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

Connect with us

Crime

UNREAL: American ISIS recruits in MN. claim they have “immunity”; just wait until you see why…

Published

on

From Allen B West: One of the problems with the current battlefield on which we find ourselves engaged is that we’re treating it with police action rather than combat operations. The battle against Islamist terrorists is not a law enforcement endeavor. Combat troops on this battlefield don’t have the time to read anyone their Miranda rights or collect evidence. Furthermore, our rules of engagement (ROE) are giving away the initiative to the enemy. Consider the recent testimony of the Afghanistan operational theater commander, General Campbell, before the House Armed Services Committee. When asked by Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK), a Navy fighter pilot, if he’s authorized to attack the Taliban simply for being the Taliban, Gen. Campbell responded, no. That means, the enemy who seeks to kill our men and women deployed in Afghanistan cannot be attacked — our troops have to sit back and wait to be engaged.

And folks, if you’ve ever been in a firefight, that ain’t right. Just wanna remind you about what retired Marine 1st Sgt. Jim Reifinger says, “if you ever find yourself in a fair fight, it’s because your tactics suck.” And thanks to this current administration, our tactics REALLY suck.

However, it’s not just in Afghanistan where we find the theater of the absurd, it’s also right here in America — in Minnesota.

As reported by the Star Tribune:

Five Twin Cities men accused of plotting to go to fight alongside ISIL in Syria are asking a federal judge to drop murder conspiracy charges on grounds that they have “combatant immunity” under both common and international law. 

They say combatants are immune from criminal prosecutions for acts of war, including murder, against military targets. 

The five — Hamza Ahmed, brothers Adnan and Mohamed Farah, Abdirahman Daud and Guled Omar — are scheduled to appear in federal court in Minneapolis next week for a hearing on that and other motions in the case, which is set to go to trial May 9. 

The men were charged last year with conspiring to leave the United States to fight with the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).  [Folks, note that only liberal progressives who refuse to acknowledge Israel’s existence refer to ISIS as ISIL.] In October, the government filed a new indictment that added a charge of conspiracy to commit murder, which attorneys for the men say should not apply. 

“ISIL has engaged in atrocious acts,” attorneys for the five said in one motion. “But however one might describe it as an entity, it has an organized professional army engaged in traditional military warfare — an army with which the defendants are alleged to have intended to join in ‘combat.’”

Federal prosecutors who brought the case argued in a court filing last month that the men were “grossly mistaken” in claiming ISIL fighters are combatants as part of a regularly constituted military force.

OK, let me explain what the defense lawyers for these wannabe barbarians are trying to do. They’re seeking to classify ISIS as a legitimate entity — a state — with a military force. Basically, these very slick chucklehead lawyers want to rewrite the Law of Warfare. They’re seeking to legitimize Islamic terrorists — these non-state, non-uniform belligerents. What they’ll seek next week is for these five men to be classified as “legitimate” combatants, rather than unlawful enemy combatants.

Let me explain the danger. But first let me remind you these Islamic jihadists reside in the congressional district represented by one Keith Ellison. A study of Rep. Ellison’s background should cause y’all much concern. Then again, Ellison was right there this past Wednesday with another Islamist sympathizer and enabler, Barack Obama, in Baltimore, at the very questionable Islamic Center of Baltimore mosque.

Now, here’s the danger: if these men are allowed to be classified as a legitimate combatants, then will we be able to deter any future ISIS recruits from leaving this country? If these lawyers are successful, the argument becomes one of ISIS not being a terrorist organization, but the legitimate and “organized professional army” of a state that’s conducting “traditional military warfare.”

Something tells me that if we follow the money, perhaps we’ll find out who’s funding this legal team — wouldn’t surprise me if it’s the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). You know, that unindicted co-conspirator in the largest Islamic terrorist funding case in U.S. history, the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Herein lies the problem in treating this as a law enforcement act; this is why we need a declaration of war against Islamic terrorism, not just ISIS or al-Qaida. Under that scenario, if you’re an American citizen seeking to join this terrorist group — not an organized professional army — your rights as a U.S. citizen would be revoked. You’re joining forces with the enemy, an unlawful enemy; you’re not a legitimate combatant and therefore not recognized by the Geneva Convention.

If we head down the path the lawyers in this case are pushing, then Hezbollah, Hamas, the Quds Force, Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa and Al Quds Martyrs Brigade, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, al-Qaida, the Taliban, Jemaat al-Islamiyah and all the others must be recognized as organized professional armies. This is a very dangerous slippery slope, combined with our releasing the enemy back to the enemy — as Obama continues to do in releasing enemy combatants from Guantanamo Bay.

Prosecutors also wrote that the current fighting in Syria has been determined a noninternational armed conflict — a battle between a nation-state and an insurgent group or between two rebel groups within the borders of a single country — which would invalidate any claims of combatant immunity. And even if the fighting in Syria were considered an international armed conflict, they said, the men can’t be considered combatants anyway. 

“They are, if they must be categorized within the international law of armed conflict, best categorized as aspiring war criminals,” the prosecution said.

Let us never forget, in the history of warfare, armed conflict, there’s a reason why those captured on the battlefield not in uniform were tried and summarily executed. It was to protect civilian populations from being caught in the crossfire of battle. And if you’ve seen the recent drone pictures of Homs Syria, you know what happens. And then these uninformed combatants flee and come to other nations, where the enemy can infiltrate because they don’t declare themselves by wearing uniforms and openly carrying their arms.

The 21st century battlefield will require leaders who won’t succumb to insidious, and deadly, games of political correctness. Here we are with unconscionable rules of engagement on the battlefield, and these lawyers are about to provide legitimizing status to barbaric war criminals. Funny, I don’t recall Rep. Ellison or President Obama addressing this last Wednesday. So, if this categorization were to be accepted in the court next week, then ask yourself, were Syed Farouk and Tashfeen Malik legitimate combatants, soldiers, who conducted a military operation in San Bernadino?

No, they were just savage butchers, unlawful enemy combatants who attacked innocent civilians. If we don’t get serious and let this enemy know we’re dead set on killing them and crushing their theocratic-political totalitarianism, we will not win. Remember Hillary Clinton said we should “empathize” with our enemy. And Bernie Sanders, heck, he’ll be too busy redistributing the wealth and resources of America. Neither of them could be trusted to protect our republic and its citizens. And based on the actions and rhetoric of folks like Obama and Rep. Ellison, we don’t have anyone safeguarding us now.

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.

Crime

BREAKING! He Just Tried To Take Down Trump For $200,000… THIS IS HUGE!!!

Someone needs to go to prison for this!

Published

on

Things are about to get very interesting in the constant fight to drain the DC swamp!

Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly while on the Glenn Beck radio show on Friday revealed details of what he said was sick and disgusting efforts to attack President Trump’s reputation in order to get him to resign from the office of the president.

He also highlights the fact that this newly uncovered information raises serious doubts about the motives behind new allegations that have been made against himself which caused him to lose his job at Fox News.

O’Reilly added that currently, investigators which are working for him uncovered an audio recording of a prominent “unnamed” NeverTrump movement Attorney offering an unidentified woman $200,000 to file bogus sexual harassment charges against the then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.

In a later interview to Newsmax, Bill O’Reilly urged the person who has the tape in their possession to hand it over to the U.S. attorney, because his investigative team believes there are at least three separate crimes on the audio tape. O’Reilly went on to say that President Trump has been made aware of the tape but for some unknown reason, he is sitting on the information. Even though he has a very powerful Attorney General who, if he wanted to, could prosecute the whole movement and end this.

Fox News Reports:

Jeff Sessions should never have accepted the position of Attorney General of the United States. His leadership has proven unproductive and ineffectual.

There are two reasons for this.

First, he deceived President Trump by concealing his intent to recuse himself from the federal investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. Hours after he was sworn in, Sessions began setting his recusal in motion by meeting with Department of Justice officials to discuss stepping aside from the probe. Failing to disclose such a material matter to the president was an egregious betrayal.

Trump was reportedly disgusted and angry with Sessions when he learned of the recusal – rightly so. “If he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me prior to taking office, and I would have picked someone else,” said Trump at a news conference. The president was entitled to know the truth, but Sessions actively hid it from him. Sessions’ deception deprived him of Trump’s confidence and trust which are essential to the job of Attorney General. This ethical impropriety renders him unfit to serve.

Second, Sessions appears either incapable or incompetent. He has resisted producing the documents relevant to the anti-Trump dossier which were subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee. He has failed to appoint a special counsel to reopen the case against Hillary Clinton for likely violations of the Espionage Act in the use of her email server, obstruction of justice for destroying 33,000 emails under congressional subpoena, and potential self-dealing for profit through her foundation. The evidence is compelling.

Moreover, Sessions has taken no action to investigate the unmasking of Trump aides during intelligence surveillance by the Obama Administration. Evidence continues to mount that the incoming president was spied upon for political reasons. Transition officials were unmasked, perhaps illegally. And in one case, the unmasking was leaked to the media which is a crime. Yet Sessions is twiddling his thumbs.

And why hasn’t Sessions investigated the possible criminal conduct of James Comey? The fired FBI Director appears to have falsely testified before Congress, stolen government documents, and leaked them to the media.

Jeff Sessions may have been a fine Senator, but he has proven to be a feckless Attorney General. He should resign. But before he does, he can attempt to rectify the wreckage he has wrought by initiating several necessary criminal investigations and/or appointing a special counsel to do so.

James Comey

Comey was asked, under oath, by the House Judiciary Committee if he decided not to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton before or after he interviewed her. He testified, “After.”

Yet, a document uncovered by the Senate Judiciary Committee belies his testimony. A full two months before the FBI ever interviewed Clinton and her top aides, Comey drafted a statement exonerating Clinton. Absent some extraordinary explanation, it appears that Comey’s investigation of Clinton was nothing more than a charade and that he may have lied under oath. If it can be proven, it would constitute the crime of perjury under 18 USC 1621 or a false statement under 18 USC 1001.

This document establishes persuasive evidence that Comey predetermined that Clinton would not be charged. What prosecutor writes a statement absolving a suspect before the evidence is fully gathered, especially from the principal witnesses? No prosecutor I know of. Unless, of course, the fix was in. Unless someone instructed him to protect Clinton or he decided to do it all on his own with a presidential election hanging in the balance.

Either way, it might well constitute obstruction of justice. It is a felony to interfere with a criminal investigation. It is also illegal to use your public office for a political purpose, if that is what Comey was doing.

But Comey’s misconduct and potential illegality don’t stop there. As FBI Director, he converted government documents to his own personal use and leaked at least one of them to the media. As FBI Director, he crafted seven presidential memorandums which are government property, took them into his personal possession when he was fired, and then conveyed one or more of them to a friend for the sole purpose of leaking them to the media. Under 18 USC 641, this could be a crime.

Under no circumstances were these memos “personal,”, as Comey claims. They were authored during the course and scope of his employment, composed on a government computer, shared with government employees, and pertained directly to meetings with the president that were central to his job as FBI Director.

Under the Federal Records Act, they are government records. This is indisputable, regardless of what Comey and his lawyers allege. They know this because Comey signed an “Unauthorized Disclosure Agreement” promising that, under penalty of legal action, he would not disseminate workplace documents. If the facts are as stated, he should be prosecuted under the Privacy Act.

Finally, four of the seven memos were “classified,” according to the FBI. If Comey conveyed any of them to an outside source, this would constitute an Unauthorized Removal of Classified Documents (18 USC 1924) or a violation of the Espionage Act (18 USC 798) under which Clinton should have been charged when Comey was FBI Director. The irony is lost on no one. Yet, Sessions appears to have taken no action.

Before he resigns, Sessions must open a full investigation and convene a grand jury to determine whether criminal charges should be brought against Comey. In the alternative, he can appoint a second special counsel to investigate the case. The current special counsel, Robert Mueller, is a long-time friend, ally and mentor to Comey. Mueller is not likely to include Comey in his current investigation, even though he has authority to do so under the directive he received.

Hillary Clinton

The case against Clinton is, by now, self-evident. She stored 110 emails containing classified information on her home computer server, an unsecured and unauthorized place. It is a crime to mishandle classified information under the Espionage Act.

Yet Comey misinterpreted the criminal statute by claiming Clinton did not “intend to violate the law.” This is not the legal standard, as any knowledgeable lawyer will tell you. The standard is whether she committed intentional acts, such as intentionally setting up her personal server and knowingly using it for her work documents, including classified materials. Clinton clearly intended to do these things.

Regardless, the law under 18 USC 793 requires only “grossly negligent” behavior. Here, Comey insisted Clinton was “extremely careless.” However, the two terms are synonymous under the law. Indeed, there is a frequently used jury instruction which explains that gross negligence is extremely careless behavior. So, in essence, Comey was admitting Clinton violated the law, although he twisted the statute to conclude otherwise.

There is strong evidence that Clinton obstructed justice. All of her emails were under a congressional subpoena. She was required to preserve and produce every single one of them. She did not. Instead, she deleted roughly 33,000 emails in defiance of the subpoena and cleansed her server of any incriminating evidence. Destruction of evidence under a lawful subpoena constitutes obstruction. Under the law, it is no excuse to claim that some of the emails were personal in nature.

Growing evidence suggests that Clinton used her office as Secretary of State to confer benefits to donors and foreign governments in exchange for financial contributions to her foundation and cash to her husband. If proven, it would support various crimes of corruption.

It has been reported that Clinton helped UBS avoid the IRS. Thereafter, Bill Clinton got paid $1.5 million and the Clinton Foundation received a ten-fold increase in donations by the bank. It has also been reported that Clinton’s state department approved billions of dollars in arms sales to several nations whose governments gave money to the Foundation.

And then, there is the infamous Uranium One deal. After the State Department under Clinton signed off on the U.S. sale of one-fifth of our nation’s uranium production capacity to the Russians, millions of dollars from Russian sources connected to the Kremlin began to flow to the Clinton Foundation, and Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a speech in Moscow. Coincidence? Or criminal “pay-to-play?”

In his confirmation hearing, Sessions promised to recuse himself from any matter involving Hillary Clinton. Therefore, before he resigns, Sessions must appoint a special counsel to reopen the Clinton investigation and decide anew whether criminal charges are merited.

Susan Rice

In March, the former National Security Adviser to President Obama insisted she “knew nothing” about Trump transition officials swept up in surveillance at the end of the Obama administration. Her statement was not true, and not the first time Rice conjured a false narrative. When confronted with evidence to the contrary, she admitted she knew of the incidental collection and, further, she is the one who requested that names be unmasked.

If Rice or UN Ambassador Samantha Power or any other person requested the unmasking of names for a reason other than national security, it is a crime. And so too is the leaking of those names to the media which clearly occurred. Under the Hatch Act, it is against the law for a public official to use his or her office for a political purpose.

Congress is vigorously investigating Rice and others. Yet Sessions seems detached and unconcerned. As the nation’s top lawyer, he is duty-bound to pursue such a substantial breach of intelligence operations.

Before he resigns, Sessions should launch a criminal investigation into the unmasking of names or appoint a special prosecutor to do the same.

Jeff Sessions either wittingly or unwittingly bungled his confirmation hearing, which led to the recusal that is said to have angered Trump and alienated the AG from the president. Regardless, Sessions’ performance as Attorney General ever since has been notable only for a series of failures to act when action is demanded.

The moment the President of the United States no longer has confidence in his Attorney General, it is time for him to submit his letter of resignation. But first, Sessions can restore integrity to the Department of Justice and salvage his own tattered reputation by taking aggressive action against Comey, Clinton and Rice.

Then he should quietly bow out.

Let’s be honest here. Attorney General Jeff Sessions turned out to be the wimpiest Attorney General in our lifetimes. Every time something important comes up he wimps out and recluses himself. Like a turtle hiding inside its shell while the wolf walks by. President Trump needs to replace him with someone like Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch, who would protect President Barack Hussein Obama in the White House whether he was right or wrong, without even question. Jeff Sessions doesn’t have President Trump’s back and he needs to go asap.

Please share if you agree Attorney General Jeff Sessions needs to resign….

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Crime

BREAKING: Trey Gowdy Just Did It – Rot In Prison You Miserable Person!

This is it!

Published

on

Representative Trey Gowdy is one person in Washington D.C. that not many people would want to go head to head with, and for a good reason. Gowdy has built his career on being a strong litigator while serving in South Carolina as a prosecutor trying some of the state’s hardest cases. Gowdy then put his skills to a better use when he decided to run for S.C. Representative and has used his litigation expertise to root out corruption in Washington.

So, on Wednesday, Trey “Pitbull” Gowdy interviewed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein before the House Judiciary Committee concerning the conflicts of interest and corruption within the Department of Justice and FBI. Instead of giving Rosenstein a pass after it was discovered that Robert Mueller’s team was hardly unbiased, Gowdy ripped into Rosenstein in an epic 6-minute tirade that you have to see to believe.

In the video, Trey Gowdy starts pointing out the very reason a Special Counsel was even appointed was to have an investigation that was not riddled with special interests. However, that has hardly been the case ever since Robert Mueller was tapped to head this witchhunt into President Trump almost a year ago.

In fact, the team that Mueller assembled to look into any criminal wrongdoings of the President of the United States is mired in corruption and bias to none other than Hillary Clinton. Trey Gowdy brings up the point that the demoted D.O.J. official Bruce Ohr and his wife worked for Fusion GPS.

Then Gowdy went on an impressive rant concerning Trump-hating FBI agent Strzok and read some of the text messages he sent his FBI lawyer mistress Lisa Page.

“This ‘conflict of interest-free’ senior agent of the FBI can’t think of a single solitary American who would vote for Donald Trump!” Gowdy said.

“These are the people who we were told we needed for a ‘conflict of interest-free’ investigation?” Gowdy asked.

Of course, Rosenstein kept insisting that there was no witchhunt after President Trump, but those text messages imply something else entirely. Fox News reported on those nasty messages yesterday in a shocking report that shows just how deep the corruption in this so-called Special Counsel really goes.

Text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in 2016 that were obtained by Fox News on Tuesday refer to then-candidate Donald Trump as a “loathsome human” and “an idiot.”

More than 10,000 texts between Strzok and Page were being reviewed by the Justice Department after Strzok was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe after it was revealed that some of them contained anti-Trump content.

The messages were sent during the 2016 campaign and contain discussions about various candidates. On March 2, Strzok texted Page that someone “asked me who I’d vote for, guessed [Ohio Gov. John] Kasich.”

“Seriously?! Would you not [vote] D[emocrat]?” Page responded.

“I don’t know,” Strzok answered. “I suppose Hillary [Clinton].”

“I would [vote] D,” Page affirmed.

Two days later, Page texted Strzok, “God, Trump is a loathsome human.”

“Yet he many[sic] win,” Strzok responded. “Good for Hillary.”

Later the same day, Strzok texted Page, “Omg [Trump’s] an idiot.”

“He’s awful,” Page answered.

“America will get what the voting public deserves,” said Strzok, to which Page responded. “That’s what I’m afraid of.”

Later that same day, Strzok texted Page, “Ok I may vote for Trump.”

“What?” answered Page. “Poor Kasich. He’s the only sensible man up there.”

“He was pretty much calling for death for [NSA leaker] Edward Snowden,” Strzok said. “I’m a single-issue voter. 😉 Espionage Machine Party.”

Strzok later told Page, “Exacty [sic] re Kasich. And he has ZERO appeal.”

Twelve days later, after Trump took a commanding lead in the Republican delegate race with victories in key “Super Tuesday” primaries, Page texted Strzok, “I can not believe Donald Trump is likely to be an actual, serious candidate for president.”

Four months later, Strzok and Page exchanged messages mocking Trump and his family at the Republican National Convention.

“Oooh, TURN IT ON, TURN IT ON!!! THE DO*CHEBAGS ARE ABOUT TO COME OUT,” Strzok texted Page on July 19. “You can tell by the excitable clapping.”

Later, Strzok reached out to Page again, saying, “Omg. You listening to npr? Apparently Melania’s speech had passages lifted from Michelle Obama’s…Unbelievable.”

“NO WAY!” Page answered, adding “God, it’s just a two-bit organization. I do so hope his disorganization comes to bite him hard in November.”

On Aug. 6, Page texted Strzok a New York Times article about Muslim lawyer Khzir Khan, who became embroiled in a war of words with Trump after Khan spoke at the Democratic National Convention.

“Jesus. You should read this. And Trump should go f himself,” Page wrote in a message attached to the article.

“God that’s a great article,” Strzok answered. “Thanks for sharing. And F TRUMP.”

Now, these are the people that are supposed to be looking into corruption, but seem to be pulling for the other guy, how is that supposed to work?

The whole reason why Jeff Sessions recused himself from looking into this ridiculous Russian collusion charade was so that there was not an appearance of bias, yet here we are with all sorts of prejudice and special interests. This entire investigation needs to be shut down and let go since it is evident that there is no proof of wrongdoing by Trump, but there is plenty of evidence of impropriety by Mueller and his team.

Thank God there are people like Trey Gowdy still in office willing to push for the truth and fight for the American people.

H/T [Fox News]

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Crime

BOMBSHELL News About NY Senator And Muslim… THIS IS SICKENING!!!

Democrats did this!

Published

on

You may have seen Kristen Gillibrand’s name in news headlines lately as she’s jousting with President Trump on Twitter. She’s consistently made a fool of herself with lame Tweets, acting as though she’s the spokesperson for all women, and living up to the “nevertheless she persisted” nonsense drivel spoonfed by Elizabeth Warren and eaten by feminists. None of this is newsworthy anymore after what reports just revealed about Gillibrand, the New York Democrat Senator, and her Muslim athlete friend accused of molesting a young girl.

Gillibrand enjoyed calling out Al Franken for sexually related accusations (with picture evidence) and suggesting that he resign. She’s attacked President Trump for the accusations he’s been wrapped in, although there’s no evidence. A new report involving Bill O’Reilly suggests that one woman was allegedly offered $200,000 to accuse Trump of sexually related crimes, and there are claims that someone caught it on tape. However, Gillibrand has one more person to call out and the public is wondering what will happen next.

The person she needs to call out now is a Muslim man who was previously denied entry into America,  but later gained entry to America thanks to Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer. That same man, 24-year-old Indian snowshoe racer Tanveer Hussain, was accused of molesting an innocent 12-year-old girl. That’s right, folks. Gillibrand more or less vouched for an alleged pedophile child molester who was legitimately accused by a real victim – not accused by a made up victim possibly paid off to make false accusations.

100% Fed Up reports:

“An Indian athlete who overcame a visa denial with the help of U.S. lawmakers and a local mayor to attend the World Snowshoe Championship in New York has been arrested on charges of the abuse of a minor.

It was a long journey for Indian snowshoe champion Hussain and his coach to the World Snowshoe Championships in Saranac Lake, New York last weekend.

The US embassy in New Delhi rejected Tanveer Hussain’s application for a visa so he could compete in the World Snowshoe Championship last month, Fox News reported.

Local officials then appealed for help to Schumer and Gillibrand, and their offices reached out to the New Delhi embassy, which let Hussain successfully reapply for a visa.

Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer, an outspoken opponent of President Trump’s position on stricter immigration policies for immigrants and visa holders coming into the United States, bragged about getting around Trump’s temporary travel restrictions to bring convicted pedophile Tanveer Hussain to New York on his Facebook page”

Seeing pictures of Hussain surrounded by children is repulsive after learning about the accusations of his alleged inappropriate contact with a girl who was only 12-years-old.  The victim may have been one of the girls from the Saranac Middle School, and there’s a picture of him surrounded by more kids. You can see he had his arm around one girl, but we are unsure of who the victim is because she’s underage and her identity may be protected.

“The grand jury returned the indictment charging Tanveer Hussain with one count of first-degree sexual abuse and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child, a report in the Adirondack Daily Enterprise quoted a press release from Essex County District Attorney Kristy Sprague as saying.

The reckless and irresponsible acts of Democrat legislators like Senator Chuck Schumer, perfectly illustrates why Trump was right about demanding that we put additional vetting measures in place for immigrants.

Hussain and team manager Abid Khan arrived Feb. 23 in the bucolic Adirondacks town, which had been following their visa ordeal and extended them a hero’s welcome. Locals offered congratulations and free lodgings at an inn that in the snow looked like a “fairy tale scene from a movie,” Khan said in a Facebook post.

The “fairy tale” was shattered Wednesday, when Hussain, 24, was arrested and charged with felony sexual abuse and child welfare endangerment, police said.

The parents of the 12-year-old girl allegedly involved said the incident happened Monday, after the end of the three-day snowshoe competition, and reported it to local authorities.”

The girl was reportedly staying at an inn where Hussain was also staying. According to reports, the girl was playing pool one afternoon with some people who may have been around her age of 12-years-old. At some point, it’s reported that the girl was alone with Hussain and they kissed. She was then groped on the outside of her clothing in what is listed as an “intimate” area.

“Chief Charles A. Potthast Jr. of the Saranac Lake Village police force said the girl was playing pool Monday afternoon with other young people at the inn where Hussain was staying.

“There was a moment when the two were alone, and that’s when the incident occurred,” Potthast said. The girl told police there was a “passionate kiss” and that Hussain touched her in an intimate area on top of her clothing.”

You may proceed to vomit and thank the Democrats for helping the alleged criminal attain entry to America and put our innocent children at risk of being molested by a Muslim pedophile.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Trending