9 percent in the fourth quarter. However, growth was still slower this fiscal year compared to the previous year.

Ivanka Trump’s brand takes another hit– via kdvr 2-12-2017

Rosemary Young, senior director of marketing at Ivanka Trump, told CNNMoney last week that the brand was growing and experienced “significant year-over-year revenue growth in 2016.

“We believe that the strength of a brand is measured not only by the profits it generates, but the integrity it maintains,” Young said.

Retailers like Bloomingdale’s, Amazon, Lord & Taylor, Macy’s and Zappos all still carry Ivanka Trump products.

Ivanka Trump has taken a leave of absence from her namesake company since her father won the presidency. She has no formal role in the administration but is expected to have a voice on issues such as women’s empowerment and child care.

Ivanka Trump’s Brand Says Nordstrom Hasn’t Dropped Them Things are getting messy. FEB 4, 2017 6:30PM EST  –via Teen Vogue

… Ivanka Trump brand is refuting the claims made by Nordstrom. On Friday, a spokesperson told Refinery29 that they were still in business together, but their merchandise has simply been moved to in-store only. “Nordstrom ordered both apparel and shoes for the spring, and followed through with the orders on the apparel,” the Ivanka Trump brand claims. “They canceled the shoe order, kept the apparel order and moved the apparel from online into stores. It’s there.”

Nordstrom is still admit about their reasoning for dropping the line saying it’s because a drop in sales, but according to this article:

… a source that claims to be near to the first daughter told Refinery29 that wasn’t the case with Nordstrom. “They couldn’t handle the political pressure, someone new came in, and there was a change in the attitude toward the brand,” they told the website.

Ivanka Trump Doesn’t Flinch As she leads her brand into its next stage, Ivanka reveals how she’s navigating the drama around her father’s presidential campaign. –via Fast Company


“I learned a long time ago that I can’t control the opinions of others or what they project on me. All I can do is live my life, and I’ve tried to do that,” she tells me a few minutes into our interview. It’s a classic Ivanka statement, as if to say, I’m perfectly clear about who I am; it’s not my fault what other people decide to think. It’s easy to understand why she feels that way, and why Ivanka—always poised, always on message—seems to work so hard to keep her image under control.

…Net sales of just the clothing arm of the company were up $11.8 million during the first 6 months of 2016 compared to the first 6 months of 2015 as it sold its products online and at department stores, according to public filings from one of Ivanka Trump’s major licensing and manufacturing partners. Forbes reported that Ivanka’s clothing line generated $100 million in revenue last year, and sales were up $29.4 million from the previous fiscal year. The private company will not confirm specific sales figures, but do say their sales went up 37% last year, and that the growth rate has held pretty steady this year. And the website’s traffic is up 50% over last year, thanks in large part to Ivanka’s heightened public profile.

Is Ivanka Trump’s brand losing its bling? –– via Fox 6 Now and http://www.nbc-2.com/story/34460378/is-ivanka-trumps-brand-losing-its-bling -NBC 2

The brand would tell you “no.” A spokesperson for the first daughter’s fashion label said Wednesday that the brand’s overall sales were up 21% in 2016 compared to the prior year.

… plenty of retailers that are still carrying the brand. A spokesperson said over 800 retailers — including Bloomingdale’s, Amazon, Lord & Taylor, Macy’s and Zappos — all carry Ivanka Trump products.

Even with all these reports of significant rises in income for the Ivanka Trump Company, Nordstrom’s continues to insist that they are discontinuing the brand because of a decrease in sales. However, there is an email from Nordstrom’s sent to their employees floating around, that was allegedly sent two days before their announcement of their decision to quit offering the Ivanka Trump Brand.

Leaked Email May Prove Nordstrom Lied About Dropping Ivanka Over ‘Poor Sales’ 2-7-2017 –via Elite Daily &  Vanity Fair

two days before Nordstrom dropped Ivanka’s line, the company’s three presidents sent an email to all company staff criticizing President Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban, Daily Mail reports.

The email, obtained by the Seattle-based newspaper “The Stranger,” said,

We literally have thousands of employees who are first and second generation immigrants.

Every one of your unique qualities brings a richness that allows us to better reflect and serve the multicultural communities we’re a part of and ultimately makes us a better company.

We are a better place with you here, no doubt about it.

It’s important that we reiterate our values to all of you and make it clear that we support each of our employees. We will continue to value diversity, inclusion, respect, and you can count on that. (the full email can be read here)

Exclusive — Women Nationwide Cut Up Nordstrom’s Cards, Plan Boycotts After Political Decision to Drop Ivanka Trump Line–via Breitbart

But, in reality, the brand wasn’t performing badly. Nordstrom’s came under political fire from a series of hardcore anti-Trump activists, according to People Magazine.

There are both boycotts of Ivanka Trump’s Brand and Boycotts of the stores that have dropped it.

screen-shot-2017-02-12-at-6-54-36-pmscreen-shot-2017-02-12-at-6-53-34-pm

#BoycottNordstrom Swings From Left To Right After Ivanka Trump Drop – via Investor’s Business Daily 2/03/2017

It was not too long ago that #BoycottNordstrom had a different audience, however, many of whom were concerned about the Trump family’s potential business conflicts of interest….

Grab Your Wallet has been vocal in trying to get shoppers to boycott stores that carry Trump-affiliated merchandise.

Ivanka Trump products are still available at Macy’s (M), Macy’s-owned Bloomingdale’s, Amazon (AMZN) and elsewhere.

Nordstrom shares rose 0.9% to 43.90 in the stock market today, (2-3-17) well off intraday highs of 46.09 as the stock tries to break a downtrend going back to early December.

Macy’s rose 6.5% Friday on continued buyout buzz, after advancing 5.2% on Thursday. Amazon slid 3.5% after reporting weaker-than-expected sales and revenue guidance late Thursday.

screen-shot-2017-02-16-at-7-32-00-pm

So what is it? Is Ivanka Trump Brand sales up overall and only down at a handful of stores?

Or is someone on either side fudging the real story? It’s hard to tell. Because of my own personal experience with trusting the mainstream press; I can’t help but question the dozens of articles that are basically copied and pasted over and over from news source to news source that state a negative bias against the Trump name.

President Trump and his Councilor Kellyanne Conway have been under duress for sticking up for Ivanka and stating that she has been treated unfairly by the retailers that have dropped her brand and by the media. Critics are saying that they are using their political positions to further Ms. Ivanka’s success. (Which is unlawful.)

Here’s How Ivanka Trump Responded to Women Boycotting Her Clothing Line October 27, 2016 11:02 a.m – via NY Mag

“Well, the beauty of America is people can do what they like, but I prefer to talk to the millions, tens of millions of American women who are inspired by the brand and the message that I’ve created,” Ivanka said.

She went on to say that her “advocacy of women” started long before the presidential campaign began. “I never politicized that message,” Ivanka added. “People who are seeking to politicize it because they may disagree with the politics of my father, there’s nothing I can do to change that.”

There has been controversy in the past year over a few instances when Ivanka wore her own accessories and apparel on TV for her father’s interview with 60 minutes and Republicans National Convention.

Ivanka Trump’s Company Scrambles Over ’60 Minutes’ Bracelet Criticism -via NBC NOV 15 2016, 1:25 PM ET

A “fashion alert” was initially sent to journalists on Monday by Monica Marder, vice president of sales for Ivanka Trump Fine Jewelry. It promoted Ivanka Trump as wearing “her favorite bangle from the Metropolis Collection” on the CBS News show. The bracelet costs $8,800 to $10,800. “Please share this with your clients…” the email said.

….The interview was not the first time Ivanka Trump used her father’s political spotlight to highlight her brand. In July, the former model marketed a blush pink sheath dress she wore at the Republican National Convention. The dress, which retailed at a more affordable $138, quickly sold out.

This past week both President Donald J. Trump, and Kelley Anne Conway, stuck up for Ms. Ivanka and were criticized for breaking the law. It’s illegal to use your political office to promote yourself or friends for profit. Which is a valid law and makes perfect sense. Many in the past have gotten away with doing this though.

The hypocrisy–

The same news sources that were telling me just weeks ago about girl power and striving to be successful women for equality are now very anti-Ivanka Trump. The same news sources that were just telling me that ‘us’ women have to stick together and stick up for each other, are now tearing down one of the most successful women in our country. Not because of something she did wrong, but because of who her dad is, and they don’t like him.

Now hypothetically, what if we were talking about Chelsea Clinton? Say, she has a successful fashion brand, while her father is president. The same father who was caught in many unfavorable acts against women. Not just talk and not just one but many. If the same thing was happening to her right now, how would the woman from “the left” be acting?

Ivanka Trump has focused on empowering women to be successful. She even markets her brand as a celebration of women.
http://ivankatrump.com/about/ via her website

It’s a celebration of women working at all aspects of their lives. Women who transition between their various roles in professional and personal capacities: building careers, raising children, nurturing relationships and pursuing passions.

For instance former President Barack Obama plugged Blackberry at the beginning of his presidency. Some may argue that it wasn’t for his personal gain, however do you know for positive sure that he hasn’t any ties, has never had any ties or friends with ties to that company? I don’t.

Reflections on the Greatest Free Product Endorsement Ever 11/08/2012 @ 9:28AM -via Forbes

January 7, 2009, days before his inauguration and in the face of having to give up his personal phone for security reasons as his predecessors had done, the President-elect said, “I’m still clinging to my BlackBerry. They’re going to pry it out of my hands.” This was a product that was of such great use to him, and represented his connection to the life he was leaving, that he would force his Executive Office of the President (EOP) to change protocol so that he could keep his cherished device. This is the sort of endorsement that companies dream about.

Samsung, selfies and the branding of Barack Obama April 3, 2014 -via Washington Post

During a concession speech in April 2008, Obama spoke in front of a crowd that included someone in an Abercrombie & Fitch shirt. The FITCH part of the shirt was very visible. The company’s spokesperson told the New York Post, “Thanks to the Obama campaign for the great product placement. We wish we had thought of it.”

First Ladies Have Often Made Use Of Their ‘Brands’ Friday, February 10, 2017 -via Valley News

Roosevelt showed up in print and television commercials endorsing bread products, margarine and even the burgeoning airline industry. The latter featured a portrait of Roosevelt seated on a plane, serenely knitting above this quote: “I never cease to marvel at the airplane.” Roosevelt was surprised at her ability to push products, historians recalled, but in the years since the selling power of first ladies has been well documented.

Their position is unsalaried and the work is unofficial, but presidents’ wives have used their platforms to promote worthy causes, promote their husbands — and, sometimes, promote themselves….

Jimmy Carter’s younger brother Billy, who gained celebrity for his boozy, good-ol’ boy likability. In the late 1970s, he endorsed a product called Billy Beer. The cans read: “Brewed expressly for and with the personal approval of one of America’s all-time Great Beer Drinkers — Billy Carter.”

Former First Lady Michelle Obama isn’t innocent of promoting friends either. Read on to her own quote about being happy to give designers a “boost.”

Like Conway, Michelle Obama boasted about ‘boosting’ sale of designers
By EMILY JASHINSKY (@EMILYJASHINSKY) •2/9/17 – via Washington Examiner

In an interview with Vogue, First Lady Michelle Obama explicitly acknowledged that one of the questions she considered when choosing fashion designers was, “Can I give them a boost?”

According to Vogue, Obama remarked, “There are definitely designers that I love, people I love to work with. And who they are as people matters. Are they good people? Do they treat their staff well? Do they treat my staff well? Are they young? Can I give them a boost?”

The implication here, of course, is that Michelle Obama deliberately exploited her position as first lady to “boost” the sales of private businesses.

There are more instances where these sorts of things have happened and I don’t remember anyone making such a mountain out of it. I’m not saying that it’s right to or it’s legal to use your political platform to make money or make money for family or friends. There is clearly a law saying that is illegal. All I’m saying is that it’s not anything new. Why is it a bigger deal when the Trump Administration has done this, rather than the people that have done it in the past? Shouldn’t we hold all persons to the same standards? If the laws aren’t enforced for everyone, only a select few, that is just unethical.

Women around the globe should be very happy that Ivanka Trump is in the White House, especially the women of America and those who aren’t fans of her father. She has a very good and strong influence on him. She’s ambitious, successful and she cares about women’s rights; everyone’s rights. With her in her father’s ear he will always advocate for women, because he will never want to let “his little girl” down.

 

SCOTUS Nom-Revenge Filibuster

There is still a bias, and a “negative narrative” being pushed to the American public, that Neil Gorsuch will take away the right to choose abortion, and that he will be an “enemy” to atheists. He’s also being accused of “only being a friend to giant corporations’. I just saw something about him being a “fascist” even. Which is all just fake news, click bait and attempts to smear his reputation to make an excuse for a filibuster. The reason I think this is, because I can prove that Gorsuch has bipartisan appeal.

The Democratic Party made up their minds before they even knew who the nominee was that they were going to block it.

The Republican Party has done something similar to The Democratic Party in the recent past however, there’s is a lot of hypocrisy going on from everywhere. Let’s take a closer look at what’s really going on.

At the end of former President Barack Obama‘s term, (2016,) there was a seat on the Supreme Court that opened when, Antonin Scalia died.

According to History News Network 

“Within hours of the announcement of Justice Scalia’s death Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), the Senate Majority Leader, poured cold water on the idea of replacing the justice in 2016. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice,” McConnell wrote in a public statement. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) insisted that Obama should nominate a replacement for Scalia.” – See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/13194

This is something you may not know. It’s a well accepted opinion, that if a Supreme Court spot opens up in an election year, that the seat should be filled by the new president, so that the people of America have the chance to elect someone that will choose a nominee, that will reflect the citizens values at that current time.

Here is a video of Democrat Joe Biden from 1992. He’s expressing this opinion.

 

Joe Biden – No Supreme Court Pick Until After Election (1992) – “The Joe Biden Rule”

This is the reason that the Republicans blocked former President Barack Obama‘s nomination to fill Scalia’s seat in 2016.

Via an article from the USA News about Barack Obama’s nominee in 2016 -Joe Biden, with a little contradiction to the video above says:

“No one is suggesting individual senators have to vote yes; voting no is always an option,” Biden said. “But deciding in advance to turn your back before the president even names a nominee is not an option the Constitution leaves open. It’s quite frankly an abdication of duty, and one that has never happened in our history.”

The Democrats are still very mad that the Republicans blocked Obama’s 2016 SCOTUS Nominee, even though they have previously argued, that the spot should be filled by the next president, if the spot is open in an election year. (As seen in the video of Joe Biden above. This is often called “the Joe Biden Rule“.)

 

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) said in July 2007 that no George W. Bush nominee to the Supreme Court should be approved, except in extraordinary circumstances, 19 months before a new president was set to be inaugurated.

“We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Schumer, a New York Democrat, said… – via The Washington Examiner 2/14/16 6:29 PM

(Hmmm, so when the Republicans did it in 2016 for 11 months it wasn’t ok. But when Democrats did it for 19, it was? This is hardly a “stolen seat,” like I’ve been seeing in a lot of headlines the past few days.) 

Schumer Warns Trump on SCOTUS Pick – US News

The top Democrat in the Senate is warning President-elect Donald Trump about his eventual Supreme Court choice: Name a ‘mainstream’ nominee or Democrats will oppose the individual ‘with everything we have.’ Jan. 4, 2017, at 1:34 p.m.

After Democrats had their SCOTUS blocked by Republicans for so long in 2016, both sides were frustrated. Now Democrats want to push back for a little revenge. They do not like the fact that, not only did they lose the election, and the SCOTUS spot, but they also lost it all to President Donald J. Trump. They had already made up their minds, no matter who he were to nominate, they were ready to “oppose the individual with everything we have.” Chuck Schumer – source US News

But did you know?????

Flashback: These Current Democrat Senators All Voted To Support Gorsuch In 2006

Source: https://gop.com/flashback-these-current-democrat-senators-all-voted-to-support-gorsuch-in-2006/

On July 20, 2006, Neil Gorsuch Was Confirmed By The Senate On A Voice Vote As A Judge On The United States Court Of Appeals For The Tenth Circuit. (PN1565, Gorsuch Nomination , Approved By Voice Vote, 7/20/06)

There Are 12 Democrat Senators That Supported Gorsuch’s Nomination In 2006 And Are Still In The Senate: Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Maria Cantwell (D-OR), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Patty Murray (D-WA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Jack Reed (D-RI), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), And Ron Wyden (D-OR). (“Senators Of The 109th Congress,” U.S. Senate , Accessed 7/27/06)

Other Democrat Senators That Supported Gorsuch In 2006 Included Harry Reid (D-NV), John Kerry (D-MA), Barack Obama (D-IL), Joe Biden (D-DE), And Hillary Clinton (D-NY). (“Senators Of The 109th Congress,” U.S. Senate , Accessed 7/27/06)

No Senate Democrats Objected To Gorsuch’s Confirmation Or Demanded A Recorded Vote. The Congressional Record , 7/20/06, S8036)

This is quite a different narrative, than Democrats and Mr. Schumer would like you to believe about Neil Gorsuch. It would seem that just a decade ago he had full bipartisan support. How did he go from that, to this horrible narrow minded “fascist” that I keep hearing about on most news sources?


Here is more proof of Neil Gorsuch‘s bipartisan support.

Why Liberals Should Back Neil Gorsuch – via The New York Times

“I am hard-pressed to think of one thing President Trump has done right in the last 11 days since his inauguration,” wrote acting solicitor general in the Obama administration Neal Katyal in the pages of The New York Times. “Until Tuesday, when he nominated an extraordinary judge and man, Neil Gorsuch, to be a justice on the Supreme Court.”

I don’t think any of this is actually about Gorsuch. If he had been nominated by any other Republican president, he would be having a completely different reception right now. In my opinion, this is more about revenge and a distaste for President Donald J. Trump.

Democrats announce plans to filibuster Gorsuch nomination -source Washington Times

Democrats have already decided they will force a filibuster on Judge Neil Gorsuch, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer said Tuesday, just minutes after President Trump announced the pick.

“The Senate must insist upon 60-votes for any Supreme Court nominee,” Mr. Schumer said in a statement.

Republicans could counter with the so-called “nuclear option,” using a shortcut to change the rules and eliminate the 60-vote filibuster threshold. But GOP leaders have been circumspect on that option.

“When the Senate previously confirmed him to the appellate court, the bipartisan support in the Senate was so overwhelming, a roll call vote was not even required,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “I hope members of the Senate will again show him fair consideration and respect the result of the recent election with an up-or-down vote on his nomination, just like the Senate treated the four first-term nominees of Presidents Clinton and Obama.”

Some Democrats have said they are especially wary of Gorsuch’s apparent lack of support for abortion rights and freedom of religion. I can’t say much on the abortion, because he has yet to judge on a case like that, however he has proved to be a judge that will uphold our Constitution and preserve rights for all Americans, including freedom of religion.

Trump’s SCOTUS Pick Neil Gorsuch: On Abortion, Religion, Immigration And More -Source Forbes

screen-shot-2017-02-01-at-5-12-28-pm
Photo Credit – Forbes

Abortion

Gorsuch attends an Episcopal church and cited his faith in his nomination speech, but he hasn’t ruled directly on abortion rights.

He wrote a book on assisted suicide that concluded “intentional taking of human life …is always wrong” and his originalist stance is hard to square with the reasoning in Roe v. Wade, but he also says it is important to respect precedent.

 

Religion

Gorsuch has ruled consistently in favor of religious rights, joining the Hobby Lobby decision later affirmed by the Supreme Court allowing religious employers to avoid paying for contraceptives.

Everyone is making speculations and causing hysteria. But in my opinion, I don’t think that people should “freak out,” about speculations. I see a lot of that lately.

A fascist would not have had such strong bipartisan support in 2006, by such respected Democrats with in their party.

Here’s What Happened Last Time An Outgoing President Made A Supreme Court Nomination via The Huffington Post

Via an article from The Huffington Post from 02/13/2016 08:58 pm ET | Updated Dec 19, 2016

Just minutes after news broke Saturday afternoon, (2-13-2016), that Antonin Scalia had died at 79, Republicans said they would not confirm President Barack Obama’s nomination to replace the conservative Supreme Court justice — no matter who it is. “Justice Scalia was an American hero,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a presidential candidate and member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tweeted Sunday. “We owe it to him, & the Nation, for the Senate to ensure that the next President names his replacement.”

(So as you see they hypocrisy comes from both sides.)

From the same article…

No president in recent memory has faced a Supreme Court vacancy that opened during his final year in office. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court’s current swing vote, took office during Ronald Reagan’s final year in office. But Reagan had nominated him the previous November. He was Reagan’s third choice — after Robert Bork, who was rejected by the Senate, and Douglas Ginsburg, who withdrew from consideration. And the vacancy he was filling had opened the previous July.

The most recent broadly similar situation occurred in June of 1968 (an election year), when President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who had said he would not run for re-election, nominated Associate Justice Abe Fortas to take over as chief justice of the Supreme Court. Republicans and conservative southern Democrats filibustered Fortas’ nomination, and Johnson eventually withdrew it.

The differences between Fortas situation and Scalia’s passing are:

Fortas was already on the court. The nomination was to make him chief justice. Which would not have changed the court’s ideological makeup. (When Johnson nominated Fortas, he also nominated Homer Thornberry, a judge and former congressman, to fill Fortas’ seat. But when the Senate rejected Fortas for chief justice, Thornberry’s nomination died, too.)

There were also ethical concerns involved. Fortas was criticized for accepting $15,000 for speaking at American University’s law school — money that was provided by corporations

The hypocrisy is pretty thick. My opinion, as a female Libertarian, that seems to lean more right by the day, I think that there are some people being very unreasonable.  It seems more and more everyday, I feel pushed to think Republicans are bad and Democrats are victims. Which is ridiculous. There are no bad guys and no victims. 

If their are any victims they are the taxpayers and voters.  We are paying these people big bucks to go argue like children, instead of getting it done and moving to the next important order of business.  We are paying them to throw temper tantrums and disrespect the president that was FAIRLY elected by the country’s electoral process.

America voted for greatness and change. We won’t get any where, without cooperation. It’s time to put the revenge aside and the “coulda shoulda wouldas” of the election away for a few years and do the work that the American people need, and asked to have done.

Democrats have nothing to worry about withNeil Gorsuch, he has a dazzling resume and is more than qualified. They should be ecstatic. 


Watch out for the crap news out there everyone!




Not everyone knows how this process even works so I thought I’d include this for you.

How the Nomination Process for Supreme Court Justices Works

Who selects the Supreme Court justices?

 

Chuck Schumer’s Crocodile Tears?

This is more about a B.S. detection, instead of just fake news. Although many news sources have been setting the tone, that Chuck Schumer, is devastated about, this new terrorist protection executive order, that President Trump has implemented.

(Actual text to the order,)

If you think President Trump, wasn’t being very nice, when he said, Chuck Schumer was fake crying, about the “refugee pause”. You really should watch this video. It’s very eye opening. Chuck Schumer and anyone promoting the story that, Chuck is in fact genuine about those tears, is manipulating your mind and playing on your emotions.

In my opinion, National Security should not even be a debate, period. According to this video, sounds like that’s what Mr. Chuck Schumer thinks too. However, he’s changed his mind all of the sudden. I wonder why? Could it be because he just doesn’t want to accept the fact that Donald Trump is the President of The United States?

*Notice how there is a small group of refugees standing around Mr. Schumer, in the video above. Is this suppose to make us feel even more guilty? Are these human props to make his statement more impactful? I don’t appreciate tactics like that.  

The press is using, mass hysteria and now guilt to manipulate your perception. They want to use your compassion, your giant hearts, and your need to help others, to make you think  you should be putting these refugees in front of the safety of your family. They are trying to use guilt, to make you think if you don’t, then you are some how a horrible selfish person. Putting the needs of our country and it’s people is not being mean spirited, or un-American. It also doesn’t mean that people’s rights are being violated. If anything it means our right to safety is being preserved.

This is not a violation of religious freedom, because this is not a “muslim ban.” This is a temporary pause, so that we can “quality check” our vetting process as a precaution. This is a pause of a group of countries, not people. These countries have been marked as dangerous, not by the Trump Administration but by the Obama Administration.

This is immigration explained with gumballs. When I first stumbled upon it, I almost didn’t watch it. By the time it was over, my mind was completely blown!

So after watching this video, you can see that helping people where they are; helping them become strong free countries, where they already live; ultimately helps way more people than trying to bring them all here. Not only that, but by bringing the smartest and strongest people here, it takes away from those communities that would benefit by having that person stay and build their society. It also can end up putting a major strain on our communities and population.

Setting up programs to help these refugees in their countries has the potential to help so many more people, and would make such a bigger impact on the world.

Photo credit: Power of Positivity https://www.facebook.com/powerofpositivity/

This update of the vetting process, is not the first thing that Chuck Schumer has been a hypocrite about. Currently, he doesn’t support, President Donald J. Trump’s nomination for SCOTUS, (Neil Gorsuch), even though, Chuck was part of the unanimous vote in 2006, that confirmed Gorsuch for Colo. appeals court judge. (Blog about this to come.)

Flashback: These Current Democrat Senators All Voted To Support Gorsuch In 2006

Source: https://gop.com/flashback-these-current-democrat-senators-all-voted-to-support-gorsuch-in-2006/

On July 20, 2006, Neil Gorsuch Was Confirmed By The Senate On A Voice Vote As A Judge On The United States Court Of Appeals For The Tenth Circuit. (PN1565, Gorsuch Nomination , Approved By Voice Vote, 7/20/06)

There Are 12 Democrat Senators That Supported Gorsuch’s Nomination In 2006 And Are Still In The Senate Including: Chuck Schumer (D-NY),

Other Democrat Senators That Supported Gorsuch In 2006 Included Harry Reid (D-NV), Barack Obama (D-IL), Joe Biden (D-DE), And Hillary Clinton (D-NY)

Below is the actual text of the executive order that has caused all the controversy and protesting. I just want to note to you that it says nothing about a “muslim ban”. It says nothing about discriminating against people, because of religion or race. There are 40 other muslim dominate countries, that are not on the order. I also want to note that the list of countries was taken from intel that was obtained during the Obama Administration. This order is only temporary, so that we can “quality check,” improve our “vetting” and national security. This is a precaution, put in place for our safety. If this order saves even one of our American citizens or individuals already living in this country. It was worth it.

EXECUTIVE ORDER: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES – Text to the actual Order in Question

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

It’s interesting to me the picture, that the press is trying to paint, and the actual reality, is nothing like what they want you to believe. Why am I not surprised? I keep exposing their lies.

 

[Update: 2-3-17 11:18pm: I found this — An open letter to Senator Chuck Schumer http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/02/01/open-letter-to-senator-chuck-schumer.html

by Ray Starmann is the founder of US Defense Watch. He is a former U.S. Army Intelligence officer and veteran of the Gulf War] Definately worth the read. 

Alternative Facts = A Different Perspective

We all think our opinions are right.

#AlternativeFacts is a horrible way of saying, #ADifferentPerspective, but this is what, I believe is the meaning. With this blog my intent is to bring to my readers, just that.

A different perspective is not a bad thing. We all get so caught up in the passion of how we believe, our personal feelings, experiences and opinions…sometimes it’s hard to see any other perspective through all of our own fire.

We all think our opinions are right. What you think are facts, I may know something else that you haven’t read or seen yet, as well as you may have seen or read something I haven’t. The facts I know are a different way of looking at the same thing. As well as vise versa. This is why creating a dialogue between one another is so very important. We can not just spout off anger and then shut down, just because we think our opinion is the right opinion. We will not get anywhere doing things like that.

Listening to each other is key. Educating ourselves is key. RESPECTING EACH OTHER IS KEY. The hating and the name calling is not helping anyone’s cause.

I’ve found that the bias from any news media these days has forced us to read the same story, 3-5 times in order to navigate our way through what the facts actually are and what is the opinions of the author. It’s making it exhausting to try and stay informed. This is not an acceptable practice for any news source to use.

A news source should be giving the straight up factual news and then letting the public decide how they feel about it. That means not leaving out convenient facts, because they do not fit their own agenda/opinion. This also means not trying to turn stories into positives or especially negatives to create angst and/or any other feelings in the public. It’s irresponsible as a journalist. If you are going to be an opinion writer, start a blog like I did.

I’ve also found that the more hateful, outrageous, and inciteful the headlines are the more the media will use them, even if they don’t really have anything to do with the actual story. They do it to get your attention, if a story is posted on social media, they want you to click it. The more clicks the more money for the ads that are supporting their website.

Did you know that most of Americans don’t even read beyond the headlines? Many of them will make a negative comment regarding their opinion and not even know what they are commenting on.

“the average news consumer in the United States is a headline-reader — at best. A new study by the Media Insight Project, an initiative of the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the American Press Institute — the entire thing is enlightening about how we consume (and don’t consume) news — affirms this fact.”-via The Washington Post

In conclusion, it’s best to do your research, and stay informed. Don’t just stay on page one of your search results. I tend to navigate through at least 10 pages. That way you can read the same story from many sources, and include a variety, between left wing/right wing/ and independent opinions. It’s also helpful to look for old news from years past, because you might find that the news is now changing the narrative from the facts of history they were reporting several months or years ago.

Good luck everyone! I hope you all feel better soon and God Bless America!

Source: Washington Post

Americans read headlines. And not much else.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/19/americans-read-headlines-and-not-much-else/?utm_term=.b6e66a4bee8b