Connect with us


Melania’s Major Monday Announcement Just Leaked And She’s Already Being Attacked Over It

Did Michelle orchestrate this?



And once again the Liberal Mainstream Media has taken to attacking our First Lady Melania Trump for doing the right thing.

We are now getting multiple reports that Melania Trump will be announcing her eagerly awaited formal platform tomorrow during a Rose Garden event at the White House. But of course, instead of being happy for the occasion the media has decided to take our first lady to task over the fact that she has taken nearly 16 months into her tenure as the first lady to make this announcement.

While Melania since September of last year said she plans to focus her efforts on the well-being of children, she had yet to mention exactly what that means. Although she has said on multiple occasions that she would not land on only one specific issue she did hint at the fact that she would take a more “multi-pronged” approach which would encompass multiple aspects of child well being.

Trending: BIG Billboard Goes Up On Busy California Highway Overnight With 4 Words That Makes Maxine Waters PANIC

This all makes perfect sense since in the past the First Lady has touched on everything from helping children combat negativity, to dealing with the effects of opioid abuse on newborns and putting a stop to bullying on social media platforms. As recently as last month, the first lady hosted a small group of 12 kids at the White House for a listening session about the emotional issues they face in their lives, both at home and in school. And in March, she convened a group of leaders from various tech companies, some of which included Twitter, Facebook, Google, and Snaphat, to discuss children and internet safety. An aspect that included cyberbullying and positivity in social media.

During that meeting, the first lady indirectly addressed the elephant in the room, which is all the altercations the President has been involved in on Twitter in the past few years, to which she said “I am well aware that people are skeptical of me discussing this topic, I have been criticized for my commitment to tackling this issue and I know that will continue. But it will not stop me from doing what I know is right.”

Here are some of the cause former First Ladies forwarded via Biography:

Dolley Madison (1809-1817) Legend has it that President Zachary Taylor referred to Dolley Madison as “first lady” at her funeral, coining the term we still use today. Before her husband was elected president, Dolley served as a hostess for President Thomas Jefferson, a widower. As first lady, Madison was known for her flamboyant parties and her strong personality. She was also a well-known supporter of many charities, including the Washington City Orphan Asylum, which was founded in 1815 to help poor children without families. Madison’s interest in caring for orphans helped inspire a long line of first ladies who became dedicated to helping the nation’s youth.

Mary Todd Lincoln (1861-1865) Mary Todd Lincoln served as first lady during one of the most difficult eras in U.S. history. During the Civil War, she became active in efforts to provide care and services to Union soldiers, and she visited troops with President Abraham Lincoln. She marshaled resources for the Contraband Relief Association, an organization which helped recently freed former slaves and injured soldiers. These activities have been overshadowed by Mary Todd’s erratic behavior throughout her term as first lady and for her immense grief after Lincoln’s assassination in 1865.

Lucy Webb Hayes (1877-1881) As the first of the first ladies to graduate from college, Lucy Hayes was a national role model for women’s education. Her husband, President Rutherford B. Hayes, made the controversial decision to ban alcoholic beverages from White House functions, a choice Lucy stood firmly behind. Later nicknamed “Lemonade Lucy,” she was an advocate of temperance but did not want to be officially connected with the cause. Instead, she visited many schools including African-American Hampton College and the National Deaf Mute College in Washington, D.C., to show her commitment to education for all. Hayes also believed in caring for the nation’s Civil War veterans. She helped several of them keep positions on the White House staff, and she frequently visited injured vets at the National Soldier’s Home in Maryland.

Lou Henry Hoover (1929-1933) A worldwide traveler who studied geology at Stanford University where she met her future husband, Herbert Hoover, Lou Henry Hoover loved the outdoors from a young age. She drove her own car from California to Washington, D.C. in 1921, and she camped by pack mule through the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Hoover was passionate about athletics and was a founder of the National Amateur Athletic Foundation. She was also an active leader in the Girl Scouts of America for many years, and transitioned to honorary president after she became first lady. She challenged segregationists by inviting African Americans to visit the White House and advocating for equal rights. Hoover encouraged all women to become active, enjoy nature and pursue an education.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1933-1945) Eleanor Roosevelt was one of the most popular first ladies of the 20th century. She was a humanitarian who championed equal rights for all, and she transformed the role of the first lady during the challenging Great Depression era. A pioneer in her time, Roosevelt formed her own staff, held press conferences, and traveled throughout the nation and the world. She was a powerful opponent of segregation and lynching, and she fought actively for equality for African Americans. After her term as first lady, Roosevelt helped create the United Nations Charter on Human Rights, remaining an important figure on the world stage.

Claudia “Lady Bird” Johnson (1963-1969) After her husband, President Lyndon Johnson, announced his Great Society plan to reinvigorate America, Lady Bird Johnson launched a campaign to inspire communities to clean up neighborhoods and highways. “Beautification” was critical, she argued, and people would become more active participants in their communities if the landscapes around them were clean and vibrant. Her advocacy helped lead to the Highway Beautification Act of 1965, which set up limitations on outdoor advertising and provided funding for cleaning up highways.

Betty Ford (1974-1977) Betty Ford is probably best known for her role in helping reduce the stigma of alcoholism after admitting her struggle with the disease and opening the Betty Ford Clinic. But she was also one of the nation’s most active and outspoken first ladies. In the wake of Watergate, she vowed the White House would try not to keep secrets and she would do her part in ensuring that openness. Shortly after her husband Gerald Ford was elected, she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Ford spoke publicly about her mastectomy, inspiring other women to learn about the disease. She was a vocal believer in equal opportunity for women, and she was devoted to the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Despite criticism from conservatives, some of whom called her “No Lady,” her approval ratings remained high throughout her term as first lady.

Nancy Reagan (1981-1989) When Ronald Reagan was elected president, the nation seemed to be responding against the cultural experimentation of previous decades. As first lady, Nancy Reagan’s name became almost synonymous with her Just Say No campaign against drug abuse. With a national emphasis on small government, Nancy Reagan urged communities to solve social problems by spreading the word about the dangers of drug abuse and premarital sex. Known for her crisp style and candid demeanor, she spoke nationally about these issues and enlisted celebrities to help her in the cause. Though this approach was later criticized for being too simplistic, at the time First Lady Reagan captured the nation’s imagination with her advocacy.

Hillary Rodham Clinton (1993-2001) Today Hillary Clinton is known as a world leader through her role as Secretary of State. As first lady, she played many different roles. Clinton poured her energies into devising a better health care system. Though the plan never took hold, she helped raise the visibility of health care issues nationwide. Clinton was also a strong supporter of historic preservation and education as honorary chair of the Save America’s Treasures committee. This program provided resources and funds to help communities preserve valuable documents, sites and structures. Clinton also helped announce the conservation of the Star-Spangled Banner at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History. This historic flag is currently on display at the museum in Washington, D.C.

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’



Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.

From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.

His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”

But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund.  In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.

Fox News reports:

“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.

The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”

It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’

Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.

The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”

Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.

The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”

The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The group advocates that –

  1. That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
  2. All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
  3. Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.

Fox News continued:

Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.

“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.

“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.

Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.

Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.

Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?

Continue Reading


Trump Issued Major Warning: ‘We Will Look Into Discriminatory and Illegal Practice’ – It’s On!

Huge problems and everyone needs to know!



President Donald Trump voiced his concerns over “discriminatory and illegal practice” when he posted about the alleged controversy going on with Republicans being censored on Twitter. The tactic is sometimes referred to as “shadow banning” and it seems to be a strategy that social media platforms use to limit the visibility of some people. For example, ever wonder why someone who is genuinely popular might have tons of followers but their posts don’t seem to get many responses? It could be one of several reasons. Either they have fake followers, the post is no good, or they are being censored. In many cases, it’s a form of censorship that’s the obvious result. When a social media user goes from getting a lot of replies and views on their posts, then all of a sudden there’s very little replies and it seems like no one has seen the post – then they were hit with that form of censorship or suppression.

Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been called out for suppressing the content of certain Republican voices or those who support President Donald Trump. Well-known stars like Diamond and Silk have made it very public that they feel targeted for the views and opinions on their pages. That’s just the tip of the iceberg because the problem spans from targeting well-known mainstream people all the way down to the independent publishers. Censorship like this is affecting people’s careers and causing an unbalanced platform in which people with certain views are being limited. It might not be listed as a “ban” but it’s certainly limiting the viewership of certain people. The content that would once appear in people’s feed or timeline now requires a fine-tooth comb to find and it seems like people are realizing this more often and being upset with it.

Trump spoke about it on Twitter and Vice News completed a report on it.

Vice News reported: “Twitter is limiting the visibility of prominent Republicans in search results — a technique known as “shadow banning” — in what it says is a side effect of its attempts to improve the quality of discourse on the platform.

The Republican Party chair Ronna McDaniel, several conservative Republican congressmen, and Donald Trump Jr.’s spokesman no longer appear in the auto-populated drop-down search box on Twitter, VICE News has learned. It’s a shift that diminishes their reach on the platform — and it’s the same one being deployed against prominent racists to limit their visibility. The profiles continue to appear when conducting a full search, but not in the more convenient and visible drop-down bar. (The accounts appear to also populate if you already follow the person.)

Democrats are not being “shadow banned” in the same way, according to a VICE News review. McDaniel’s counterpart, Democratic Party chair Tom Perez, and liberal members of Congress — including Reps. Maxine Waters, Joe Kennedy III, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan — all continue to appear in drop-down search results. Not a single member of the 78-person Progressive Caucus faces the same situation in Twitter’s search.

“The notion that social media companies would suppress certain political points of view should concern every American,” McDaniel told VICE News in a statement. “Twitter owes the public answers to what’s really going on.”

Presented with screenshots of the searches, a Twitter spokesperson told VICE News: “We are aware that some accounts are not automatically populating in our search box and shipping a change to address this.” Asked why only conservative Republicans appear to be affected and not liberal Democrats, the spokesperson wrote: “I’d emphasize that our technology is based on account *behavior* not the content of Tweets.”

Twitter directed VICE News to a May 15 blog post that explained the company’s new approach to combating “troll-like behaviors.” After making changes to its platform, the company said that “[t]he result is that people contributing to the healthy conversation will be more visible in conversations and search.”

Twitter did not respond to a follow-up question.

Twitter’s troll hunt, however, has ensnared some of the most prominent Republicans in the country. Type in the names of McDaniel, conservative members of Congress like Reps. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz, and Trump Jr.’s spokesman Andrew Surabian, for example, and Twitter’s drop-down search bar does not show their profiles. The search menu also does not display the verified profile of Rep. Devin Nunes of California, only his unverified one that he seldom uses to post.

That limits their visibility and the ease of finding their profiles compared to their liberal counterparts.

UPDATE: July 26, 10:00 AM: Twitter appears to have adjusted its platform overnight to no longer limit the visibility of some prominent Republicans in its search results.”

At what point do social media platforms give the control back to the people? Users should not have to worry about their views being censored by the machine.

Censoring any content that is not illegal should not be tolerated by the users.

Continue Reading

Like Us on Facebook



No trending posts found at this time.