Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Trump Just Made American Airlines REALLY Regret Refusing To Enforce His Immigration Laws – OUCH!

Published

on

As the manufactured crisis and faux outrage at the border concerning this whole separation of illegal immigrant children debacle continues to ramp up, several prominent airlines waded into the fray. American Airlines jumped in head first into the illegal immigration debate, demanding the Department of Homeland Security not use their planes in their efforts to rightfully enforce America’s immigration laws and borders.

American Airlines issued the statement on Wednesday stating that it has “requested the federal government to immediately refrain from using American for the purpose of transporting children who have been separated from their families due to the current immigration policy. We have no desire to be associated with separating families, or worse, to profit from it. We have every expectation the government will comply with our request and we thank them for doing so”

United Airlines, Frontier Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Delta Airlines, and Alaska Airlines quickly followed with statements of their own echoing similar demands. Virtue signaling at its finest as these companies pretend to show the world just how very humanitarian they are at the expense of common sense and national security and in defiance of current immigration laws.

CBS News reports – “American Airlines issued the statement amid questions over whether it has transported children split from their loved ones. It acknowledged that it provides travel services to the U.S. government through contracts, but said it has “no knowledge that the federal government has used American to transport children who have been separated from their parents due to the recent immigration policy” and “would be extremely disappointed to learn that is the case.”

Trending: Mark Zuckerberg Just Stole $315,000 From A Triple-Amputee Vet

‘The family separation process that has been widely publicized is not at all aligned with the values of American Airlines — we bring families together, not apart,’ the airline said.

It also said, “the government does not disclose information about the nature of the flights it takes or the passengers who are traveling.”

Alaska Airlines said ‘our values guide us to do the right thing. Alaska Airlines does not support the recent immigration policy that separated immigrant children from their families. To our knowledge, we haven’t transported any immigrant children who have been separated from their families, and today informed the government that we do not want to do so.'”

The statements from the various airlines were prompted by a recent Facebook post from Victoria Cook in which she spoke of her friend Ånika Łodzinski who she claims is a flight attendant. However, Łodzinski’s profile identifies her as a “stay at home mum” so her exact position is unclear. The post claims to detail the events of a redeye flight from Arizona to Miami and describes a group of children aboard the flight “dressed as criminals.” The Facebook post, which circulated online, claims the children arrived in Miami last week, “not knowing if they will ever see their loved ones again that they were separated from in Phoenix.”

Victoria Cook’s Facebook post stated:

“My friend Ånika Łodzinski is a flight attendant. Today her coworker posted the following about a REDEYE flight from Arizona to Miami last night:

“Through all the adversities we faced last evening with computer outages, cancellations and delays, nothing prepared me or my crew for 16 passengers. Sixteen. All dressed in black and gray cheap Walmart sweat suits, quietly boarding the 12:30am flight.

Children! Thirty-two scared eyes looking straight forward dazed. We try to speak,  yet none speak English.
During the beverage service, one of the crew comes to me in tears. They can’t face these children that have been ripped from their families with a smile.

These children were probably ranging in age from 11, to the most adorable little girl maybe 6 years old. At 2:30 in the morning, deplaned here in Miami not knowing if they will ever see their loved ones again that they were separated from in Phoenix.

Those sweet innocent children, dressed as criminals silently deplaned with the same fear as our initial meeting. Except for the little girl. She looked up at me as she turned left for the main cabin door, with tears of fear streaming down her face. I’m not sure the protocol, but I leaned over hoping to offer some hope, she hugged me, which was returned – much to the scowl and comments from the adult escort.

I pray that these 16 scared little souls, as well as all the other thousands, find their way to reuniting with their loved ones.

We are trained yearly in hundreds of possible scenarios as attendants. Something like this isn’t remotely one of those. I had only met one of my crew a few years earlier, the rest never. Thank God, we had one another to lean on to not only get through the flight, but also maybe some glimmer of hope for those babies.”

What have we become? HaShem Yirachem!”

Meanwhile, United Airlines stated they had seen no evidence whatsoever that they had flown children who had been separated from their parents, however, they did not want to participate in such a program either.

United CEO Oscar Munoz said in a statement – “Based on our serious concerns about this policy and how it’s in deep conflict with our company’s values, we have contacted federal officials to inform them that they should not transport immigrant children on United aircraft who have been separated from their parents. Our company’s shared purpose is to connect people and unite the world. This policy and its impact on thousands of children is in deep conflict with that mission and we want no part of it.”

A statement from Frontier read – “Frontier prides itself on being a family airline and we will not knowingly allow our flights to be used to transport migrant children away from their families. At this time, we are not aware if Frontier has been used for this purpose.”

CBS News reported later on Wednesday, Southwest Airlines issued a statement, as did Delta Air Lines.

“While we do not have evidence that tickets purchased for Southwest flights have been utilized to transport detained children, we do not wish to have involvement in the process of separating children from their parents. Therefore, we appeal to anyone making those types of travel decisions not to utilize Southwest Airlines,” it said.

“Delta’s mission is to connect people and we are against anything that runs contrary to that mission,” the company said. “Recent reports of families being separated are disheartening and do not align with Delta’s core values. We applaud the administration’s executive order resolving the issue of separating children from their families at the U.S. border.”

In response, Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tyler Q. Houlton promptly responded via Twitter in a series of tweets with some hard truths.

Houlton began with – “It’s unfortunate that @AmericanAir , @united, and @FlyFrontier no longer want to partner with the brave men and women of DHS to protect the traveling public, combat human trafficking, and to swiftly reunite unaccompanied illegal immigrant children with their families.”

He continued in a second tweet – “Despite being provided facts on this issue, these airlines clearly do not understand our immigration laws and the long-standing devastating loopholes that have caused the crisis at our southern border.”

And he continues to hit back with facts in a third tweet – “Buckling to a false media narrative only exacerbates the problems at our border and puts more children at risk from traffickers. We wish the airlines would instead choose to be part of the solution.”

Continuing with his total annihilation of the woefully transparent attempt at virtue signaling begun by American Airlines, Houlton sums up his factual summation – “For 15 years, @DHSgov has worked diligently with America’s airlines to secure aviation and facilitate the travel by air of millions of Americans and visitors and we will continue to do so.”

The entire situation has been little more than a mass emotional hurricane over an issue that has been going on for years. Long before President Trump, and even before former President Obama with little logic, reason, or historical understanding playing any role in most people’s overly-hysterical reactions. Yet all of a sudden, as if through a coordinated attack, the left suddenly “decided” to care about the children of illegal aliens being with their mothers and fathers and families being whole. How nice of them…

That is despite the fact that many of these unaccompanied minors are actually traveling with human traffickers who are not their mother or their father so much as their pimp daddies ready to exploit these children to the fullest, viewing them as a commodity or chattel, rather than people. Never mind the United States has exactly zero responsibility as in loco parentis to children who are not even American. Mass hysteria and emotional response reign upon the day, despite facts to the contrary.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

WATCH: Alec Baldwin tells donors to ‘Overthrow’ Trump at Democrat Fundraiser

Published

on

...

* By

These Hollywood lunatics don’t seem to get it. The more they make threats towards our President..The more they fire up the American people. So please..keep it up. That giant red tsunami is coming in November.

Baldwin’s career is so in the gutter that the only job he can get is being unfunny on SNL.

Oh..and by the way..‘The Alec Baldwin Show’ Premiere Totally Bombs. Breitbart has more on that story.

From Fox News:

MANCHESTER, N.H. – Less than 24 hours after reprising his Emmy Award-winning parody of President Trump on “Saturday Night Live,” Alec Baldwin took aim at the president again.

“In an orderly and formal way, and lawful way, we need to overthrow the government of the United States under Donald Trump,” Baldwin said Sunday night at a major fundraising dinner for New Hampshire’s Democratic Party.

“I flew here this morning after doing ‘Saturday Night Live’ last night,” the actor, comedian and longtime liberal political activist told a crowd of some 800 party office-holders, candidates, officials and activists, drawing loud applause.

Baldwin said his role as Trump on “SNL” wasn’t supposed to last as long as it has.

“‘Just three shows,’ he said,” Baldwin recalled “SNL” producer Lorne Michaels saying as he tried to convince the actor to portray then-candidate Trump. “‘Till the election,’ he said. ‘Then he’ll be gone,’ he said. ‘Three shows. It will be fun,’ he said.”

But Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election resulted in an extension of Baldwin’s run on the late-night comedy show – including this weekend’s opening sketch about Trump’s recent meeting with rapper Kanye West.

Turning serious, Baldwin then rallied the crowd to vote in next month’s midterm elections, saying “this election and the one that follows in 2020 will be the most consequential elections since the election of FDR.”

He added: “It is time to overthrow the government of Donald Trump — not in a violent way or unlawful way — but it must be overthrown nonetheless.”

Baldwin ended his nearly 20-minute-long speech by putting his own spin on the president’s famous campaign slogan.

“Let’s make America great again by making Donald Trump a casino operator again,” he said.

“Let’s make America great again by making Donald Trump a casino operator again.” — Alec Baldwin

Some New Hampshire Republicans criticized the state’s Democrats for choosing Baldwin as their keynote speaker. They pointed to Baldwin’s past problematic behavior, including making abusive comments to and about women, and making homophobic remarks.

Taking questions from reporters after his speech, Baldwin didn’t directly answer.

“Most of the time people are trying to tar me with a brush about defending Woody Allen,” he said, referring to the filmmaker who has long faced allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied.

Baldwin also told reporters that he’s “always dreamed” of running for office himself, but explained it’s not in the cards for him at this time.

“My wife told me she’d divorce me if I ran for office,” he joked.

He also downplayed suggestions that his Democratic activism would limit the success of “The Alec Baldwin Show,” his new venture on ABC.

Baldwin has long been a backer of Democratic candidates and causes. He famously declared that he’d move to Canada if then-Texas Gov. George Bush won the 2000 presidential election. Though Bush did win, Baldwin didn’t move.

More recently, Baldwin campaigned last year for Democrat Ralph Northam in Virginia’s hotly contested gubernatorial election. And last November he headlined the Iowa Democrats’ major fall fundraising gala.

New Hampshire is the state that holds the first presidential primary every four years — and Sunday night’s dinner over the years has been a key stop for potential Democratic White House hopefuls.

Baldwin previously made headlines in June when he told radio host Howard Stern that if he made a 2020 presidential bid, he would beat Trump.

“If I ran, I would win,” Baldwin said. “I would absolutely win.”

Baldwin said Sunday that if he had decided to run, “I thought it would be such a pleasure to go around the country and try to remind people that, Let’s get back to a time of common sense.”

But Baldwin said he’s not very optimistic when he considers the potential field of Democrats vying for the party’s presidential nomination in 2020.

“I’m hoping that someone that isn’t necessarily on the horizon right now would materialize,” Baldwin said, “because I don’t think anybody that’s a frontrunner now of the top six, seven, eight names that I’ve seen, I don’t think any of them is going to have an easy time of it.”

He also took another shot at the president.

“Every day I wake up, I still am horrified,” he said. “I feel like I’m in some dream that Trump is president of the United States. I almost can’t even say it.”

Continue Reading

BREAKING: Federal Judge Dismisses Stormy Daniels’ Defamation Lawsuit Against Donald Trump

Published

on

...

* By

This is breaking right now. A federal judge has dismissed Stormy Daniels’ defamation lawsuit against Trump, and said that Trump is entitled to legal fees from her.

Trump has emerged victorious!

The Washington Times is reporting:

“A judge has dismissed the defamation lawsuit brought against President Trump by a porn star who claims to have had an affair with him.

According to a Fox News report, the judge also ordered the porn actress, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford and who has been represented by attorney Michael Avenatti, to pay Mr. Trump’s legal fees — customarily, a rebuke of a lawsuit ever being brought.

“No amount of spin or commentary by Stormy Daniels or her lawyer Mr. Avenatti can truthfully characterize today’s ruling in any way other than total victory for President Trump and total defeat for Stormy Daniels,” said Trump attorney Charles Harder in a statement issued by the White House.”

Stormy’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti responded:

“Re Judge’s limited ruling: Daniels’ other claims against Trump and Cohen proceed unaffected. Trump’s contrary claims are as deceptive as his claims about the inauguration attendance.

We will appeal the dismissal of the defamation cause of action and are confident in a reversal.”

The Hollywood Reporter also reported:

“A judge sees Trump’s tweet about a “con job” as “rhetorical hyperbole” and orders the porn queen to pay his attorneys fees.

First Amendment.

Stormy Daniels was the plaintiff in this one.

She not only sued Trump to invalidate a hush agreement over an alleged affair, but in the midst of the controversy, her attorney Michael Avenatti sheparded a claim over one of Trump’s tweets.

Last April, Avenatti released a sketch of a man who allegedly threatened Daniels into remaining silent back in 2011. Trump tweeted, “A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!”

In response, Trump moved to have the complaint stricken under Texas’ anti-SLAPP statute, which provides special protection against frivolous litigation usurping one’s free speech activity. Charles Harder, his attorney, argued that the statement at issue represented protected opinion and that Daniels hadn’t sufficiently alleged damages nor stated facts to show Trump acted with actual malice.

U.S. District Court Judge S. James Otero concludes that Daniels has failed to establish a prima facie case for defamation.

“The Court agrees with Mr. Trump’s argument because the tweet in question constitutes ‘rhetorical hyperbole’ normally associated with politics and public discourse in the United States,” states the opinion. “The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement.”

The judge continues by defining “rhetorical hyperbole” as “extravagant exaggeration employed for rhetorical effect” and characterizes Trump’s tweet as displaying “an incredulous tone, suggesting that the content of his tweet was not meant to be understood as a literal statement about Plaintiff. Instead, Mr. Trump sought to use language to challenge Plaintiff’s account of her affair and the threat that she purportedly received in 2011. As the United States Supreme Court has held, a published statement that is ‘pointed, exaggerated, and heavily laden with emotional rhetoric and moral outrage’ cannot constitute a defamatory statement.”

Otero adds that Trump made a “one-off rhetorical comment, not a sustained attack on the veracity of Plaintiff’s claims” and that this distinguishes this suit from other cases where courts have seen enough to deem defamation from a public statement. The judge adds that Daniels’ assumption that Trump knew of the 2011 threat doesn’t establish facts adding up that he did, in fact, know about the threat. The judge ends up agreeing with Trump that Daniels hasn’t shown actual malice nor adequately pled damages.

Daniels won’t get the opportunity to amend her complaint to cure deficiencies, and what’s more under Texas’ anti-SLAPP statute, she now has to pay Trump’s legal costs — perhaps a rubbing of salt in the wound to those who contributed to Daniels’ legal defense fund. However, she does have a right to pursue an appeal.

UPDATE: In a tweet following publication of this story, Avenatti attempted to frame the ruling as “limited” and said it wouldn’t affect her other claims looking to invalidate the contract. (There, Trump offered her a covenant not to sue and is arguing a court no longer has jurisdiction to entertain that controversy.) Avenatti added, “We will appeal the dismissal of the defamation cause of action and are confident in a reversal.””

A little history on the lawsuit:

A U.S. federal judge in Los Angeles on Monday appeared poised to throw out adult film actress Stormy Daniel’s defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump on free-speech grounds, Reuters reported.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, sued the president in April over a tweet in which he denied her claims of being subtly threatened by a man in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011.”

“Daniels said the man was threatening her for going public about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied the affair took place, and cast doubt on her story of being threatened.

“A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!” Trump tweeted.

Daniels’ attorney Michael Avenatti said the tweet damaged her credibility by portraying her as a liar. Trump’s attorneys have asked a federal judge in Los Angeles to dismiss the suit.

“The question is whether the tweet by the president is protected communication or political hyperbole and non-defamatory on its face,” U.S. District Judge James Otero said during Monday’s hearing.

“He’s a public official, he’s president of the United States, so it doesn’t get much higher than that,” Otero said. “It’s free speech by a public official on a matter of public concern.”

He continued, “(Allowing) the complaint to go forward and to have one consider this to be defamatory in the context it was made would have a chilling effect,” Otero said during the hearing.

Avenatti told reporters he expects a ruling within days and plans to appeal if the suit is dismissed.

Otero scheduled a hearing Dec. 3 to discuss Trump’s efforts to dismiss another lawsuit by Daniels over a hush-money agreement related to their alleged affair.

Daniels sued Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen, who negotiated the deal, so she could speak publicly about the alleged affair without fear of reprisal. Cohen had threatened to sue her for $20 million.”

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend