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

Connect with us

Funny

Trump Just Enraged Hillary With Perfect ‘Gift’ He Sent Her After Her Addiction Secret Gets Out

We love this & so will you! Trump got her Good! LOL!

Published

on

Hillary Clinton is back in the spotlight as she gearing up to push her memoir What Happened. The book will chronicle the 2016 presidential candidate loser about her experience during the election and how she handled the loss. In the book, Hillary Clinton hints at a possible addiction to alcohol in an obvious attempt to garner sympathy from her rabid supporters and blame President Trump for her “pain”. Well, if Hillary Clinton was ticked off by her epic loss last November what Trump just tweeted should have her even angrier.

Hillary Clinton is like a gnat that just won’t go away no matter how many times you swat at it. Just when you think that she would slink off back to the hole she came from, she re-emerges again. Clinton has just finished writing her memoir detailing her loss last November to Donald Trump. It is apparent this memoir is supposed to help soften her image in order to make her more sympathetic, but it has already become an internet joke. The title that Hillary Clinton chose was clearly not thought out and begs for someone to make fun of it.

And, guess what? Someone has and it is hysterical, but what makes it even funnier is that President Trump just re-tweeted it. 

Within hours of returning to Washington D.C. after visiting the flood-ravaged cities in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, President Trump took the time to take a swipe at Hillary Clinton by sharing this meme.

As of late Saturday night, the meme has been shared more than 3,500 times and liked over 10,000 times. Of course, Trump got right back to business and tweeted topics on a more serious note, but you know the left is already raging mad, right?

Here is more from Daily Mail:

Clinton is expected to launch a nationwide book tour to promote the memoir.

Her campaign against Trump and her shocking election loss are written about extensively in the book.

In one chapter of the book, Clinton explained what was going on in her head when Trump lurked behind her during a presidential debate in St. Louis, Missouri.

‘It was incredibly uncomfortable he was literally breathing down my neck,’ Clinton said.

‘My skin crawled,’ she recalled.

Hillary noted that the October 2016 debate came just days after the release of a shock audio tape in which Trump was heard bragging about groping women.

Clinton steamed: ‘What would you do? Do you stay calm, keep smiling and carry on as if he weren’t repeatedly invading your space? Or do you turn, look him in the eye and say loudly and clearly: “Back up, you creep, get away from me”.’

Another excerpt tells how she almost fell victim to bad branding – and fresh embarrassment – as she created a new political organization in the aftermath of her election loss.

Clinton also opened up about her ‘dark days’ with Bill in a new memoir but doesn’t mention Monica Lewinsky by name as the once-presidential hopeful admits that she stayed with the former president because she loved him.

Clinton, herself, will be speaking out, not just in the pages of the book, but on a 15-city book tour being called ‘Hillary Clinton Live.’

Tickets at some of the Canadian dates are going for $1,200 American dollars each.

While her first stop, in Washington, D.C. – at a venue that’s one block from President Trump’s hotel and two blocks from the White House – tickets sold out within minutes, with some prize seats now being sold on StubHub also for $1,200.

This book is nothing but fluff and is 100 percent all about rebranding Clinton’s image into something more likable. Hillary Clinton lost the election not just because her policies would have sunk America, but she also came off as insincere. Clinton reeks of the old tired establishment of money and elitism and the American people were not buying this time. Clinton was caught in numerous lies, scandals, and whatever else you can throw at her. Women didn’t like her because she claims she is for women’s rights but acts like a victim that can’t leave her philandering husband. Men don’t like her because she puts them down with her incessant screaming of patriarchy and white privilege. And, the black community threw her out since her policies would do nothing to help them. It was the time for fresh blood to be injected into the shark tank of D.C. and the only one that was big do it was Donald Trump himself.

Trump is a brash New Yorker who has a thick skin that can handle the constant attacks from the petty left and dish it right back out. This jab at Clinton was just his way of playing the game right back with them, and they hate it. These leftists are used to being able to call the shots, but not this time and it is glorious.

SHARE IF YOU LOVE PRESIDENT TRUMP’S JAB AT HILLARY CLINTON! 

H/T [ Daily Mail ]

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Liberty Belle is a libertarian and provocateur who believes in freedom and liberty for all Americans. As a passionate journalist, she works relentlessly to uncover the corruption happening in Washington, while exposing politicians and individuals who wish to do us harm. Liberty’s legendary ability to piss off liberals and get to the bottom of corruption makes her an extremely dangerous foe to all the easily-triggered snowflakes out there.

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.

Funny

TRUMP GOT LAST LAUGH!!! Judge Who Struck Down His Muslim Travel Ban Just BUSTED!!!!

HE’S NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS!

Published

on

Isn’t it grand seeing the Swamp drain itself?

This new movement that is sweeping the nation taking aim at holding powerful men accountable for sexual harassment, misconduct, and assault has now named a prominent Liberal jurist as a serial harasser. It’s now being reported that six former far left liberal Ninth Circuit clerks and externs are now saying that the liberal Judge Alex Kozinski subjected them to sexual comments and unwelcome situations.

One of the former Kozinski clerks, Heidi Bond, who was his clerk between 2006 and 2007 has gone on the record with allegations that on multiple occasions the judge summoned her alone to his chambers in order to show her pornography which was unrelated to any case before the judge. He then asked if the images turned her on. Bond recounts at least three different instances of being shown porn by her boss and says the experiences were shocking. She has also written an extremely disturbing first-person account of her experiences of clerking for Judge Kozinski where she also details Kozinski isolating her from her co-clerks to discuss his sexual history

The Washington Post Reports:

Prominent appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski accused of sexual misconduct

Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, pictured in 2003. Six women — all former clerks or externs in the 9th Circuit — alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments.

A former clerk for Judge Alex Kozinski said the powerful and well-known jurist, who for many years served as chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, called her into his office several times and pulled up pornography on his computer, asking if she thought it was photoshopped or if it aroused her sexually.

Heidi Bond, who clerked for Kozinski from 2006 to 2007, said the porn was not related to any case. One set of images she remembered was of college-age students at a party where “some people were inexplicably naked while everyone else was clothed.” Another was a sort of digital flip book that allowed users to mix and match heads, torsos and legs to create an image of a naked woman.

Bond is one of six women — all former clerks or more junior staffers known as externs in the 9th Circuit — who alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67 and still serving as a judge on the court, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments. She is one of two former clerks who said Kozinski asked them to view porn in his chambers.

In a statement, Kozinski said: “I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”

Kozinski provided the statement after The Post called and emailed a spokesman with a detailed list of the allegations this story would include. After the story posted online, the judge told the Los Angeles Times, “I don’t remember ever showing pornographic material to my clerks” and, “If this is all they are able to dredge up after 35 years, I am not too worried.”

After the Harvey Weinstein scandal broke, more women and men have come forward against a growing list of well-known male figures. (Erin Patrick O’Connor, Nicki DeMarco/The Washington Post)
When Bond was clerking, Kozinski was on the precipice of becoming chief judge for the 9th Circuit — the largest federal appeals court circuit in the country, handling cases for a large swath of the western United States as well as Hawaii and Alaska. The other people who alleged that Kozinski behaved inappropriately toward them worked in the 9th Circuit both before and after her, up to 2012.

Bond said she knew that she was to come to the judge’s office when her phone beeped twice. She said she tried to answer Kozinski’s inquiries as succinctly and matter-of-factly as possible. Bond was then in her early 30s and is now 41.

If the question was about photoshopping, Bond said, she would focus on minor details of the images. If Kozinski asked whether the images aroused her, Bond said, she would respond: “No, this kind of stuff doesn’t do anything for me. Is there anything else you need?” She said she recalled three instances when the judge showed her porn in his office.

“I was in a state of emotional shock, and what I really wanted to do was be as small as possible and make as few movements as possible and to say as little as possible to get out,” Bond said.

Bond, who went on to clerk for the Supreme Court and now works as a romance novelist writing under the name Courtney Milan, and another clerk, Emily Murphy, who worked for a different judge on the 9th Circuit and is now a law professor, described their experiences in on-the-record interviews. The other four women spoke on the condition that their names and some other identifying information not be published, out of fear that they might face retaliation from Kozinski or others.

Kozinski, who served as the chief judge on the 9th Circuit from 2007 to 2014, remains a prominent judge, well known in the legal community for his colorful written opinions. His clerks often win prestigious clerkships at the Supreme Court.

Murphy, who clerked for Judge Richard Paez, said Kozinski approached her when she was talking with a group of other clerks at a reception at a San Francisco hotel in September 2012. The group had been discussing training regimens, and Murphy said she commented that the gym in the 9th Circuit courthouse was nice because other people were seldom there.

Kozinski, according to Murphy and two others present at the time who spoke to The Post, said that if that were the case, she should work out naked. Those in the group tried to change the subject, Murphy and the others present said, but the judge kept steering the conversation toward the idea of Murphy exercising without clothes.

“It wasn’t just clear that he was imagining me naked, he was trying to invite other people — my professional colleagues — to do so as well,” Murphy said. “That was what was humiliating about it.”

Murphy, who was 30 at the time of the incident and is now 36, provided The Post with a 2012 email showing that she told a mentor about what had happened at the time. Two of Murphy’s friends who were present at the time of the encounter, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also confirmed her account.

Bond, similarly, provided emails showing that she told a friend what had happened at least as of 2008. The friend, fellow romance novelist Eve Ortega, provided the same emails. She confirmed that Bond had told her years ago that Kozinski made inappropriate sexual comments and showed her porn.

Kozinski has previously been embroiled in controversies related to sexually explicit material.

In 2008, the Los Angeles Times revealed that the judge had maintained an email list that he used to distribute crude jokes, some of them sexually themed, and that he had a publicly accessible website that contained pornographic images.

A judicial investigation ultimately found that Kozinski did not intend to allow the public to see the material and that, instead, the judge and his son were careless in protecting a private server from being accessible on the Internet.

Anthony J. Scirica, then the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, wrote at the time that Kozinski’s “conduct exhibiting poor judgment with respect to this material created a public controversy that can reasonably be seen as having resulted in embarrassment to the institution of the federal judiciary.”

According to Scirica’s report, Kozinski said that he used the server to keep a variety of items he received by email, including TV commercials, video clips, cartoons, games and song parodies.

Of the sexually explicit files, Kozinski testified: “Some I thought were odd or funny or bizarre, but mostly I don’t have a very good reason for holding onto them. I certainly did not send them to anyone else or ask anyone to send me similar files,” according to Scirica’s report.

Kozinski also testified that he “does not visit and has no interest in pornographic websites,” according to Scirica’s report. He separately apologized for any embarrassment he had caused in maintaining the email list and said he had stopped sending the jokes.

Bond said the images Kozinski showed her seemed to come from his private server, because he pulled them from a site containing the term “kozinski.com.”

The other Kozinski clerk who said the judge showed her porn declined to provide specifics out of fear that Kozinski would be able to identify her. Bond said the judge also showed her a chart he claimed he and his friends from college had made to list the women with whom they had had sexual relations.

Bond said that either Kozinski or his administrative assistant reached out to her around the time of the news reporting on his private server, asking whether she would be willing to defend his character. She wrote to Ortega about the inquiry in 2008, according to emails the women shared with The Post, and Ortega responded that it “sounds like a very bad idea to me.”

“I know he brought you into his office to show you porn, I know he made sexual innuendos to you. I know this because you told me so in DC, and you even used the words sexual harassment,” Ortega wrote. “You said you would warn off other women thinking of clerking for him. And if there’s a woman out there he harassed worse than you, do you really want to be pitted against her? Because that’s what it would be. I’m worried that this is what he’s asking you to do — to be the female, intelligent face of his defense and make whoever it is accusing him look like a stupid slut, and then he hopefully never has to actually address those allegations.”

Kozinski was born in Romania to Holocaust survivors in 1950, and the family fled the communist state when he was a boy. Decades ago, long before he was a federal judge, he appeared on the television show “The Dating Game,” planting a kiss on a surprised young woman who selected him for a date. He is married and has three sons.

Kozinski was appointed to the 9th Circuit by President Ronald Reagan in 1985. He is an atypical federal appeals court judge — authoring irreverent opinions and not shying, as many of his colleagues do, from media appearances.

He styled one opinion in 2012 not as a traditional concurrence or dissent, but instead as “disagreeing with everyone.” He famously wrote during a trademark dispute between the toy company Mattel and the record company that produced the 1997 song “Barbie Girl”: “The parties are advised to chill.”

In more recent years, Kozinski wrote that using lethal injections to impose the death penalty was “a misguided effort to mask the brutality of executions by making them look serene and beautiful — like something any one of us might experience in our final moments,” and he told the Los Angeles Times, “I personally think we should go to the guillotine, but shooting is probably the right way to go.”

The Post reached out to dozens of Kozinski’s former clerks and externs for this report. Many of those who returned messages said that they experienced no harassment of any kind and that their experience — which entailed grueling work into the wee hours of the morning every day — was a rewarding one. They noted Kozinski’s wry sense of humor.

Those who talked to The Post about negative experiences said that they thought his behavior went beyond bad jokes or that they felt personally targeted.

A former Kozinski extern said the judge once made a comment about her hair and looked her body up and down “in a less-than-professional way.” That extern said Kozinski also once talked with her about a female judge stripping.

“I didn’t want to be alone with him,” the former extern said.

A different former extern said she, similarly, had at least two conversations “that had sexual overtones directed at me,” and she told friends about them at the time. One of the friends, also a former extern, confirmed that the woman had told her about the remarks — though both declined to detail them for fear of being identified.

One former 9th Circuit clerk said she was at a dinner in Seattle, seated next to Kozinski, when he “kind of picked the tablecloth up so that he could see the bottom half of me, my legs.” She said Kozinski remarked, “I wanted to see if you were wearing pants because it’s cold out.” The former clerk said she was wearing pants at the time. The incident, she said, occurred in late 2011 or early 2012.

“It made me uncomfortable, and it didn’t seem appropriate,” said the former clerk, who worked for a different judge.

All of the women The Post interviewed said they did not file formal complaints at the time. Bond said Kozinski had so vigorously stressed the idea of judicial confidentiality — that what is discussed in chambers cannot be revealed to the outside — that she questioned even years later whether she could share what had happened with a therapist, even though she had already talked with Ortega about it.

Bond said Kozinski worked his clerks so hard that “there was no thought that I could see him as anything other than in complete control,” and she feared that not leaving with a good recommendation from him might jeopardize her career.

“I did think about walking away and concluded I just didn’t know what I would do if I did,” Bond said.

The other former Kozinski clerk who said the judge asked her to watch porn in his chambers said she both feared what he might do and knew that a complaint was unlikely to strip him of his influence.

“I was afraid,” the former clerk said. “I mean, who would I tell? Who do you even tell? Who do you go to?”

Murphy said she discussed what had happened with the judge for whom she was clerking, and he was supportive of her filing a complaint. But because the complaint would first go to Kozinski himself, then be referred elsewhere, Murphy said she chose not to proceed. The judge, Paez, declined to comment for this report through a representative.

As a judge, Kozinski has addressed the topic of sexual harassment in important ways. In 1991, he joined an opinion that decided such cases should be judged from the perspective of the victims, using what was then called the “reasonable woman” standard. The opinion, written by then-Judge Robert R. Beezer, noted pointedly, “Conduct that many men consider unobjectionable may offend many women.”

Beezer died in 2012. Kozinski himself wrote about sexual harassment in 1992, commenting on how legal remedies could come with unforeseen consequences.

He wrote that men “must be aware of the boundaries of propriety and learn to stay well within them,” while women “must be vigilant of their rights, but must also have some forgiveness for human foibles: misplaced humor, misunderstanding, or just plain stupidity.”

He acknowledged, though, that the problem of harassment was a real one.

“But who knew, who understood, that it was quite so pervasive,” Kozinski wrote. “Apparently most women did, while most men did not. It was the best-kept secret of modern times.”

Now that’s sick, but then again, what else can we expect from a judge from the infamous 9th circuit court who is known for its radical far left agenda leanings. No wonder the 9th circuit wants Muslims Refugees in this nation, they act the same way their judges act.

It seems that for every right-wing leaning man who is accused of sexual misconduct there are at least 100 liberal men accused of the same, or worse. This whole time all these institutions where being run as brothels and not one person in the outside world even knew. They tell us how to think and what is and isn’t moral while at the same time their stench of immorality is off the charts.

Please share if you agree this Judge needs to be in prison….

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Crime

Big Booty Girl Mouths Off To WRONG Lady Cop, Learns What Respect Tastes Like! (VIDEO)

THIS JUST MADE MY DAY!!!

Published

on

A typical Philadelphia neighborhood became a war zone for the city’s hoodrats when entitled ghetto trash filled the street and started wrecking things. Between greasy weaves being ripped off and illiterate trash-talking, local cops showed up to stop these thugs when one particularly foul girl ran her mouth at the wrong female cop who filled her face with something else.

With nothing to do and seemingly no real reason, a mob of other people’s undisciplined kids filled the road to riot and wreak massive havoc. A shocked witness to the scene began recording, showing teens with too much time on their hands beating on each other and other people’s property. Cops tried to control them the best they could by hauling thugs off one-by-one but were outnumbered until one badass lady cop went beast mode on a mouthy brat, sending a clear message to the others that they messed with the wrong cop.

With multiple fights happening at once and one girl’s big butt on full display in the middle of it as she tried to claw another girl’s eyes out, cops tried to peel people off of each other. Assuming that she was free from discipline since she could just cry racism, one girl turned her angry attention on the black lady cop who didn’t care who was watching when she knocked the girl to the ground and used her snotty face as a punching bag to get the girl to shut up.

Nah this video tho 😳😳😳

Posted by Tax Stone on Monday, January 2, 2017

The girl got exactly what she deserved. Since the cop was black in this case, she didn’t face any media backlash for how she handled this hoodrat and not a single word has been mentioned in the news about this unrest that would have certainly been covered had the cop been white and did what this woman did. Since it was just another day in the ‘hood, however, it’s apparently not worth of anyone’s attention which is why this unrest will keep happening. Bravo to this badass cop for giving this thug a brutal dose of discipline that she definitely had coming.

Continue Reading

Funny

BREAKING!!! Markle CAN’T Marry HIM!!! – Her Secret Is OUT!

TRUTH COMES OUT!

Published

on

When Prince Harry proposed to American “commoner” and Meghan Markle, it appeared as though fairytales do come true. A regular girl with a messy family dynamic and recluse father was flung into royalty and would soon become a princess. It seemed like a real Cinderella story until the fairytale came to a screeching halt after her secret came out, banning her from marrying the Prince. Now, Markle must face the royal family matriarch, the Queen of England, who doesn’t seem too happy about what she’s been hiding.

The picture of perfection and elegance that this couple has portrayed over the last few weeks as they flaunt their love for each other from the states to the Royal Palace, has now been shattered as it seems like it was a front for something else. The American actress does what she’s apparently pretty good at and that’s pretending to be someone she isn’t. As it turns out, Markle may not be able to wed Prince Harry in the Church of England, which officiates royal weddings.

Prince Harry has planned to tie the knot with Markle in May, however, there could be some hiccups along the way before that can happen. The untraditional pair has done things differently than the royal tradition, starting with Harry marrying a divorced American actress. In 2011, Markle married Jewish film director, Trevor Engelson. They divorced about two years later in 2013. Having been married before is frowned upon in the royal family and will take some special permission for the pair to wed in the Spring of 2018, including from the Queen of England herself and a special license from the Archbishop of  Canterbury.

PEOPLE Magazine reports:

For centuries, divorce was frowned upon by the Church of England and members of the British royal family were forbidden — or at the very least, strongly discouraged — from marrying someone who was divorced.

The history-shaking controversy surrounding Edward’s abdication, as fans of The Crown will attest, has never been forgotten by Queen Elizabeth, who was just 10 when her uncle stepped aside — paving the way for her own ascension to the throne. Edward married Simpson in 1937 in exile in France.

But times have changed.

In 2002, the General Synod – the governing body of the Church of England – voted to recognize “that some marriages regrettably do fail.” They added, “there are exceptional circumstances in which a divorced person may be married in church during the lifetime of a former spouse.” Any decision “as to whether or not to solemnize such a marriage in church after divorce rests with the minister.”

However, being a divorcee isn’t the only hurtle Markle is facing in marrying her prince. Religion plays a part as well and since she seems to assume the faith of whoever she’s with, she’s going to have to state what she believes on her own. It’s unknown what her religion is or if she has one since she married her first husband in a Jewish ceremony but attended a private Catholic school growing up. If she’s in fact Catholic, this could be a problem in marrying Harry in the Church of England.

PEOPLE Magazine explains:

In order to remain in the line of succession, members of the royal family cannot be Catholic. The vast majority are members of the Church of England, with the Queen serving as the head of the church. And until 2013, laws forbade members of the family from marrying someone who is Catholic. It was a restriction couples could work around: Peter Phillips’s wife, Autumn, converted from Catholicism before their May 2008 wedding. If she hadn’t, Phillips — the Queen’s eldest grandchild, who is 13th in line to the throne — would have lost his place in the line of succession.

However, in 2013, Britain modernized their laws. Now, those in the immediate line of succession can marry anyone they like, regardless of religion (provided they have permission from the monarch if they’re one of the first six in line to the throne). The rules regarding gender were also changed so that a first-born daughter would inherit the throne, irrespective of whether a boy followed. Under the previous primogeniture rule, any boy would take priority over an older sister.

Unlike with Charles and Camilla, PEOPLE understands that the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has no issue with conducting the ceremony for Harry and Markle – if he’s asked.

“Following the guidelines of the Church of England, the Archbishop wouldn’t have any problem with officiating with their wedding if it got to that point,” says a source close to the Archbishop.

Well, that’s a big relief to Markle who is shaking things up in the royal family by doing things a lot differently than how they have been done for decades. It looks like she may get her fairytale no matter who or what factor tries to prevent her from that end goal. However, she still needs to impress the queen and that seems to be her most difficult task yet. Meanwhile, she’s still planning her wedding to Harry and the pair are said to be tying the knot in a far more “casual” affair than Prince William’s wedding to Kate Middleton.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Subscribe to our newsletter

Become An Insider! Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop on the top breaking news of the day.

Trending