NWV News -- Is Donald Trump in Mortal Danger?he GOP's charismatic presidential candidate Donald Trump's private plane was forced to make an emergency landing in Nashville, Tennessee, as a result of what's being called "engine trouble," by his campaign staff. But in light of some statements by several people -- such as two well-known GOP political consultants who advocate shooting Trump in his head -- a thorough investigation should be conducted, said political strategist Mike Baker.
Trump's personal Boeing 757 -- which he jokingly christened his own official Air Force One -- was on its way to Little Rock, Arkansas, from New York, but his pilots had to make the emergency detour and landed at Nashville International Airport. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials released a statement claiming that Trump's plane landed safely at 4:40 p.m. (Central Time) after the plane's captain reported he was experiencing problems with the jet engine. The FAA investigators responding to the incident said they will investigate the incident with an "open mind."
Trump, who is known as The Donald to his friends and supporters, completed his trip using a charter plane for him and his campaign entourage. This latest report builds on existing best practices for threat assessment investigations established by the Secret Service through its research, training, and operational experience over the last 20 years. While all presidential candidates now have Secret Service protection, including Trump, he already had a large, well-trained security force protecting him.
The Secret Service's protection bureau details information about possible offenders’ planning behavior, motives, and other concerning behaviors they exhibited prior to the attacks. Although the strategy addresses attacks on federal targets, the report is designed to offer guidance to federal, state, and local law enforcement officials in their efforts to identify, assess, and manage a range of potential threats when they protect VIPs (Very Important Persons).
“The reports released by National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) provide front line law enforcement and public safety professionals with in depth analysis into targeted violence incidents throughout the United States,” stated Kelly Nee, Deputy Superintendent of Boston Police Department’s Regional Intelligence Center. “This information is invaluable to local law enforcement in our mission to keep our citizens safe.”
DEATH THREATS AGAINST TRUMP
While the Secret Service and Trump's security people get reports about "crazies" and "madmen" making death threats against the GOP's most controversial candidate, even some of the nation's top political minions are making violence-prone statements.
For example, Pat Brady, the co-chairman of the John Kasich for President Campaign, said in an interview that the only way to beat Donald Trump is with a “head shot,” a term used to describe a single-bullet killing. Once he realized the ramifications of what he said, Brady then claimed that his head shot comment regarding Trump wasn't referring to a literal gunshot to the head. See Youtube video.
Not to be outdone by Brady, Republican political consultant Rick Wilson appeared on MSNBC and was more direct when he said the GOP political establishment has to “put a bullet” in Trump’s head.
According to conservative firebrand and Trump supporter Ann Coulter, "FOX News is ignoring these death threats against Donald Trump. Disgusting." And NRA firearms instructor Rick Smith noted, "Never thought it would be possible, but Fox now makes MSNBC look like a professionally run news
The real Ted Cruz is in the Senate. The imposter is running for the White House.
Ted Cruz forces Common Core onto every private, religious, and homeschool in his proposed S 306 with Federal Choice (which is NO choice at all).
Explaining the Disastrous Impact of Ted Cruz's S 306 and His Federal Choice.
• Common Core sets the stage for ALL children to be identified as “At-Risk” in public schools under Title I. This is now a given since the Every Student Succeeds Act, ESSA, was passed in December. ESSA was a bill sponsored by two establishment Republicans, Sen. Lamar Alexander and Rep. Kline. A “schoolwide” Title I banner means that Common Core now covers the entire school, and every child will receive a blanket of supports, techniques, and interventions that will force every child into compliance to meet Common Core standards.
• Sen. Ted Cruz's S 306 uses these Title I school-wide federal funds to identify and follow the child. S 306 expands “portable” funding to every child, which means they will take “public school choice” with them into any private or religious school. This means every child is “At-Risk or becoming At-Risk” of not meeting Common Core. This baggage then goes with the child into that private or religious school. This baggage includes psychological supports and interventions carried out by IDEA (Individual With Disabilitites Education Act), which is the Special Education behavioral conditioning for all students to meet Common Core non-academic standards.
• Sen. Ted Cruz’s S 306 Federal so-called “Choice” funds are “portable,” meaning a Title I child takes his/her funds with them to any school. The “portable” funds “follow the child.” This means that schools will no longer be funded as they have been in the past. Rather, children are funded. This eliminates zip codes as a destination for a better local school. “Equitable” funding means schools will “spread the Common Core wealth around” and that all schools must be the same.
• The “portable” funds following the child amount to a “micro-voucher” for every child. This is used as a backpack of funds which includes a per pupil expenditure so that every child receives an equal amount of money. An algorithm is designed by the Federal IES, Institute for Educational Science, to determine regional “equity.” Federal, state, and local funds combined are deposited into an education savings account, called an ESA, used for school tuition and Common Core services at any school or even online. The State decides what is qualified as Common Core and aligns all curriculum with Common Core. The State is the overseer of this federal financial assistance accountability. Thus “choice,” in essence, is no choice, just Common Core in any school for every child.
• Sen. Ted Cruz’s S 306 appears to eliminate the church/state controversy when the funds “follow the child.” The “portable” micro-vouchers are given to parents to use in any private and religious school that accept Title I children with their allotted micro-voucher in hand. Schools do not receive money from the government, but receive the money from parents. So it deceptively looks like parental freedom of “choice.” But it is not.
• Sen. Ted Cruz redefines a homeschool as a private school, thereby forcing homeschooled children to come under the federal Title I net which mandates Common Core. A homeschool can set up a micro-voucher ESA, education savings account, and collect the same federal, state, and local funds to use to teach their child/children Common Core. Or use an ESA in any public, charter, private, religious school, or online class which must align to Common Core.
• Sen. Ted Cruz eliminates the cap on ESA's in order to accept ALL funds that mandate services AND support interventions to meet Common Core. These services and supports are used in order to make sure that every child's personalized career pathway conforms to Common Core. The government micro-voucher, which becomes substantial by including ALL funds, are deposited into this Lifelong Learning ESA backpack. This wide array of funds is the carrot for parents to support what they think is Choice, but no one explains to parents that there is Common Core baggage attached to the funds. This personalized plan is NOT for your chil
Do Rubio and Cruz support this? You bet....We are fighting insiders who are bringing us down....Mr Trump hates American being sold down the river....to slavery.....Ryan is no different or Bush, Christie, Kasich, Sanders, Clinton...Vote for a pro American Candidate, Mr Trump! Remember the establishments hs lied to us for 50 yrs + and we are down on our knees....and they are laughing....they could care less about Americans.....
The Bundy standoff in 2014 has led to the current Oregon standoff where trigger happy Oregon State Patrol and FBI agents couldn’t wait to shoot one of the landowners at a traffic stop in what has been reported by eyewitness Victoria Sharps, who was in the white SUV, as, “red laser lights everywhere, shined on all of the occupants of the rancher’s car, and a hail of bullets from the FBI agents fired into our car where Ryan Bundy was wounded. It’s a wonder we weren’t all killed.”
The apparent summary execution of Lavoy Finicum at the traffic stop was murder according to Ms. Sharps. She stated that Lavoy. 54, a Mormon and father of 11 children and 19 grandchildren, had his hands up when the FBI agents shot him several times and while he was laying on the ground, they shot him three more times. But let’s not forget that Lavoy Finicum tried to run a roadblock.
The FBI calls Ms. Sharps’ testimony false and has released a video of the event. The FBI claims Lavoy was reaching for a gun when they shot him. Couldn’t they have at least waited to see the gun before they shot him? The FBI video doesn’t mention or show the bullet-riddled SUV. Any investigation into the shooting will likely be a whitewash.
But this begs the question of why would a father of 11 children be at a place where he could be killed? That’s irresponsible. Who will take care of the children and his ranch now that he is gone ….. the government?
By the time this article is published, the Malheur Nature Preserve occupation will probably be over. The apparent leader of the ranchers, Ammon Bundy, from his jail cell, has strongly urged the other remaining ranchers to go home, if they can get out of there without being arrested, or shot. Hopefully, they will leave peacefully and no more blood shed will occur.
There were only two possible outcomes from the Oregon standoff. The first outcome is all of the ranchers would all be shot dead by government agents. The other outcome was that they would be arrested for breaking the law. Only one was shot dead and the rest have been, or probably will be, arrested. They could serve many years in jail.
What did the ranchers hope to accomplish? Yes, they obtained national news coverage, but that coverage labeled the ranchers as thugs and terrorists. What the ranchers wanted was the Hammond Father and Son Oregon ranchers to be released from prison for a trumped up arson charge by the government giving them a five-year sentence as terrorists. That sentence was obviously over-kill by the government and was and is a travesty of justice. Nevertheless, even after the standoff is over, the Hammonds will still be in prison. So there was no win on this demand.
The ranchers’ second demand was for the federal government to cede all federal lands to the states. That demand was never going to happen in the short term but several states are attempting to regain control of federal lands in their states. We see movement along these lines in Utah, Nevada and Idaho.
Even though we sympathize with the ranchers and their cause, the occupation was futility by any other name, driven by irrational anger and frustration. The news of the occupation will be dead in a week or two, drowned out by the Presidential race. The trials of those arrested might be covered but it won’t be front-page news. The press will crucify the ranchers and when the ranchers go to jail, no one will care. The ranchers will become nameless martyrs in a long war against rising government tyranny, even though the ranchers’ honorable goal was to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
What are the lessons learned from the Oregon occupation event? The first lesson is, you have to be smarter than the government and that shouldn’t be too hard given that government employees are intellectually challenged at best. What the ranchers did was not being smarter than the government.
The second lesson is that you don’t go up against a superior force with a handful of disorganized armed citizens. That’s not only folly it can be deadly and is in direct violation of the art of war. If Americans decide they want to challenge the military power of the federal government, they had better have no less than 10,000 heavily armed, dedicated citizens with a tight organization, strong leadership, adequately supplied and funded, a detailed plan and the commitment and courage to confront government no matter what the cost. Any outright war with the 10,000 would be perceived by the public as heavy handed and dictatorial and the mask of government tyranny would finally be removed for all to see. That is probably why the government backed down at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada in 2014 because of the adverse public opinion if civilian Americans started dying in the desert at the hands of BLM agents.
Anyone should know that the government can easily over power a smaller force as they did in Oregon and the smaller force will have gained nothing out of the confrontation. But a force of 10,000 or more raises the stakes to a whole new level where the government will think twice about a war where Americans are killing other Americans, albeit that didn’t stop them in the civil war.
Government could not ignore the demands of an army of 10,000 armed and dedicated civilians who intended to punctuate their demands with guns. However, as far as we know, there is no force of an organized group of 10,000 heavily armed citizens lurking in the shadows of America right now.
Consequently, the only other way is to legally challenge the government by using the courts, like the environmentalists do, even knowing that the courts and brainwashed juries lean in favor of the government and especially the environmentalists. Such a strategy requires a non-beatable legal team and tens of millions of dollars to fund the legal battle. Yes, we can take back America in the courts, with enough money.
If the 50,000,000 or so voters that voted for Mitt Romney in the 2012 election donated $10.00 per month for a year, a war chest of $500,000,000 would be raised each month (that’s $6 Billion Dollars in a year) to fight a legal battle. Even if 10% of that 50 million would donate $10.00, that would be enough. The giant legal firms would fall all over themselves to represent this group in that they would sue their own mother if there were enough money in it for them.
But until such a legal strategy is mounted and the funds raised, nothing will change in America. As we said in our last article entitled, “America’s Collapse Is A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy – UNLESS”, “….. a critical mass of dedicated American citizens finally decide to resist government tyranny by acts of civil disobedience on a grand scale, punctuated by the threat of force if necessary.” A Boston style tea party, or even a million-man march on Washington DC, or an armed occupation at a nature preserve in Oregon to seek a redress of grievances, just doesn’t cut it in today’s America. The corrupt “system” will just swallow them up and spit them out.
But we wonder who gets it, or even whose listening, or worse, who cares?
[NOTE:The forgoing article is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the opinion of NewsWithViews.com, it's employees, representatives, or other contributing writers.]
Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property issues and author of his weekly column, "In Defense of Rural America", is the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners, (NARLO) (http://www.narlo.org) a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. He can be reached for comment at info@narlo.org.
Government could not ignore the demands of an army of 10,000 armed and dedicated civilians who intended to punctuate their demands with guns. However, as far as we know, there is no force of an organized group of 10,000 heavily armed citizens lurking in the shadows of America right now.
Trump, who is known as The Donald to his friends and supporters, completed his trip using a charter plane for him and his campaign entourage. This latest report builds on existing best practices for threat assessment investigations established by the Secret Service through its research, training, and operational experience over the last 20 years. While all presidential candidates now have Secret Service protection, including Trump, he already had a large, well-trained security force protecting him.
Share This Article
