Wednesday, January 18, 2017


 85-15 Wareham Place, Jamaica Estates, New York
Childhood Home of President Elect Donald J. Trump  
Bedrooms   5
Full Bathrooms   4
Half Bathrooms   1
Lot Size   Approx. 40' x 120'
Extras   Finished Basement, Patio, Balcony, 5 Car Driveway with 2 Car Garage. Note: This property is not currently owned by President Elect Donald J. Trump or the Trump family.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

  The divorcing couple who owned a childhood home of President-elect Donald Trump’s home in Queens has finally sold it to a mystery buyer in a $1.25 million deal that closed last week.

The sellers, restaurateur Isaac Kestenberg and his now-estranged wife, Claudia, bought the modest five-bedroom house in Jamaica Estates for $782,500 in 2008. The Kestenbergs “received a big, fat check to close very fast, with no contingencies,” Misha Haghani, of auction house Paramount Realty USA, tells Gimme Shelter.
The new owner, though, isn’t planning to stick around — and in fact is planning to flip the property.

Haghani’s firm is auctioning the Tudor on the new buyer’s behalf on Jan. 17, just days before Trump’s inauguration. The Kestenbergs first put the home, located at 85-15 Wareham Place, on the market for $1.65 million in June with a traditional broker.
The price later dropped to $1.2 million.

In September, Trump told Jimmy Fallon on “The Tonight Show” that he wanted to buy it back. The beleaguered home was then slated to go to auction on Oct. 19, the evening of a presidential debate, for a measly minimum bid of $849,000. But the couple yanked it off the auction block at the last minute — on a gamble that Trump could win the election.
He did, and the home shot up in value. These presidential childhood homes, Haghani says, “are very rare.”
The new buyer is a sophisticated New York real estate investor who understands the risk of an auction and who believes that the home is worth far more than he paid.”
Experts previously told The Post that the home could be worth up to $10 million to wealthy investors who might turn it into a museum.
Developer Fred Trump, the president-elect’s father, built the home in 1940. By the time the Donald was 4 years old, the family moved to a larger brick mansion around the corner. While the home is modest by Trump standards, with nary a touch of glitz or accent of gold in sight, it still features a stately formal dining room, a fireplace, a sun room, a paneled study, a “summer kitchen” and a five-car driveway with a two-car detached garage.
The Jan. 19 auction represents a “truly once in a lifetime opportunity for a bidder to name their price to own a piece of history,” Haghani says, adding that this time there will be no minimum bid. To place a bid, potential buyers must pay $20 on the Paramount Realty website.


Gloria Allred Announces Former 'Apprentice' Contestant Files Defamation Lawsuit Against Trump 

 Published on Jan 17, 2017

Today we are here to announce that this morning we filed a defamation lawsuit on behalf of our client, Summer Zervos, against President-elect Donald Trump.
The lawsuit alleges that Ms. Zervos had been subjected to unwanted sexual touching by Donald Trump and that she had told family and friends about the incidents not long after these incidents occurred.

She did not go public or take any action against Mr. Trump at that time, however, because she decided that Mr. Trump’s behavior had either been an aberration, a test, or that he may even have regretted or been ashamed of his behavior.

The lawsuit alleges the following:

“In October 2016, that all changed. On October 7th, when Trump’s own recorded, crude and vulgar comments to Billy Bush on the Access Hollywood tapes recorded in 2005 were broadcast, it became clear that Trump’s sexually inappropriate behavior towards Ms. Zervos was entirely consistent with Trump’s own words, and his belief that he had the right to sexually assault women – and even to boast about it. Then at the October 9th presidential debate, Trump told the world a boldface lie: he stated in response to a direct question from Anderson Cooper that he had not ever done any of the things that he had bragged about to Billy Bush.”

Ms. Summer further alleges in the lawsuit:

“For the first time, Summer Zervos saw Trump’s behavior towards her for what it was: that of a sexual predator who had preyed on her and other women. She realized that she was just one of many women who had been victimized by Trump’s predatory conduct. Ms. Zervos could no longer rationalize or excuse Trump’s behavior by telling herself that his behavior had been a mistake or an isolated incident for which he might even be ashamed. Trump had no shame. His own boasting to Billy Bush made clear that his behavior was intentional.

Ms. Zervos knew that Donald Trump had lied – to the country and to the world – and knew that the statements he made to Billy Bush were not just words or “locker room” talk, but were evidence of his pattern of misconduct towards women. Ms. Zervos felt a responsibility to inform the public of the true facts. It was unacceptable to stand by and allow a presidential candidate to lie openly, with impunity, to the American public. She came forward – as a number of other Trump victims did – to inform the public of the facts she knew were true, to make clear that Donald Trump had kissed and groped her without her consent, repeatedly.”

The lawsuit goes on to allege, “And what did Donald Trump, the liar and misogynist do, to cover up his lies? He lied again, and debased and denigrated Ms. Zervos with false statements about her.
Trump immediately lied, saying that he “never met [Ms. Zervos] at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately.” He quickly went further, describing Ms. Zervos’s experience, along with those of others, as “made up events THAT NEVER HAPPENED;” “100% fabricated and made-up charges;” “totally false;” “totally phoney [sic] stories, 100% made up by women (many already proven false);” “made up stories and lies;” “[t]otally made up nonsense.” He falsely stated: “Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign, total fabrication. The events never happened.” During the last presidential debate, he stated that these women were either being put forward by the Clinton campaign, or were motivated to come forward by getting “ten minutes of fame,” and nothing more.”

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The PC movement continues to barrel through college campuses across the country with extraordinary steam as exemplified by a new campaign against so-called offensive language at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls, in which students are asked to avoid innocuous words and phrases like “you guys” and “crazy.” The school published a guide for its “Check Yourself Educational Campaign” in which it lists a set of terms and words that are said to be offensive.
“Sometimes we say things without realizing the impact they may have on others,” suggests the campaign. “Take time to educate yourself about language and the histories of oppression. This list is not extensive, but touches on common identities and concepts. Read them. Consider them. Understand them. And Check Yourself before you use them.”
While a number of the expressions found within the guide would generally be classified as offensive, such as racial slurs, derogatory terms, and curse words, others are harmless colloquialisms.
The guide spends a lot of time discussing terminology that can be perceived as offensive by the LGBTQ community.
For example, it instructs students to avoid asking about the gender of a trans person from someone other than the transgender individual. Similarly, students are not allowed to make claims that bisexuality does not exist and that people are simply either gay or straight. The reason? “This denies the fluidity of sexuality and dismisses people’s experiences and definitions of self.” At the same time, however, students are asked not to make such statements as “I think everyone is really bisexual” because it then denies bisexual students of their individuality as bisexuals.

It also prohibits students from using terms like “she-male,” “she-he,” and “tranny,” as they “dehumanize transgender women.” It asks students to stop exclaiming that something is “so gay” as a “negative adjective.” All derogatory terms for homosexuals such as “faggot” and “dyke” appear on the list.
The guide also showcases an underlying anti-male attitude, as it takes a stand on using words referring to “people with vaginas to express that someone is weak or emotional dehumanizes women and perpetuates misogyny and sexism” but makes no such point regarding men and derogatory words typically used for males.
It instructs students to avoid using terminology having to do with female promiscuity, such as “ho” and “slut.” The reasoning is bizarre as it seems to indicate that racism somehow plays into the use of these words. It also seems to justify a sexually promiscuous lifestyle as one that should be accepted. The guide asserts that the use of these terms does the following: “Dismisses anyone seen as being ‘too sexual’, particularly sex workers, women, LGBTQIA+ people, and people of color. Perpetuates negativity towards sex itself. Promotes a sexual double standard.”
Additionally, students are asked to avoid the phrase “illegal aliens” because it apparently reduces undocumented immigrants to “something less than human.”
Students are discouraged from using terms like “ghetto” or "ratchet" because it associates “people of color” with negative characteristics of being “poor” or “dangerous.”
The guide also asks students to avoid terminology that would amount to body-shaming, specifically by referring to someone as fat, as the guide claims such a word reinforces “harmful assumptions that fat people are gluttonous and are fat because they have no constraints around food.” Students are asked not to refer to themselves as fat for the same reasons.
It continues by stating that the term audaciously implies “that there is an acceptable amount of food to eat and anything more is disgusting, or that enjoying too much food is disgusting.”
“Ugly” also appears on the list, because it somehow “can be connected back to white supremacist, ableist, sizeist standards of beauty.”
Any reference to a person’s inability to execute a task, such as “retarded,” “lame,” “dumb,” and “crazy” are also no-nos because they allegedly target “mental, emotional, and physical disabilities as objects for ridicule.”
But of all the items prohibited by the guide, perhaps the most absurd is the phrase “you guys,” which apparently generalizes “a group of people to be masculine,” and fails to properly address the various identities of those in the room.
The guide, like all other PC efforts, is yet another attempt at preventing hurt feelings. It contributes to students’ inflated sense of self and their delusions that they should never have to experience confrontation or differing viewpoints that they may perceive as offensive. Of course, the PC movement encourages all viewpoints to be accepted, unless they are conservative or Christian. Those are the viewpoints deemed hateful, and anyone holding them should obviously be told they are wrong.
Institutions of higher education are doing a dramatic disservice to their students by guarding them from all that can hurt their egos. Greg Lukianoff, a constitutional lawyer and the president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, and Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist who studies the American culture wars, addressed this very issue in the September 2015 issue of The Atlantic in an article entitled “The Coddling of the American Mind.”
They contend that political correctness has morphed into an even more restrictive movement that not only seeks to limit free speech but also attempts to punish anyone who interferes with those goals, which fails to prepare students for real-world scenarios. They wrote:
It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong. The harm may be more immediate, too. A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.
These PC efforts encourage students to avoid all that they fear and all that offends them, thereby further increasing their sensitivity to things that may otherwise have not offended them. “In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like,” Lukianoff and Haidt wrote.
Schools such as the University of Wisconsin-River Falls are only too happy to comply. And as long as the students remain on campus, they may be able to safely avoid being offended, but who will protect them when they graduate?


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Ron Ewart

January 18, 2017
It's not just cities that are providing a safe haven for illegal alien lawbreakers that include aliens who have been deported, murderers, robbers, thieves, rapists, pimps, con artists, drug smugglers, human trafficking perpetrators, terrorists and others of a deplorable nature, and yes, some non-criminal individuals and families. There are several states, as well as multiple counties in almost every state that defy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with their sanctuary policies. About 300 jurisdictions in America have been identified by ICE as having a policy, or are non-cooperative when it comes to immigration enforcement. Many cities, like Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago and New York are in open defiance of federal immigration law, with their respective mayors publicly thumbing their collective noses at immigration authorities.
From sources we learned that from January 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015 these sanctuary jurisdictions rejected more than 17,000 detainers for illegal immigrants, 11,800 of which had a prior criminal history. A detainer is issued by ICE to gain custody of specific criminal aliens for deportation, being held in another law enforcement jurisdiction. These illegal alien criminals are free to commit their crimes with impunity, thanks to illegal sanctuary policies. Who are their victims ..... lawful American citizens?
The illegal immigration problem is massive. One in four inmates in American prisons are illegal immigrants. In 2014, 36.7% of all felony convictions were illegal immigrants. Regarding the cost to taxpayers, the Heritage Foundation reports that: "in 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost was borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar."
Most illegal immigrants have less than a 10-year education and are among the lowest wage earners, thereby contributing the least amount to taxes, compared to the benefits they consume.
Sanctuary states, counties and cities exacerbate these statistics by protecting criminals, undesirables and those illegal immigrants that have violated our laws by coming here illegally, raising the total cost to taxpayers for illegal immigration by billions of dollars.
In open defiance of their mandated duties and swearing to uphold the law of the land, an official of the Department of Justice of the Obama Administration confirmed in 2010 that the agency would not take any action against cities, or other sanctuary jurisdictions, that defy the "Illegal Immigration and Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996." (Pub. Law 104-208) True to their word, they haven't taken any action.
There is an unwritten policy on the Democrat side of the federal government who purposely look the other way on illegal immigration and are not concerned that our borders are as porous as Swiss cheese. The rationale is that these illegal immigrants will eventually receive legal status and will vote Democrat because most of them come from socialist countries, thereby securing perpetual Democrat control of power in America. The Democrats compassion rationale is hollow and only results in more illegal immigration.
Federal Law (8 USC 1227) describes in detail who is a deportable person and the list is lengthy.
But one of the provisions in the law "(2)(A)(i)(I)(II) "General Crimes" states that:
(i) Crimes of moral turpitude
Any alien who — (I) is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude committed within five years (or 10 years in the case of an alien provided lawful permanent resident status under section 1255(j) of this title) after the date of admission, and (II) is convicted of a crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed, is deportable.
Moral Turpitude is a very broad term but has been defined in greater detail by court decisions and “refers generally to conduct that shocks the public conscience as being inherently base, vile, or depraved, contrary to the rules of morality and the duties owed between man and man, either one's fellow man, or society in general" and includes murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, rape, spousal abuse, child abuse, incest, kidnapping, robbery, aggravated assault, mayhem, animal fighting, theft, fraud, and conspiracy, or attempting to, or acting as an accessory to a crime.
In every sanctuary city, county and state in America there resides thousands of illegal immigrants who are guilty of moral turpitude under federal immigration law, as defined, and as such are deportable. In a flagrant, criminally negligent act, ICE released 86,288 illegal immigrant criminals into the general population from 2013 to 2015, according to ICE Director Sarah Saldana in written testimony to Congress. Those persons in our government, who made the decision to release known criminals, violent or otherwise, should be in jail themselves.
When illegal immigrant criminals are released into the general population, or come here illegally, where do you think they go? They migrate to sanctuary cities, counties and states of course, where the criminals will be shielded from federal prosecution by the governor of the state, or mayor, the city or county council, prosecuting attorneys, judges and law enforcement, by specific written or verbal sanctuary policies. Kate Steinle was a victim of and killed by one of those illegal alien criminals who had been deported 5 times and ended up in San Francisco, a sanctuary city.
ICE issues what are called detainers for illegal immigrants that are subject to deportation. Most if not all illegal immigrants are subject to deportation under 8 USC 1227, whether criminal or not. Under this statute, deportable persons are defined as:
"Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this chapter or any other law of the United States, or whose non-immigrant visa (or other documentation authorizing admission into the United States as a non-immigrant) has been revoked under section 1201(i) of this title, is deportable."
One can safely conclude that anyone who has entered the U. S. illegally is deportable, unless they are seeking asylum for reasons covered under the law, subject to judicial review.
What seems to have gone unnoticed here is that the leaders of these sanctuary states, counties and cities are guilty of harboring fugitives from justice and potential terrorists by their policies, written or verbal and are "principals" under 18 USC Section 2, making them personally liable for their actions. Federal law 18 USC 1071 covers this harboring of fugitives by sanctuary cities wherein it states:
"Whoever harbors or conceals any person for whose arrest a warrant or process has been issued under the provisions of any law of the United States, so as to prevent his discovery and arrest, after notice or knowledge of the fact that a warrant or process has been issued for the apprehension of such person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; except that if the warrant or process issued on a charge of felony, or after conviction of such person of any offense, the punishment shall be a fine under this title, or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both."
Under the "harboring" statute, 18 USC 1071, a "process" would be construed as an ICE detainer. It is logical to assume that sanctuary city leaders, or local law enforcement, have been issued those detainers, or had knowledge of them and flagrantly ignored them. In fact an ICE "detainer" was issued to the Sheriff of San Francisco County for Kate Steinle's killer, which said Sheriff promptly released the illegal immigrant criminal, purposely ignoring the ICE detainer. Therefore, the Sheriff directly violated 18 USC 1071. The San Francisco city and county leaders indirectly violated the statute by establishing the policy. Each of them should be tried for criminally violating federal law and held personally liable for their complicity in Kate Steinle's death. San Francisco's sanctuary city policy was a direct contributing factor in her death.
The Kate Steinle murder by an illegal immigrant criminal is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. A website was established to memorialize those Americans who were killed by illegal aliens HERE. It is not a complete list and it doesn't include those tens of thousands of Americans that were or will be severely injured or killed by other illegal aliens. The list is long and grows by the day because the federal government has allowed millions of illegal aliens to enter America, criminal and otherwise, with little or no penalty, thereby creating a magnate for further illegal immigration. As a result of government's negligence to properly manage our immigration system and our borders, there are somewhere between 11,000,000 to 30,000,000 illegal aliens residing in America (no one knows for sure). Hundreds of thousands of those illegal aliens are dangerous criminals and potential terrorists, preying on lawful Americans. Any sanctuary policy that shields illegal aliens, is a direct threat to national security.
It is possible that a Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) under Senator Jeff Sessions, the incoming U. S. Attorney General, will reverse the Obama Administration policy of coddling illegal aliens and start a vigorous enforcement of immigration law inside America and on her borders. Part of this vigorous enforcement should be a full frontal attack on sanctuary states, counties and cities by cutting off federal funding and bringing to trial those state, county and city leaders that harbor illegal criminals in violation of 18 USC 1071.
But we aren't waiting for the Department of Justice, or the Congress, to take on sanctuary states, counties and cities. We will be filing a formal Complaint and Request For Investigation with the U. S. Attorney in multiple districts, against these state, county and city leaders, under 18 USC 1071, with a copy forwarded to the incoming U. S. Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. This could take us several days to reach all of the relevant U. S. Attorneys. We have posted a sample of our Complaint on our website HERE. Our single Complaint, by itself, may not trigger an investigation, much less indictments. However, if hundreds of our readers used our sample Complaint and Request for Investigation and filed their own Complaint with specific U. S. Attorneys and the U. S. Attorney General, it is more likely that an investigation would commence into this open, festering, illegal alien wound that slaps every law abiding American in the face.
Each American citizen is required to obey the law or face penalties, fines and even imprisonment for violation of the law, depending on the severity of the violation. If you screw up your income taxes, or make a mistake, or don't pay what they think you owe them, or don't file, the IRS will be all over you and it could take years to get them off your back. Why isn't ICE just as relentless on illegal immigrants as the IRS is on taxpayers?
In fact, why are sanctuary jurisdictions thumbing their noses at federal immigration law while the rest of us must obey the law? Why do not their sanctuary actions fly in the face of justice, fairness, equity and the law? Why are illegal aliens, especially criminal ones, above the law and are entitled to sanctuary, or a status superior to lawful Americans? Why is it OK for lawful Americans, hapless victims of criminal and non-criminal illegal aliens due to government negligence, be forced to pay for those same illegal aliens that are sucking up government benefits and committing the crimes? Why indeed!
 In a nation of laws, if laws aren't enforced equally across the board, then there is no law, only injustice and eventually anarchy and chaos.

When are the people of America going to rise up against sanctuary jurisdictions? When will they revolt against government-instituted injustices and crimes committed by illegal immigrants? If you are as incensed as we are against sanctuary states, counties and cities in America and you truly want to make a difference, please join with us in filing your own Complaint and Request for Investigation with multiple U. S. Attorney's offices and the U. S. Attorney General, as we are doing. All it will cost you are a few stamps, some paper, some envelopes and some of your time. Everything you need is on our "SANCTUARY" website page, including interactive maps and the U. S. Attorneys list. Or, view our new "Sanctuary City Video."
If you would like to receive a Microsoft WORD copy of our Complaint and Request for Investigation by e-mail, please click HERE. Be sure to include your name, county and state you live in. We will not e-mail the Complaint to blind mail addresses.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 NWV Senior Political News Writer, Jim Kouri

  In a newly released video, renowned investigative journalist James O'Keefe 
continued his far reaching probe of the Democratic Party's connections to anti-Trump, 
anti-GOP activities many of which border on criminal action, perhaps even acts of 
O'Keefe, famous for bringing down President Barack Obama's top supporter known as ACORN, uncovered a secret organization calling themselves the DC Anti-fascist Coalition who are planning an attack using Butyric acid at the National Press Club during the Deploraball event scheduled for the evening of Thursday January 19.
The substance has also been used as a stink bomb by animal-rights groups to disrupt whaling crews, as well as by pro-life activists to disrupt operations at abortion clinics.
Although the evidence doesn't point to any direct connection with the Democratic Party or its minions in the news media, some suspect that those members of the U.S. Congress such as Rep. John Lewis, Rep. Luis Gutierrez and Rep. Keith Ellison, are boycotting the inauguration on Friday because they are aware that there will be violent incidents by Democrat-supported protesters and want to maintain their deniability.
"Anyone who is a student of history recognizes these anti-Trumpers as being very much like the Nazi Party 'Brown Shirts' who created havoc that helped the rise to power of Adolf Hitler. Also, look for these people to seek creating a 'martyr' to hold up to the people of American with the help of less-than-honest news media organizations," said former NYPD detective and U.S. Marine Michael Snopes. [YouTube Video]
According to news analysis by former law enforcement official, Jim Kouri, appearing on the Conservative Base, security surrounding the inauguration of Donald Trump is proving to be the most challenging in recent history, according to senior officials involved in its planning, largely because of the same forces of political rancor that shaped the race for the presidency.
The dozens of government and contracted agencies responsible for security at the Jan. 20 festivities are preparing for the possibility of large numbers of protesters pouring into the capital, along with what may be nearly 1 million supporters of Trump. For example, there is talk of one group of anti-Trump “potheads” who are claiming they will handout thousands of marijuana “joints” for protesters to smoke while protesting the inauguration.
In 2009, Obama’s inauguration was the first transfer of power in the post-9/11 era — and the first in which an African-American was taking the oath of office. Obama faced a rash of racist threats, as well as concerns about a terrorist plot that ultimately proved unfounded but sent the president-elect and top aides scrambling on the eve of his swearing-in.
Even so, Obama did not face the kind of large-scale protests expected to greet Trump when he officially arrives in Washington. The 2009 crowd of nearly 2 million people, a record, included few, if any, protesters and did not lead to a single arrest, according to Christopher T. Geldart, the director of homeland security for the District of Columbia.
A vast planning board of intelligence analysts, military personnel, and law enforcement officers numbering in the tens of thousands will be working to protect the inauguration and related activities.
In total, more than three dozen different agencies spread out across the capital will be working to prevent the occasion from becoming a platform for individuals or groups looking to do harm. Their work, begun months ago, has taken on a new urgency since Election Day and will soon include the imposition of a security perimeter around the Capitol, the Mall, and large parts of the city. [YouTube Video]
Soldiers and airmen from the South Dakota National Guard are preparing for joint support of the 58th Presidential Inauguration in Washington, Jan. 20, 2017, according to Air Force Master Sgt. Christopher Stewart.
“They will join hundreds of National Guardsmen from across the country to assist with security, crowd control and traffic management throughout the national capital region when President-elect Donald J. Trump takes the oath as the 45th president of the United States,” Sgt. Stewart wrote. “This joint service security group is preparing with refresher training on the safe and secure movement of civilians prior to, during and after inauguration events.”
 “The purpose of the training is so that the two branches can blend together and work together as a cohesive team,” said Army Sgt. Kurtis Brown, 235th Military Police Company team leader. “For a joint operation like the Presidential Inauguration we all want to be on the same page.”

Instructors from a local air ambulance service provided medical training on Dec. 3 that was focused on medical issues civilians might develop at the inauguration.
“The practice was needed and beneficial to all of us, said Air Force Lt. Kristopher King,” 114th Security Forces chief of information protection. “It’s a great opportunity to make sure everyone is speaking the same language and using the same techniques.”
The costs of security alone are expected to exceed $100 million.

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 Concerns are being raised by a prominent pro-family 
organization after country music star Carrie Underwood, who has 
expressed her support for same-sex “marriage” and attends a church that 
allows practicing homosexuals to serve in ministry, recently appeared at
 a major Christian conference attended by tens of thousands of 
college-age youth.
The American Family Association (AFA) has penned an open letter to Louie Giglio, leader of the annual Passion Conference and pastor of Atlanta’s Passion City Church, to express concern about Underwood’s participation in the event held January 2-4 at the Atlanta Dome.
The yearly conference regularly features worship music from artists such as Chris Tomlin, Kristian Stanfill and Crowder, as well as Bible teaching from speakers like Giglio and Francis Chan. This year, Underwood, who had not been advertised as a guest, took the stage with Crowder near the end of the performance of the song “Lift Your Head Weary Sinner,” and also led the tune “Something in the Water.”
“Louie, if I can be completely transparent, I was very frustrated that you would allow [Underwood] to help lead thousands of people in worship. My frustration quickly turned to disappointment and then to sadness,” wrote AFA Director of Outreach, Wesley Wildmon.

“With the many Christian artists who believe and teach the full counsel of God’s Word available to lead worship at Passion, why would you choose one who publicly states homosexuality is not a sin?” he asked. “Your approval gives thousands of unsaved or weak Millennials an untruthful image of what the Bible says about marriage.”
Wildmon clarified that he isn’t saying that Underwood should be shunned altogether, but that her public remarks should give reason for pause to provide a platform to someone that supports an unbiblical view of marriage.
“It should go without saying, but I will say it anyway: her denial of God’s Word should not keep you from being friends and encouraging her, but it should give you hesitance in inviting her to partner with your ministry,” he wrote.

As previously reported, Underwood, who attends GracePointe Church in Nashville with her husband Mike Fisher, announced in 2012 that she supports same-sex “marriage.”
“As a married person myself, I don’t know what it’s like to be told I can’t marry somebody I love, and want to marry,” she told The Independent. “I can’t imagine how that must feel. I definitely think we should all have the right to love, and love publicly, the people that we want to love.”
“Our church is gay friendly,” Underwood continued. “Above all, God wanted us to love others. It’s not about setting rules, or [saying] ‘everyone has to be like me.’ No. We’re all different. That’s what makes us special. We have to love each other and get on with each other. It’s not up to me to judge anybody.”
She also criticized “people who use the Bible for hate,” remarking, “That’s not how I would want myself as a Christian to be represented.”
In light of her comments, AFA asked that Giglio be more careful about who he invites to the event in the future.
“I am writing to plead with you to consider the clarity of God’s Word on marriage and reflect on it in the artist you choose for next year,” Wildmon said. “It is God who has blessed you with this platform and it is God who can remove His hand of blessing if you become careless with His principles.”
Following her appearance at the Passion Conference this month, Underwood thanked organizers on social media for allowing her to be a part of the event.
“What an incredible night @passion268! Thanks for letting me be a small part of it! & thanks @crowdermusic for letting me crash your set!” she wrote.
Passion likewise expressed excitement over Underwood’s performance, Tweeting, “Thanks @crowdermusic for an amazing night of music and to our special guest @carrieunderwood for joining us at Passion 2017! What at start!”
Giglio has not responded to press inquiries about the matter.
Underwood’s appearance may be viewed here as it was posted to the event’s YouTube page.

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

"Dear Louie,
I hope this letter finds you well. I have been seeing this year’s Passion Conference in the headlines and images from it are flooding my social media feeds. It is amazing how God has used you and your wife in this way. Only He could bring your vision from a few students at your house to over 50,000 in the Georgia Dome. That’s not to mention how Passion is now taking place in multiple locations and streaming to countless more. Myself and many others praise God for the platform He has given you!
The life-changing impact of Passion is not an abstract idea for me. I was one of the 40,000+ to attend in 2012. I can speak firsthand when I say I experienced the Holy Spirit while I was there. The teaching was solid and the worship was deep. My friends and I took many notes. Passion 2012 was a spiritual milestone in my life to say the least.
The most popular headline and image circling social media thus far this week show the performance of Carrie Underwood. Louie, if I can be completely transparent, I was very frustrated that you would allow her to help lead thousands of people in worship. My frustration quickly turned to disappointment and then to sadness. Carrie Underwood encourages and supports homosexual marriage which the Word of God does not (1 Corinthians 6:12-20). In fact, it calls us to flee from it and all other sexual sin. Our message as Christians to those who practice homosexuality should reflect that of Jesus in Matthew 19:4-6, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let not man separate.”
With the many Christian artists who believe and teach the full counsel of God’s Word available to lead worship at Passion, why would you choose one who publicly states homosexuality is not a sin? Would you invite a well-known artist who stated publicly that using porn is honoring to God to speak or sing at Passion? I do not ask this with a facetious attitude but the sincere hope of making a point. God has given you such a major platform with Millennials it is disheartening to see your lack of concern for biblical clarity on marriage in such a chaotic era. Your approval gives thousands of unsaved or weak Millennials an untruthful image of what the Bible says about marriage. It should go without saying, but I will say it anyway: her denial of God’s Word should not keep you from being friends and encouraging her, but it should give you hesitance in inviting her to partner with your ministry.
Louie, I am 27 years old and one of the most important ideas I have learned to cling to in my few short years of ministry is the difference between preference and principle. The genre of music, what age group to focus on, what topic to teach, etc. are preferences. They are important, but only preferences. Someone may prefer contemporary music and another rap. Neither is wrong.  The Word of God is not a preference, but principles God has spoken. God is right about marriage and Carrie Underwood is wrong.
I am writing to plead with you to consider the clarity of God’s Word on marriage and reflect on it in the artist you choose for next year. It is God who has blessed you with this platform and it is God who can remove His hand of blessing if you become careless with His principles. I completely understand the desire of attracting more people so you can present them with the eternal truth of the gospel. The strategy behind it is wise, but strategy must not usurp biblical principle. Just as the Lord continues to help me distinguish between preference and principle I pray you allow Him to help you. “For our appeal does not spring from error or impurity or any attempt to deceive, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never came with words of flattery, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness. Nor did we seek glory from people, whether from you or from others, though we could have made demands as apostles of Christ” 1 Thessalonians 2:3-6."
In Christ with humility,
Wesley Wildmon
Director of Outreach of American Family Association and Social Media Coordinator for Engage Magazine
"The teaching from pastors and apologists such as John Piper, Louie Giglio, Beth Moore, Francis Chan, and others was phenomenal."

"When I hear and see the passion Christian Millennials have for life when it comes to ending slavery, helping the poor, and caring for orphans, I am so encouraged. We are radicals for justice in these areas.
However, I am sadly discouraged by our lack of zeal for other issues such as homosexuality, immigration, and religious freedom. My point? If it is a controversial issue that needs our attention, we are likely to be silent and content with our silence."



 Published on Jan 17, 2017
Investigative reporter James O'Keefe reveals his latest project which exposes more plots by the left to disrupt Donald Trump's inauguration.

Democratic Operatives Caught Planing Terror Attack On Inauguration Day