Connect with us

Everything

The Federalist Party fundraising is up and running

Published

on

Whenever I talk to pundits and political pros, the first (and often second, third, and fourth) question they ask is about money. Having a passionate party with great ideas is one thing, but funding it is a whole other story. Other third parties have failed because of a lack of sufficient funds. How will the Federalist Party be different?

We’re opening up to the standard practice of accepting contributions from members. The difference is that we have no intention of making this our primary form of revenue. It’s important to get the ball rolling through investments by those who believe in what we’re doing, but it’s just the start. Over time, we’ll be introducing some other standard practices such as selling Federalist merchandise. More importantly, we’ll be exploring ways to generate revenue by actually earning it. It’s crazy, I know, but there’s no reason why we shouldn’t apply our talents and the talents of members towards the goal of earning revenue just like any business in America.

It’s important to understand that operating the party as a business does not mean we’re operating the party for profit. We will keep overhead low, particularly when it comes to salaries. Nobody employed by the Federalist Party will be getting rich. Once we start assigning salaries (everyone is currently a volunteer, including me), they will be reasonable. Frugality is a virtue that every Federalist Party employee must embrace. Every penny raised will be used to push the national party, state parties, and candidates forward.

For this party to succeed, we need money. This is why we’re not going to go down the same path as any other party. The two major parties use big corporate donations. We will not. In fact, we can make a Constitutional case against accepting money from large corporations since the vast majority of them generate revenue in other countries.

We also won’t go down the path of failure that third parties invariably travel. They spend a good chunk of their time trying to convince big-money donors to give them a chance. It almost never works. This is why they’re all struggling just to get boots on the ground in many states or to run for local elections. They simply can’t afford to run their dream candidate as a sacrificial lamb in the presidential races and still support those running in local races. This is a huge mistake.

If you are interested in learning more about the Federalist Party, visit our website and sign up as a member. If you’re ready to contribute, go straight to the investment page.

Throughout history, our nation has had moments when a brave group of people stood up and made things happen against seemingly insurmountable odds. From the Mayflower to the Revolutionary War to the civil rights movement, people who were tired of the status quo stood up and had their names counted. It took courage, effort, and help from above, but they succeeded. We intend to succeed as well, God willing. Are you willing to help?

Immigration

Will Trump suspend the Constitution to build his wall?

Published

on

Will Trump suspend the Constitution to build his wall

What do martial law, illegal immigration, and using the military as a national police force have in common with Barack Obama and Donald Trump? Possibly more than you realize.

After years of failing to fix the illegal immigration problem and Obama’s abuse of executive orders, there were conspiracy theories being spread by people like Alex Jones at InfoWars.com that Obama was laying the groundwork to declare martial law and cancel the 2016 election.

Of course, that never happened, although I sometimes wish it had (just kidding, no letters please). But with the obvious assault on our Constitutionally protected, God-given rights increasing with every passing day, and with Trump’s ignorance of the Constitution, we need to ask ourselves if something like that could still happen.

Trump convinced America to vote for him in 2016 based on his promise to build a “big beautiful wall” on our southern border and have Mexico pay for it. Yet, after two years, no such wall exists, and Mexico has let Trump know in no uncertain terms they have no intention of financing one.

As a result, all of the problems associated with illegal immigration not only still exist, but they’ve gotten worse. On top of that, Trump is busy gearing up for another four years as president … or more.

Trump has often joked about being president beyond the Constitutionally allowed eight years, but recent comments about his border wall would seem to indicate that he’s not all that concerned about any limitations placed on him by the Constitution he once called “archaic.”

On Tuesday, Trump bragged about the success he was having with the wall even though it doesn’t exist while issuing this threat. “If the Democrats do not give us the votes to secure our Country, the Military will build … the Wall.”

In essence, Trump is saying that he will play the role of dictator by ignoring Congress and using the military to force his will, a threat he also made earlier this year.

Such an action would turn the military into a national police force, but it would also require some manipulation of the Constitution. Trump can’t simply shift Border Security funds from the Department of Homeland Security to the military without Congress, unless he declares a national emergency.

Such a declaration would suspend the limits placed on the president by the Constitution and allow him to use the military as he sees fit without Congressional approval such as he did when he sent thousands of troops to the border to deal with the migrant caravan in October.

In a survey released in the summer of 2017, a majority (52%) of respondents supported the idea of postponing the 2020 election if Trump needed to declare a national emergency to deal with the immigration problem.

It looks like Trump might just take them up on the offer.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

News

Shooting near West Bank settlement kills at least 2 Israelis

Published

on

Shooting near West Bank settlement kills at least 2 Israelis

JERUSALEM (AP) — A shooting attack near a West Bank settlement on Thursday killed at least two Israelis and critically wounded another two, Israel’s rescue service said.

The deaths extend a violent week that began with a shooting outside a West Bank settlement on Sunday, resulting in the death of a baby who was delivered prematurely following the weekend attack, and continued with the killing of two Palestinians wanted in that and another attack on Israelis in the West Bank.

Eli Bin, the head of Israel’s Magen David Adom service, told Israeli Army Radio that two people were killed in the shooting, which occurred at a location about a ten-minute drive south from the place of Sunday’s attack. Their identities were not immediately known.

A later statement from the service said paramedics arrived at a bus stop to find four “youngsters” with gunshot wounds.

Israeli media reported that a passing car opened fire outside the settlement, but it was not clear if the gunmen had fled the scene or were stopped. The Israeli military had no additional information.

While the West Bank experiences occasional deadly violence, often between Israeli troops and Palestinian protesters, much of the Israeli-Palestinian violence in recent months has been limited to the Gaza Strip, where some 175 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire in border protests.

“In recent days, we definitely feel like the situation (in the West Bank) is getting worse,” Shalom Galil, a paramedic who assisted at the scene of the shooting, told Israeli Army Radio.

The shooting comes hours after Israeli security forces tracked down and killed a Palestinian accused of killing two Israelis.

Israeli police said Ashraf Naalweh was found armed near the West Bank city of Nablus and was killed during an arrest raid.

Israel accuses Naalweh of shooting to death two Israelis and wounding another at an attack on a West Bank industrial zone in October. He fled the scene and Israeli forces have been searching for him since.

“Israel’s long arm will reach anyone who harms Israeli citizens,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

Police said it had made a number of arrests in its attempt to hunt down Naalweh and suspected he was planning on carrying out another attack.

On Wednesday, Israeli forces killed Salah Barghouti, a Palestinian suspect wanted in the drive-by shooting earlier this week at a West Bank bus stop.

In Sunday night’s attack, assailants in a Palestinian vehicle opened fire at a bus stop outside a West Bank settlement, wounding seven people, including a 21-year-old pregnant woman, before speeding away.

The militant Hamas group that rules the Gaza Strip said that both Barghouti and Naalweh were its members but stopped short of claiming responsibility for the attacks the two carried out.

“The flame of resistance in the (West) Bank will remain alive until the occupation is defeated on all our land,” Hamas said.

Also Thursday, police said an assailant stabbed two officers in Jerusalem’s Old City, wounding them lightly. The officers opened fire on the attacker and he was killed, spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said.

Police identified the man as a 26-year-old Palestinian from the West Bank. It released security camera footage that shows the man lunging toward the officers and appearing to stab them.

Continue Reading

Politics

The administrative state is far too powerful

Published

on

The administrative state is far too powerful

The administrative state is essentially a loophole in government that gives citizens no recourse. We don’t elect them. We can’t expect Congress to do its job. What are we supposed to do?

Philip Hamburger took to PragerU to deliver one of the most important talks the channel has had in a while. The dangers inherent to unelected bureaucrats and their fiefdoms is real and must be addressed now.

We can’t vote them out. Capitol Hill has abdicated. The founding fathers would be ashamed of the administrative state that holds too much control. Philip Hamburger and PragerU have made a must-watch video. The question is, how do we fix this?

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report