Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.BLOGSPOT.COM
Saturday, August 18, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
DOJ's Bruce Ohr wrote Christopher Steele was 'very concerned about Comey's firing -- afraid they will be exposed'
By Catherine Herridge, Gregg Re| Fox News
A collection of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr's
A collection of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr's emails, texts and handwritten notes, reviewed by Fox News, reveals that he was deeply connected to the unverified Steele Dossier as well as its author, and, during the presidential election campaign, the alleged government surveillance abuses involving a Trump campaign official.
The dossier, which was used by federal officials to justify the surveillance of a top Trump aide, Carter Page, was created by Fusion GPS and paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Ohr wrote that Christopher Steele, the ex-British spy who wrote the salacious dossier, was "very concerned (abt) about [former FBI Director James] Comey's firing -- afraid they will be exposed."
The Ohr documents shed more light on Steele's activities before the presidential election. While Steele shopped the dossier to multiple media outlets, he also appeared to ask Ohr for help with a Russian oligarch -- Oleg Deripaska -- after rumors the U.S. might impose sanctions.
Ohr had a conflict of interest during the presidential campaign and transition, congressional investigators say, because his wife Nellie worked for Fusion GPS. Steele, an ex-British spy, was a key source cited by the FBI and Department of Justice to obtain a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrant to monitor Page.
After the FBI dropped Steele as a source in November 2016 over his contacts with the media, the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee found that Steele had maintained contact with government officials by effectively using Ohr as a back channel.
During recent congressional testimony, now-fired FBI agent Peter Strzok confirmed that "the FBI received documents and material from Mr. Ohr."
“Very concerned about Comey’s firing, afraid they will be exposed,” said Bruce Ohr. DOJ’s Emails & Notes show Bruce Ohr’s connection to (phony & discredited) Trump Dossier. A creep thinking he would get caught in a dishonest act. Rigged Witch Hunt!
On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders announced that President Trump had terminated former CIA Director John Brennan's security clearance, and was reviewing the clearances of several other former officials. Sanders read a statement from Trump that cited what he described as Brennan's misleading testimony before Congress and his increasingly partisan rhetoric, saying Brennan improperly traded on his access to classified information.
"For this reason, I've also begun to review the more general question of the access to classified information by government officials," Trump’s statement read. "As part of this review I'm evaluating action with respect to the following individuals: James Clapper, James Comey, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Bruce Ohr."
Ohr is the only official on that list still working in the U.S. government.
During closed-door congressional testimony last year, the co-founder of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, claimed he had no contact with Ohr until after the presidential election. But Ohr's work emails conflict with Simpson's testimony, and show contact months earlier.
Ohr's notes also indicate that in December 2016, there was a meeting in Washington, D.C.'s Chinatown between Fusion GPS’ Simpson and Ohr, with Ohr writing, "Glen(n) gave me a memory stick."
Reacting to the news late Thursday, President Trump suggested the disclosures were more proof of a "witch hunt" against him.
"DOJ’s Emails & Notes show Bruce Ohr’s connection to (phony & discredited) Trump Dossier," Trump wrote. "A creep thinking he would get caught in a dishonest act. Rigged Witch Hunt!"
The DOJ declined to comment on this story. There was no response from Simpson’s lawyer to a Fox News request seeking comment. Ohr can tell his side of the story on Aug. 28, when a closed-door interview is scheduled with the House oversight and judiciary committees as part of their joint investigation into the FBI and DOJ's conduct during the presidential election.
Fox News' Pamela K. Browne and Cyd Upson contributed to this report.
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.
Watters explodes on Juan Williams over Trump media coverage: They’re ‘dishonest Dem Party hacks!’
Frieda Powers
Tensions were high and accusations were flying on Fox News Channels’ The Five as co-hosts slammed the media’s coverage of President Donald Trump versus former President Obama.
Juan Williams praised the move by newspaper editorial boards across the nation Thursday to launch a coordinated effort to bash the president in light of his attacks on the press.
“The legitimate purpose of the press is to be an adversary to people in power and hold them accountable,” Williams said, arguing that reporters have a responsibility to call out “a guy who lies and lies.”
But the liberal co-host did not find any support from his colleagues who dropped the truth bomb about how reporters acted under Obama, obediently towing the line and acting as agents of the left.
“They’d have a lot more credibility if every administration that came around, they were this adversarial,” Jesse Watters said. “Donald Trump has exposed them as dishonest Democrat Party hacks. The media right now are extensions of the Democratic Party. They give him no credit for anything good he does and deny him all credit for anything he does.”
Williams refuted Watters’ claims demanding he give examples of his accusations. Watters, meanwhile, argued that the liberal press was just angry because they were being called out on their biased coverage.
“Why they get so upset is because their credibility rests upon the fact that they pretend to be independent,” he said.
Williams fired back some nonsense about Trump wanting to be a king rather than a president.
“The only thing the king wants is somebody who will adore him, who will honor him, who will say, ‘Donald Trump’s the greatest ever,’” he said.
The two continued talking over each other as the heated exchange became more tense. Co-host Greg Gutfeld attempted to reign them in at one point, asking them to find their “happy place.”
He also pointed out his belief that the Boston Globe editorial stunt made no impact on the average American who probably did not know, or care, about the editorial boards’ smug stand for the freedom of the press.
Co-host Dana Perino gave a more level response, saying the First Amendment gives all parties the right to express themselves.
The Vatican’s Pathetic Statement About ‘Shame and Sorrow’
nThe Vatican released a statement expressing “shame and sorrow” Thursday about the hundreds of predator priests uncovered in Pennsylvania. This statement comes after two days of silence and offers no quote from Pope Francis.
“There are two words that can express the feelings faced with these horrible crimes: shame and sorrow,” the statement reads. “The Holy See treats with great seriousness the work of the Investigating Grand Jury of Pennsylvania… The Holy See condemns unequivocally the sexual abuse of minors.”
“Victims should know that the Pope is on their side. Those who have suffered are his priority, and the Church wants to listen to them to root out this tragic horror that destroys the lives of the innocent.”
In the middle of these platitudes, comes this: “By finding almost no cases after 2002, the Grand Jury’s conclusions are consistent with previous studies showing that Catholic Church reforms in the United States drastically reduced the incidence of clergy child abuse.”
This is what stood out to me… “Almost no cases after 2002.”
We are talking about the kind of sexual abuse against children that would make Harvey Weinstein blush and the Church is using the words “almost no” in its defense.
Let’s read that another way…
Ford Motor: “Almost no Ford Pintos exploded and killed their occupants after 2002.”
The FBI: “Almost no FBI agents were involved in manipulating presidential elections after 2002.”
The local mosque: “Almost none of our Imams sought to radicalize terrorists after 2002.”
CNN: “Almost none of our reporters spread fake news after 2002.”
the Catholic Church: “Almost no children were raped by our priests after 2002.”
And then there is the whole “fool me once” aspect of all this.
These are the kinds of statements we heard 15 years ago when the first child abuse scandal exploded on the Church, and I am afraid empty words are just not good enough anymore.
I joined the Church in 2008 in large part because I was assured this was behind us, assured an unforgivable blot on the 2,000-year-old institution had been eradicated, assured this would not and could not happen ever again. And yet here we are in 2018 with the discovery that the cover up has been ongoing and that the standard when it comes to predatory priests raping children is “almost no[ne].”
Just as unacceptably is this sentence in the Vatican’s statement, “The Holy See also wants to underscore the need to comply with the civil law, including mandatory child abuse reporting requirements.”
You have child rapists in your own home and a gangster mentality protecting those child rapists… How can you not be proactive? How can you not be calling on every attorney general in all 50 states to launch investigations — with the FULL cooperation of the church — in all 50 states? How can you not be demanding these “secret archives” (incredibly, that was the Pennsylvania Church’s term for the secret files detailing the abuse and cover-ups) be released to the public in very diocese, not only here in America but throughout the world?
As a practicing Catholic, someone who loved the Church, who joined the Church as a 42-year-old adult, who was proud to call himself a Roman Catholic, I am horrified, not only by this report (which I intend to read in full), but by a powerful institution’s passive response to an unspeakable evil breeding within its own home.
And how are we to define this passiveness as something other than it is own kind of evil?
Special Ops Heroes Slam Brennan
Many high profile people in the intelligence community and military have come to the aid of John Brennan after Trump stripped his security clearance. But the same cannot be said for special forces operators who do not share the same glowing opinion of the former CIA director.
John Brennan rallied numerous high-powered defenders to his corner over his security clearance clash with President Trump, but some well-known special ops heroes are firing back suggesting the former CIA director got what he deserves.
Kris “Tanto” Paronto, a former Army Ranger and private security contractor who was part of the CIA team that fought back during the 2012 Benghazi terror attack, accused Brennan of putting his “politics” before those in the field.
My principles are greater than clearances too John, especially when you and the @CIA kool-aid drinkers punished us for not going along with the Benghazi cover-up story in order to protect you, @HillaryClinton ‘s & @BarackObama ‘s failures. You put your politics before us. https://t.co/qWFWujKthL
— Kris Paronto (@KrisParonto) August 16, 2018
..Or caught lying to congress OR caught spying on Pres. candidates OR caught using their positions to influence US elections OR caught fabricating stories about attacks on US personnel in Libya OR providing weapons to ISIS backed militias in Syria ..should I go on @JohnBrennan ? https://t.co/Vk6ui6SmR7
— Kris Paronto (@KrisParonto) August 17, 2018
…
Security operators involved previously had to sign non-disclosure agreements, though Brennan told lawmakers in 2014 that this was not a specific effort to prevent them from speaking to Congress.
The former SEAL who is credited with killing Osama Bin Laden joined in on the fun as well:
I have nothing but respect and love for ADM McRaven. Yes I’ve seen this. We simply disagree. https://t.co/pidL6PZQhV
— Robert J. O'Neill (@mchooyah) August 16, 2018
Actually, @brhodes , 23 conservatives went after UBL. No offense, in case you were wondering. https://t.co/yujmBYuTFd
— Robert J. O'Neill (@mchooyah) August 15, 2018
Brennan is saying the president is trying to silence him while he continues to give interviews and speak out in the press. Not something one usually does when silenced.
KEITH ELLISON AND AL FRANKEN, COMPARE AND CONTRAST
Paul Kane of the Washington Post compares the reaction by leading Democrats to evidence of Keith Ellison’s domestic abuse with the reaction to evidence of Al Franken’s sexual touchings and harassment. He finds a disparity.
In Franken’s case, Sen. Kristin Gillibrand forcefully called for an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee within hours of the first accusation against the then-Senator. So did Sen. Kamala Harris. Both made it clear they would not give Franken a pass just because he was a leading liberal. “Sexual harassment and misconduct should not be allowed by anyone and should not occur anywhere against anyone,” Harris exclaimed.
But neither Gillibrand nor Harris has called for a congressional investigation of Ellison. According to Kane, no congressional Democrat has.
Harris says, “I know the DNC is investigating it, so we’ll see and let that run its course.” Gillibrand hasn’t even made a statement about the allegations against Ellison, and her press office has not responded to requests for a comment.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar has also declined to comment. And when Sen. Bernie Sanders was asked if he had anything to say, he responded, “Nope, nothing.”
What are the differences between Franken’s situation and Ellison’s, and how do they cut. One difference cuts in Ellison’s favor. There was photographic evidence of some of Franken’s misconduct. In Ellison’s case there is none — just reports by alleged victims and/or their kin.
But credible reports are all that should be required for purposes of investigating. And the reports against Ellison include a 911 call, certainly credible evidence. There was no photographic evidence against Roy Moore, either.
Another distinction is that the DNC supposedly is looking into the allegations against Ellison, as Sen. Harris says. However, the Post’s Kane notes the difference between a “somewhat vague DNC ‘review'” and a congressional ethics investigation. Unlike congressional ethics committees, the DNC isn’t set up to conduct serious investigations. Moreover, Ellison is the number two guy at the DNC.
The most obvious distinction between the Ellison’s situation and Franken’s is that Ellison is accused of far more heinous conduct. Even in the “MeToo” era, beating one’s girlfriend correctly deemed much worse than anything Franken did. Franken’s misconduct consisted of low-level harassment of a colleague and inappropriate touchings of admirers who wanted to be photographed with the Senator. He didn’t beat anyone.
Rep. Ellison quite possibly did. Congress should investigate.
Another distinction between Franken and Ellison is that Ellison is Black. Race matters big time to Democratic politicians. However, John Conyers’ race didn’t protect him when he was accused of sexual misconduct. Nancy Pelosi initially defended him but, under pressure, quickly changed her tune. Conyers wasn’t accused of beating anyone and, like Ellison, denied wrongdoing.
There seems to be something special about Ellison even beyond his race — something that is causing Democrats not to want a congressional investigation of his conduct.
Is it his religion — Muslim? Is it the authenticity of his radicalism, manifested by his animosity towards Israel, his support for cop killers, and his associations with Louis Farrakhan? Al Franken seemed like an authentic leftist, but he hadn’t manifested his leftism in any of these three ways.
I don’t know why Democrats are skirting the issue of Ellison’s possible domestic abuse. But when the Washington Post calls out its favorite party for doing so, something is up. The Dems’ motives are worth exploring.
UPDATE: Here is distinction I should have noted. At the time of Franken’s travails, Democrats were intent on defeating Roy Moore in Alabama and, if that failed, running him out of the Senate due to his dating of teenagers and alleged assault of at least one them many years ago. By calling out Franken, they avoided charges of hypocrisy. There is no comparable imperative right now that necessitates calling out Ellison.
Kris “Tanto” Paronto, a former Army Ranger and private security contractor who was part of the CIA team that fought back during the 2012 Benghazi terror attack, accused Brennan of putting his “politics” before those in the field.
My principles are greater than clearances too John, especially when you and the @CIA kool-aid drinkers punished us for not going along with the Benghazi cover-up story in order to protect you, @HillaryClinton ‘s & @BarackObama ‘s failures. You put your politics before us. https://t.co/qWFWujKthL
— Kris Paronto (@KrisParonto) August 16, 2018
..Or caught lying to congress OR caught spying on Pres. candidates OR caught using their positions to influence US elections OR caught fabricating stories about attacks on US personnel in Libya OR providing weapons to ISIS backed militias in Syria ..should I go on @JohnBrennan ? https://t.co/Vk6ui6SmR7
— Kris Paronto (@KrisParonto) August 17, 2018
…
Security operators involved previously had to sign non-disclosure agreements, though Brennan told lawmakers in 2014 that this was not a specific effort to prevent them from speaking to Congress.
The former SEAL who is credited with killing Osama Bin Laden joined in on the fun as well:
I have nothing but respect and love for ADM McRaven. Yes I’ve seen this. We simply disagree. https://t.co/pidL6PZQhV
— Robert J. O'Neill (@mchooyah) August 16, 2018
Actually, @brhodes , 23 conservatives went after UBL. No offense, in case you were wondering. https://t.co/yujmBYuTFd
— Robert J. O'Neill (@mchooyah) August 15, 2018
Brennan is saying the president is trying to silence him while he continues to give interviews and speak out in the press. Not something one usually does when silenced.
KEITH ELLISON AND AL FRANKEN, COMPARE AND CONTRAST
In Franken’s case, Sen. Kristin Gillibrand forcefully called for an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee within hours of the first accusation against the then-Senator. So did Sen. Kamala Harris. Both made it clear they would not give Franken a pass just because he was a leading liberal. “Sexual harassment and misconduct should not be allowed by anyone and should not occur anywhere against anyone,” Harris exclaimed.
But neither Gillibrand nor Harris has called for a congressional investigation of Ellison. According to Kane, no congressional Democrat has.
Harris says, “I know the DNC is investigating it, so we’ll see and let that run its course.” Gillibrand hasn’t even made a statement about the allegations against Ellison, and her press office has not responded to requests for a comment.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar has also declined to comment. And when Sen. Bernie Sanders was asked if he had anything to say, he responded, “Nope, nothing.”
What are the differences between Franken’s situation and Ellison’s, and how do they cut. One difference cuts in Ellison’s favor. There was photographic evidence of some of Franken’s misconduct. In Ellison’s case there is none — just reports by alleged victims and/or their kin.
But credible reports are all that should be required for purposes of investigating. And the reports against Ellison include a 911 call, certainly credible evidence. There was no photographic evidence against Roy Moore, either.
Another distinction is that the DNC supposedly is looking into the allegations against Ellison, as Sen. Harris says. However, the Post’s Kane notes the difference between a “somewhat vague DNC ‘review'” and a congressional ethics investigation. Unlike congressional ethics committees, the DNC isn’t set up to conduct serious investigations. Moreover, Ellison is the number two guy at the DNC.
The most obvious distinction between the Ellison’s situation and Franken’s is that Ellison is accused of far more heinous conduct. Even in the “MeToo” era, beating one’s girlfriend correctly deemed much worse than anything Franken did. Franken’s misconduct consisted of low-level harassment of a colleague and inappropriate touchings of admirers who wanted to be photographed with the Senator. He didn’t beat anyone.
Rep. Ellison quite possibly did. Congress should investigate.
Another distinction between Franken and Ellison is that Ellison is Black. Race matters big time to Democratic politicians. However, John Conyers’ race didn’t protect him when he was accused of sexual misconduct. Nancy Pelosi initially defended him but, under pressure, quickly changed her tune. Conyers wasn’t accused of beating anyone and, like Ellison, denied wrongdoing.
There seems to be something special about Ellison even beyond his race — something that is causing Democrats not to want a congressional investigation of his conduct.
Is it his religion — Muslim? Is it the authenticity of his radicalism, manifested by his animosity towards Israel, his support for cop killers, and his associations with Louis Farrakhan? Al Franken seemed like an authentic leftist, but he hadn’t manifested his leftism in any of these three ways.
I don’t know why Democrats are skirting the issue of Ellison’s possible domestic abuse. But when the Washington Post calls out its favorite party for doing so, something is up. The Dems’ motives are worth exploring.
UPDATE: Here is distinction I should have noted. At the time of Franken’s travails, Democrats were intent on defeating Roy Moore in Alabama and, if that failed, running him out of the Senate due to his dating of teenagers and alleged assault of at least one them many years ago. By calling out Franken, they avoided charges of hypocrisy. There is no comparable imperative right now that necessitates calling out Ellison.
Happy Birthday, Robert De Niro: Here’s a Look at His Four Zaniest Trump Comments

The 'Goodfellas' and 'Taxi Driver' star has been pushing his extremist political rhetoric for years now (what happened to acting?)
Today is Robert De Niro’s birthday. The Oscar winning actor is 75 years old. While normally a day like today would be a perfect opportunity to revisit and celebrate an impressive filmography — the actor has been so aggressive with his political views in recent years that it’s really all people can think of when his name is uttered.
His tirades have been so out of control that fellow filmmakers like Rob Reiner, a staunch anti-Trumper, and Jon Voight, a Trump supporter and De Niro’s costar in the classic “Heat,” have called him out on it.
Even President Donald Trump took notice and suggested on Twitter that the “Raging Bull” star had taken too many shots to the head in the past.
Here is a look at De Niro’s zaniest Trump-related comments.
1.) “I’d like to punch him in the face.” In what was supposed to be a non-partisan video encouraging people to vote in the 2016 presidential election, De Niro devolved into schoolyard bully insults for almost a full minute.
He said he’d like to assault Trump, then called the former real estate mogul a “mutt,” “a bozo” and “an embarrassment” to the country. It was clear then that the actor’s beef with the future president was about far more than politics.
It was in some way personal.
2.) “I don’t care what he likes. If he walked into a restaurant I was in — I’d walk out.” De Niro made this comment while promoting a restaurant he was helping to open in Spain. The establishment serves Japanese-inspired cuisine and De Niro made clear he would “never let Trump into any of the Nobu restaurants.”
Chef Nobu Matsuhisa, who co-founded the venture, was a little more reasonable. “It’s my dream for Trump to sit next to Bob. To make them sushi!” he said.
3.) “Our country is led by a president who believes he can make up his own truth. And we have a word for that — bull****.” De Niro said this at a function that really didn’t call for politics to be addressed. It was during a speech to high school students at a New York awards ceremony for recipients of the Rosemary Breslin American Writer Award.
Another nugget from De Niro was: “So what about the truth? What does the truth even mean today? I mean, if you’re Donald Trump, it doesn’t mean anything. If you’re cowardly Republican enablers in Congress, you don’t let the truth stand in the way of pathetically clinging to power.”
4.) “I hope there’s a couple [segments] where I interrogate [Trump], I arrest him, and then I take him to jail.” De Niro said this to NBC’s Craig Melvin after he played Robert Mueller on the leftist show “Saturday Night Live.”
How sad that the man who once gave groundbreaking performances in films like “Taxi Driver,” “Goodfellas,” “Raging Bull,” and more is now content to simply play out strange political fantasies.
Maybe “Meet the Parents” counted as fair warning…
Former NFL Quarterback: Gov. Cuomo ‘May Want to Rethink’ Saying Anti-America Claim
By Craig Millward

How sad that the man who once gave groundbreaking performances in films like “Taxi Driver,” “Goodfellas,” “Raging Bull,” and more is now content to simply play out strange political fantasies.
Maybe “Meet the Parents” counted as fair warning…
Former NFL Quarterback: Gov. Cuomo ‘May Want to Rethink’ Saying Anti-America Claim
By Craig Millward
Boomer Esiason (Screenshot)
Former NFL Quarterback Boomer Esiason said Thursday that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) “may want to rethink” saying America was “never that great.” Esiason responded to Cuomo on Twitter with a post and a picture, linking to the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial.
“NY Gov @andrewcuomo says America was never that great. He may want to rethink that,” Esiason said in a Tweet.
NY Gov @andrewcuomo says America was never that great. He may want to rethink that. #NeverForget #foolish https://goo.gl/images/GEsK1B
Image: Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial
In a second tweet Esiason said, “Another reminder of the great sacrifices made not only on behalf of this nation but for the world as well,” while including a link to an image of Arlington National Cemetery.
After broad public backlash, Gov. Cuomo's office released a statement contradicting Cuomo’s “never that great” claim:
Press Secretary Dani Lever released a statement claiming “the Governor believes America is great and that her full greatness will be fully realized when every man, woman, and child has full equality. America has not yet reached its maximum potential.”
“When the President speaks about making America great again - going back in time - he ignores the pain so many endured and that we suffered from slavery, discrimination, segregation, sexism and marginalized women's contributions. The Governor believes that when everyone is fully included and everyone is contributing to their maximum potential, that is when America will achieve maximum greatness.”
Esiason played 14 seasons in the National Football League with the New York Jets, Cincinnati Bengals and Arizona Cardinals. He is currently an analyst for “The NFL Today” on CBS and a host of the radio program, “Boomer and Gio,” in New York City.
Please support CNSNews today! (a 501c3 non-profit production of the Media Research Center)
Yazidi Sex Slave Escapes to Germany, Then Meets Her ‘Owner’ Who Germans Let in Too
BY RON CAPSHAW
In the novel “Marathon Man,” a Nazi war criminal walking through a Jewish section in New York is recognized by an elderly man as one of his Nazi concentration camp captors from Germany during the war.
Before the wanted war criminal could be exposed, he managed to escape while the crowd was distracted by a woman hit by a car.
Something similar happened to a 15-year-old Yazidi girl when she recognized her abuser and former captor in Germany.
Except unlike the Nazi criminal, he didn’t flee the scene when he was recognized by his victim.
In 2014, Ashwaq was captured by the Islamic State group and sold as a sex slave to one of the terrorist group’s members.
Ashwaq was in captivity for 10 months before managing to escape back to Kurdistan.
She eventually moved to Germany, which she thought was a safe haven from her sick abuser.
She was wrong.
After living in the country for three years, she was approached by her captor.. Ashwaq explained what happened to basnews.
The man, who identified himself as Abu Humam, told her, “Yes, I know you and you know me. And I know how long you’ve been living here,” Ashwaq recounted.
“I know that you live with your mother and your brother,” he continued.
He then repeated her address twice.
Ashwaq immediately went to police for help — but with no success.
“The police told me that he is also a refugee, just like me, and that they could not do anything about it. They just gave me a phone number that I could contact in case Abu Humam ever stopped me. After this response, I decided to return to Kurdistan and never go back to Germany,” Ashwaq said, according to basnews.
Her story shows that despite all the accusations of racism hurled against President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, we must know who is coming into our country– for the good of everyone, including actual refugees like Ashwaq.
German policies have allowed terrorists to be protected when classified as refugees.
How are vulnerable people like Ashwaq supposed to be kept safe in a country that is supposedly a safe haven when the country also allows in perpetrators of terror and abuse?
Americans should take a cue from Ashwaq’s frightening tale and continue to push strong immigration policy that insists on knowing exactly who is coming into our country.
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2018/08/www_17.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment