Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 12, 2017

Waching daily Dec 29 2017

BREAKING News From DC!!

TRUMP Says HELL NO!!

The Democrats and the GOP RINOS in Congress are back to their normal shenanigans.

But this time our President isn't Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush or George W. Bush.

This morning President Donald Trump sternly warned both Democrats and Republicans in Congress

that he won't approve any legislative fix for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

program, or DACA, until he sees full funding for the much needed border wall between the

US and Mexico.After losing my home state of California because President Ronald Reagan

fell for the Democrat lie that promised border wall funding after he sighed amnesty, and

seeing how globalist President George HW Bush failed to live up to his 1988 campaign promise

of "Read my lips, no new taxes," which set up this nation for the Clinton curse which

we are still living with 25 years later, it's awesome to finally have a president who actually

keeps his promises?

Via Yahoo News:

10 promises Trump kept in 2017

Donald Trump in 2017 moved from being a chaos candidate to a chaos president.

He shoots for the moon (literally), routinely says things that aren't true, and often

makes pledges that generate enormous attention but very little follow-through.

Many of his signature policy efforts have been tied up in or blocked by the courts,

his campaign is under investigation by the FBI, and his approval rating is at historic

lows for a first-year president.

But the mind-numbing deluge of the Trump administration's first-year controversies — the sheer number

of misstatements and inflammatory tweets and abrupt staffing shifts — sometimes obscures

the fact that Trump has achieved quite a number of the things he set out to do during the

first year of his administration.

He is, after all, the president.

And Democratic resistance or no, that remains the most powerful post in the land — the

ultimate government executive authority.

Here are 10 campaign promises Trump kept.

Together, these achievements could form the nucleus of a reelection campaign.The replacement

for Justice Scalia will be a person of similar views and principles."

On Jan. 31, Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch, described by the New York Times as "a conservative

in the mold of Antonin Scalia."

He was confirmed at the start of April on a 54-45 party-line vote after a bruising political

campaign for and against his nomination, and the removal of the judicial filibuster and

its 60-vote threshold in the Senate.

This was the easiest campaign promise for Trump to keep — thanks to Senate Majority

Leader Mitch McConnell's refusing to open the confirmation process to an Obama nominee

throughout 2016 — and Trump kept it.

Since taking office, Trump has nominated and the Senate has confirmed more appellate judges

in his first year than any other president since the courts they sit on were created

in 1891.

Pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, "a potential disaster for our country."

Trump promised to replace America's multilateral trade agreements with one-on-one deals, and

on his first full weekday in office he pulled America out of the 12-nation TPP agreement,

a signature Obama accomplishment that Hillary Clinton had also expressed doubts about.

Critics say U.S. withdrawal from the agreement governing trade with Asian and Pacific nations

only strengthened the hand of China.

"Cancel" the Paris climate deal.

Trump vowed to "cancel" the Paris climate accord, which was ratified in October 2016,

giving it the force of international law, and in June 2017 announced he would withdraw

the United States from the now 197-country agreement to reduce carbon emissions.

"We're getting out," he said.

Of course the accord continues to exist, even without the official support of the world's

second-largest source of carbon emissions.

And because the climate accord was ratified just days before Trump won election, the process

of withdrawing from it is no simple matter: It will take four years and only become final

shortly before the 2020 election.

Nonetheless, Trump took all the steps he could to put "a checkmark next to one of his key

campaign promises," as CNN put it over the summer.

"The Trump plan will lower the business tax rate."

Trump made an array of specific promises during the campaign on how he'd cut taxes as president.

Among them: Lower the business tax rate from 35 to 15 percent, "collapse the current

seven tax brackets to three brackets," repeal the alternative minimum tax and eliminate

the carried interest loophole, create a new child- and elder-care tax deduction, and eliminate

the estate tax.

Of these promises, the one most clearly encoded in the tax bill hashed out by Congress in

December was the lowering of the corporate tax rate, which was reduced from 35 percent

to 21 percent.

"This bill put corporate tax cuts first; that's where roughly 70 percent of the benefits

go," noted Los Angeles Times columnist Doyle McManus.

The alternative minimum tax remains on the books, though with a higher income exemption

level, as does the carried interest loophole and the estate tax.

The new plan does not decrease the number of tax brackets at all, though it changes

their income thresholds and rates.

"Repeal and replace disastrous Obamacare."

Congressional Republicans were repeatedly thwarted in their efforts to repeal and replace

the Affordable Care Act's many provisions in stand-alone bills, but the individual-mandate

penalty for not carrying health insurance, which was legally permitted as a form of taxation

by the U.S. Supreme Court, was repealed in the tax bill passed December 20.

The mandate penalty is understood as one of the core provisions underlying the ACA's

health insurance exchanges, which need healthy as well as sick individuals to pay into the

system.

The Trump administration sought to undermine enrollment in the exchanges in other ways

too, such as cutting back on the advertising for them and the time to enroll.

But Democratic and activist efforts to preserve Obamacare may have acted as a yearlong advertising

campaign for the program, and enrollment in the exchanges in the end reached record numbers

for 2018.

Rolling back regulations.

Donald Trump has overseen what the Week has described as "the biggest regulatory rollback

in American history."

As befits an antiregulatory agenda overseen by a former real estate developer, the major

focus of that rollback has been undoing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection

Agency and the Department of the Interior — both of which govern land use — and

rules that rein in the banking industry.

The administration has also adopted a more lenient approach to enforcing those rules

that remain on the books.

"Drill, baby, drill."

Advocates for protecting wildlife in the Arctic This was originally a 2008 Sarah Palin campaign

promise, but Trump stood next to her as she echoed it while supporting his campaign, and

he promised to once again open America's public lands and offshore areas to energy

exploration.

In April, Trump signed an executive order to allow offshore drilling in parts of the

Arctic, Pacific and Atlantic oceans, including in marine sanctuaries, declared off limits

under Obama.

He also ordered the Interior Department to review the Obama-era rules.

The administration overturned an Obama-era ban on new coal mining leases on public lands

as well.

"By ending catch-and-release on the border, we will stop the cycle of human smuggling

and violence.

Illegal border crossings will go down."

Then-Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly declared on a visit to El Paso, Texas, in

April, "We have ended dangerous catch-and-release enforcement policies."

That was a bit of an overstatement, but the perception that the Trump administration had

ended the policy of allowing captured undocumented border crossers to avoid detention while awaiting

legal disposition of their cases led to a dramatic 58 percent decline in border-crossing

attempts during the first half of 2017.

By June, the average monthly increase in those awaiting proceedings outside custody was about

7,500, compared with 20,600 during the final seven months of Obama's presidency.

In April, the Border Patrol caught a low of 11,100 undocumented immigrants, but by October

it had become clear that there had not actually been a formal revocation of catch-and-release

policies, despite statements to the contrary, and border crossings surged again, to 26,000.

That said, Trump's assertion that ending catch-and-release would decrease crossings

was proved correct, and border crossing attempts declined sharply for a time.

Recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

"While previous presidents have made this a major campaign promise, they failed to deliver.

Today, I am delivering," Trump said in making the announcement overturning seven decades

of U.S. foreign policy in December.

The administration went on to sign a waiver permitting the U.S. Embassy to remain in Tel

Aviv for another six months, continuing the policies of previous presidents.We finally

have President Trump, a man of his word who won't let the establishment convince him

that they can be trusted.

All during the campaign as he would make his multiple, almost unreal, promises, I recall

telling a friend who was very suspicious of him at that point, "If he does 10% of what

he claims it will still be 8% more than what any other Republican President in our lifetimes

has ever done, and who knows, we might even be pleasantly surprised."

Never in a million years did I ever dream that after only a year in office, he would

be keeping most of the promises he made.

Makes you wonder what the other 44 presidents were doing during their time in office.

For more infomation >> BREAKING News From DC!! TRUMP Says HELL NO!! - Duration: 10:33.

-------------------------------------------

BREAKING NEWS!!! TRUMP JUST DID IT! THEY ARE FIRED!!! - Duration: 13:15.

BREAKING NEWS!!!

TRUMP JUST DID IT!

THEY ARE FIRED!!!

President Donald Trump took a huge step towards draining the DC swamp this week.

With not as much as an explanation nor a thank you, the White House has terminated the employment

of members of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS amid a widespread discontent among

these Barack Hussein Obama loyalists.

The discontent seems to stem from President Trump's approach to the epidemic.

This was the culmination after six members of PACHA resigned in June, so the White House

took liberty on Wednesday by also terminating the remaining 16 members without any explanation

via a letter from FedEx.

Scott Schoettes, a Chicago-based HIV/AIDS activist and senior attorney for Lambda Legal,

was one of the six who resigned in June over Trump's inaction on HIV/AIDS and said on

Twitter the remaining members were fired.Sources with knowledge of PACHA said many of the council

members were fired even though additional time remained on their terms as advisers.

But sources did confirm that terminated members were actually given the option to reapply

after Tuesday, January 2nd, 2018.Keep in mind these are people with the same exact mindset

as the ones who are here in California.

And who gave us this law described in the article below which has already been signed

by our lunatic Governor Democrat Jerry Brown.

Via Freedom Outpost:

It's No Longer a Felony to Knowingly Infect Someone with HIV-AIDS in California

In the land of fruits, nuts and flakes, aka the State of California, the legislative body,

along with Governor Jerry Brown, is proving their worth when it comes to idiocy.

From legislating the State as a "sanctuary" state for illegal alien invaders to criminalizing

long-term care facility workers for using the wrong pronoun when addressing LGBTQrsuvxyz

individuals, the intelligent brain cells of these individuals have truly been killed,

not by an excess of alcohol or drugs, but by an excessive amount of disengagement from

reality.

In the latest round of legislation, the State of California passed a bill, which Governor

Jerry Brown signed on Friday, decriminalizing exposing an individual to HIV without disclosing

the infection – instead of a felony, it is now a misdemeanor.

As reported by the Los Angeles Times, "The measure also applies to those who give blood

without telling the blood bank that they are HIV-positive."

The rationale for this change in legislation, according to State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San

Francisco) and Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), the authors of the bill, is the advancement

of modern medicine that allows individuals with HIV to live longer and the advancement

in medical science that nearly eliminates the possibility of transmission.

The operative word here is "nearly."

These two "lawmakers" did not cite any study that substantiated their claims.

A bit of research produced this published study which appeared in August 2013.

After laboring through the text, checking the sources, and then looking at the acknowledgements,

the conclusion drawn by this writer is this entire study attempted to reconcile the law

with health and social issues.

This is not to imply this study was used by the legislative body of the State of California;

however, several points present in the study are re-stated by the authors of the bill,

which is now law in the land of fruits, nuts, and flakes.

Not being a lawyer, but a simple layperson, it comes to mind this new law makes "murder

by disease" similar to driving while intoxicated without causing injury to another.

Let me explain.

While taking extended professional classes in forensic nursing, one particular class

taught the determination of an individual's death can be very important for law enforcement

when applying the law.

An individual receives a gunshot wound to the abdomen, lives, receives treatment and

goes home.

The individual then expires a few weeks later.

Upon examination, the individual died from a pulmonary embolism (blood clot that developed

somewhere else in the body then traveled to the lungs blocking blood flow).

Further medical examination finds the blood clot initiated in the abdomen from the gunshot

wound.

The cause of death is the pulmonary embolism created by the gunshot wound to the abdomen,

changing the nature of the crime to homicide.

While medical science may have resulted in individuals infected with HIV/AIDS living

longer, the disease itself still causes death.

Moreover, while claims of studies purporting to show the "near" elimination of the

possibility of HIV transmission exists, one should consider that at one time medical science

though it safe to give thalidomide to pregnant women in the late 50s and 60s.

Later, medical science determined thalidomide damaged unborn children.

This 2013 study is premised on the researchers' assumption the laws criminalizing the transmission

of HIV/AIDS is somehow linked to preventing the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

That is not the purpose of the law.

The law is there to punish criminal behavior and exact justice upon those who violate others.

Should not those who knowingly inflict injury and/or death upon others receive justice under

the law whether it is by passing on a deadly disease intentionally, knowingly feeding someone

arsenic, or stabbing someone in the chest purposefully?

The answer should be "yes".

But, not in California.

The Los Angeles Times continued:

"Today California took a major step toward treating HIV as a public health issue, instead

of treating people living with HIV as criminals," Wiener said in a statement.

"HIV should be treated like all other serious infectious diseases, and that's what SB

239 does."

Supporters of the change said the current law requires an intent to transmit HIV to

justify a felony, but others noted cases have been prosecuted where there was no physical

contact, so there was an argument intent was lacking.

Brown declined to comment on his action.

HIV has been the only communicable disease for which exposure is a felony under California

law.

The current law, Wiener argued, may convince people not to be tested for HIV, because without

a test they cannot be charged with a felony if they expose a partner to the infection.

"We are going to end new HIV infections, and we will do so not by threatening people

with state prison time, but rather by getting people to test and providing them access to

care," Wiener said.

Wiener is under the impression that HIV/AIDS has not been treated as a public health issue.

It is and has been treated that way since it was discovered.

No one has treated individuals who have or are living with HIV/AIDS as criminals unless

the individual knowingly and intentionally infected others or attempted to infect others

with the deadly disease.

It's the same as treating an individual who knowingly and intentionally stabbed someone

with a knife as a criminal.

HIV/AIDS is treated like other serious infectious diseases.

Individuals receive care and treatment upon diagnosis.

However, what SB 239 did was downgrade the commission of a felony to a misdemeanor.

A change in the law is not going to "convince" anyone to receive testing for HIV.

Read again what Wiener asserted: "without a test they cannot be charged with a felony

if they expose a partner to the infection."

So, Wiener asserted that people don't get tested so they are not charged with a felony.

In reality, individuals do not seek testing for HIV for various reasons, not because they

are worried about a felony charge.

Many individuals are unaware of an infection with HIV/AIDS until hospitalized for another

problem caused by the disease, such as pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, or another rare bacterial

infection.

Still others are diagnosed when presenting with flu-like symptoms resulting in testing

for a variety of causative processes when the symptoms do not abate.

Wiener is dealing in apples and oranges.

It is not until after someone is diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and that person knowingly and

intentionally infects another or attempts to infect another with the disease that a

crime is committed.

Medical science still cannot explain why some individuals exposed to HIV/AIDS retrovirus

take years to develop the disease while others contract it in less time and still others

never develop the disease at all.

It makes contact with the HIV/AIDS retrovirus a spin of the roulette wheel.

It would be best if individuals would engage in personal responsibility.

However, society has degraded to such a point that some individuals refuse to accept responsibility

for their actions or themselves.

An individual with HIV/AIDS has the personal responsibility to prevent transmission to

others.

However, that does not happen in all cases.

The only other protection innocent individuals have is the law and their personal responsibility

to not engage in risky behaviors.

And, physical contact does not have to happen in order for the transmission of HIV/AIDS

to occur – sharing of needles does not involve personal contact and neither does a blood

or plasma transfusion.

All of this is premised on the definition of "physical contact."

As we know with some individuals, definitions change with the wind.

According to The Los Angeles Times:

Supporters of the bill said women engaging in prostitution are disproportionately targeted

with criminal charges, even in cases where the infection is not transmitted.

Republican lawmakers including Sen. Joel Anderson of Alpine voted against the bill, arguing

it puts the public at risk.

"I'm of the mind that if you purposefully inflict another with a disease that alters

their lifestyle the rest of their life, puts them on a regimen of medications to maintain

any kind of normalcy, it should be a felony," Anderson said during the floor debate.

"It's absolutely crazy to me that we should go light on this."

Anderson said the answer could be to extend tougher penalties to those who expose others

to other infectious diseases.

If a woman has HIV/AIDS, knows she has the infection, and engages in prostitution, the

woman is knowingly and intentionally exposing a "john" to infection with HIV/AIDS, meaning

he could develop the disease and ultimately die.

How is this not deserving of a criminal charge?

Transmission of the infection may not appear for years in some individuals or not at all.

It's a chance.

It's unreasonable to say a crime is not being committed when the infection is not

transmitted via prostitution.

Unless health services follow these "johns" for the rest of their life, how do supporters

of this bill, now law, know the infection has not been transmitted?

And, should that matter when the offender knows there is a possibility of infecting

another individual but engages in the behavior anyway, putting the other individual at risk

of losing their life?

Considering that contraction of this disease ultimately results in death, how can one not

consider knowingly and intentionally engaging in behavior with another that could result

in that person's death not be considered a crime?

How could one not consider an individual with HIV/AIDS knowingly and intentionally donating

blood for transfusion to another a crime?

Wiener and supporters act as though individuals with HIV/AIDS are lacking counseling upon

diagnosis about avoiding infecting others.

Individuals diagnosed with HIV/AIDS receive extensive counseling about transmission and

refraining from activities, such as sexual activity and blood donation, which could result

in the infection of others.

Some follow the counseling recommendations while others do not.

Yes, HIV/AIDS is a health issue as well as a social one.

And, yes, health and social measures are in place to help prevent further spread of the

deadly disease.

Medical science is not exact.

It isn't called the "practice of medicine" because every microbe, virus, mold and bacteria

is understood or there is a remedy for it.

But, we are not talking about the disease itself, we are talking about the evil intent

of humans.

And some individuals with HIV/AIDS are inflicting evil intent upon others.

Until the evil intent of humans is erased, laws are in place to punish evildoers and

exact justice upon them.

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét