Ever Feel You Were Being Watched?

In the little town of Bluffdale, Utah, between the Wasatch Range and the Oquirrh Mountains, the National Security Agency (NSA) is building what will be the nation’s largest spy center.

 Dubbed the Utah Data Center, the project is already employing thousands of hardhat workers in its construction and will soon have some 10,000 construction workers building a data center that will be more than five times the size of the nation’s capitol.

“We’ve been asked not to talk about the project,” Rob Moore told a local reporter. Mr. Moore is president of Big-D Construction, one of the three major contractors working on the project. Plans for the center include a $10 million antiterrorism protection program, a fence designed to stop a 15,000-pound vehicle traveling 50 miles per hour, closed-circuit cameras, a biometric identification system, a vehicle inspection facility, and a visitor-control center.

Why all the fuss? Why all the security?

Well, the lead story in Wired magazine for April exposed the Stellar Wind program for its intended purpose: to spy on every jot and scribble of any American citizen’s life all the way down to his “pocket litter:” parking-lot stubs, receipts from McDonalds, tickets from his haircut at Cost Cutters, as well as all the way up to the content of his every e-mail, every Google search, every telephone or cell phone conversation.

Stellar Wind is the code name for an effort approved by President George W. Bush following the September 11, 2001 attacks, to mine a large database of communications of American citizens but which was allegedly terminated when Congress pushed back against it.

However, the National Security Agency, awash with funds provided by Congress, is nearly finished constructing the Utah Data Center as the collection point for data provided from around the country and around the world. Its purpose: “to intercept, decipher, analyze and store vast swaths of the world’s communications … [including] all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls and Google searches.”

In other words, according to James Bamford, author of The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, when the $2 billion facility (consisting of four 25,000 square-foot buildings full of computer servers and their air conditioning units plus a 900,000 square-foot building to house its technical and administration people) is completed in September, 2013, virtually everything one communicates through any traceable medium, or any record of one’s existence in the electronic medium, which these days is everything, will … become the property of the US government to deal with as its sees fit.

William Binney, a former NSA crypto-mathematician who quit NSA after he realized it was openly and deliberately ignoring privacy limitations built into the Constitution, said in an interview with Bamford, holding his thumb and forefinger close together: “We are this far from a turnkey totalitarian state.”

Binney headed up a team that built the infrastructure to spy on everyone all the time and, at the time, recommended that NSA install its “tapping gear” only at the nation’s “landing sites” — physical locations where fiber optic cables come ashore — to limit its eavesdropping to international communications only and preserving Americans’ right to privacy.

But NSA ignored Binney’s recommendation and instead decided to build its spy center in Utah, connecting it with satellites and listening posts in Colorado, Georgia, Texas, Hawaii, and elsewhere, with direct links to NSA headquarters in Fort Meade, Maryland, NSA’s research facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and last but not least, the White House.

In addition NSA has two huge data-gathering facilities, each with three 105-foot satellite dishes, one at Catawissa, Pennsylvania, called Roaring Creek, the other at Arbuckle, California, called Salt Creek.

Says Binney, “They violated the Constitution setting it up. But they didn’t care. They were going to do it anyway, and they were going to crucify anyone who stood in their way. When they started violating the Constitution, I couldn’t stay.”

One of the challenges NSA faced was decrypting data, such as that encoded by PGP or the much more robust encryption software used by governments. The Advanced Encryption Standard is used to protect most commercial e-mail programs and web browsers and has, until very recently, been considered unbreakable.

To break a 128-bit encryption code, for example, the number of trial-and-error attempts — call “brute force” — requires an incomprehensibly large number of attempts before succeeding: 340 undecillion (10 to the 26th power). But current breakthroughs by NSA, using Cray super computers, now can break such codes in fractions of a second, exposing all information to the light of day and the peering eyes of NSA observers.

At the moment it appears that the two strongest barriers to intrusions on privacy, technological and constitutional, have been shredded. But courts are involved in a variety of challenges to the NSA’s efforts, and the project isn’t due to come online in full flower until a year from September. Such an operation, now out in the open, requires enormous funding.

Congress, given sufficient encouragement and electoral change of heart this November, could just shut it down by defunding it. It’s really up to informed Americans to see where their elected officials stand on privacy versus security and then take appropriate action in the voting booth.

Attribution: Patriot Update, The New American

Constitution 101 (5)

http://www.hillsdale.edu/constitution/week_05_overview.aspx

Lesson 5:“The Separation of Powers: Ensuring Good Government”

Study Guide

Overview
The separation of powers helps to ensure good government at the same time it guards against tyranny. Independent in function but coordinated in the pursuit of justice, the three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—must each have enough power to resist the encroachment of the others, and yet not so much that the liberty of the people is lost.

A political regime has three dimensions: the ruling institutions, the rulers, and the way of life of the people. In America, the rulers—the people themselves—and their ruling institutions—staffed by the people’s representatives—aim at securing the Creator-endowed natural rights of all citizens. The Framers did this in two ways. “Vertically” considered, our ruling institutions are defined by federalism, or the division of power between the national, state, and local governments. “Horizontally” considered, the ruling institutions of the federal government itself are separated and co-equal.

In the American regime, the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” No one branch is superior to it; all three branches have a duty to abide by it. While each of the three branches plays a unique role in the passage, execution, and interpretation of laws, all of the branches must work together in the governing process.

The legislative branch is closest to the people. It is also the branch in which the danger of majority tyranny lurks. The passions of the people are reflected most in the House of Representatives, where the members are elected for terms of two years. The Senate, with its six year terms, was designed to be a more stable legislative presence than the House.

The defining characteristic of the executive is “energy.” The president can act swiftly and decisively to deal with foreign threats and to enforce the law, and can also provide a check on legislative tyranny through the veto.

Members of the judiciary, the third branch of government, must exercise judgment in particular cases to secure individual rights. Through “judicial review,” the judiciary is given the authority to strike down laws that are contrary to the Constitution. But judicial review is not judicial supremacy; even the Supreme Court must rely upon the other branches once it has rendered judgment.

The checks that each branch can exercise against the encroachment of the others ultimately protect the liberties of the people. The separation of powers promotes justice and good government by having each branch perform its proper function. This institutional design allows the sovereign people to observe and to know which branch is responsible for which actions in order to hold each to account. The sense of mutual responsibility built into the separation of powers is a reflection of the moral and civic responsibility all Americans share.

Mitt hearts Oil

I don’t agree much with Mitt Romney, but he is right on the money regarding this topic.

rom: Conservative Byte

During an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” former Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate Mitt Romney said there is “no question” that President Obama is to blame for rising gas prices and called for the president to fire the “gas hike trio” of cabinet members.

“When [President Obama] ran for office, he said he wanted to see gasoline prices go up,” Romney said. “He said that energy prices would skyrocket under his views, and he selected three people to help him implement that program.

The secretary of energy, the secretary of interior and EPA administrator. And this gas hike trio has been doing the job over the last three-and-a-half years, and gas prices are up. The right course is they ought to be fired because the president has apparently suffered election-year conversion. He’s now decided that gasoline prices should come down.”

Romney went on to say that once Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson submit their letters of resignation, Obama should “start drilling for energy here,” and pursue development of oil, natural gas, and coal resources.

A Fork in the Road

Stuart Chase was a progressive and Fabian socialist, who wrote a book called “The Road we are Traveling”. He wrote this book in 1942.Chase was a well-known progressive of his era and was part of the Woodrow Wilson administration. He has been credited for the term “The New Deal”.

No one, including me, had heard of this gentleman, until Glenn Beck brought him to light a few days ago. The reason why he brought him to light was the new film, the propaganda film, narrated by Tom Hanks, called “The Road we Traveled”.

When I heard of this book by Stuart Chase, I, like Glenn, thought, what a remarkable coincidence that this progressive book and this new film could be so similarly titled.

Over the past few days Glenn Beck has done some research on this progressive, Stuart Chase and has come up with some remarkable similarities between the book, “The Road we are Traveling” and the situation we find ourselves in now.

As Glenn Beck has stated, when Barack Obama said five days before the election in 2008 that he wanted to fundamentally transform America and the world, no one listened. We should have.

As many people say, words mean things. It’s no different for progressives. Words mean things to them also. Progressive’s words are always carefully crafted. We should realize that they do in fact mean what they say and say what they mean. They are not just hollow words nor campaign rhetoric.

Knowing now whom Barack Obama is and the people that he has surrounded himself with are, we must surely take him at his word that he and they wish to change the entire structure of America and the world.

Most of us today would consider this progressive march to be a march toward socialism communism or fascism. Once again we go back to, words mean things.

Stuart Chase was smart enough to realize that, in 1942 no one wanted to hear about socialism or fascism or communism. Instead he called his proposed fundamental transformation, simply “Political System X”. Chase claimed, in his book; once you have enough pieces of the society fundamentally transformed, you will not be able to turn the ship around, as it were. In other words, there will be no turning back to capitalism or the free market.

So now let’s juxtapose what Stuart Chase had in mind and just how far Barack Obama has come.

As we go through this list just keep in mind that Barack Obama and his ilk are not the first to attempt to transform this country. It has been a progressive project for 100 years. These are patient lot.

In his book Chase describes his political system X as the following [Chase’s words will be italicized]: You will need a strong centralized government. I think we can all agree that we have a strong and ever stronger centralized government. I guess we can check that one off.

You will need an Executive arm growing at the expense of the Legislative and Judicial arm. I think we can all agree that this is happening right under our noses. President Obama and his administration appear to be doing whatever they want whether they have the constitutional authority to do so or not, simply brushing aside the legislature as they go. I suppose we can give him a big thumbs up for this one.

You will need to have control of banking, credit and security exchanges by the government. The tarp bailouts pretty much took care of the control of banking issue. As far as credit goes, try getting a student loan or purchasing a house without having the government involved in the financing. Let’s check that one off.

Seems they are doing rather well with their fundamental transformation project so far.

You will need underwriting of employment through armaments or by public works. This sounds a lot like the stimulus package. I guess we’ll check this one off also, at least partially.

You will need underwriting of Social Security by the government, underwriting of food, housing and medical care by the government. Social Security, that’s a given. Underwriting of food is certainly being taken care of with the FDA, the USDA and Michelle Obama with the rest of her food Nazis telling us what we can and can’t eat. And let us not forget the foodstamp program. Housing is certainly being taken care of through Fannie and Freddie and all the other government organizations controlling loans and whatnot. Of course, Obamacare will take care of medical care. That’s check, check, check and check.

The use of deficit spending to finance underwriting is essential. This one is fairly obvious. We’ll give them a big checkmark.

There must be an abandonment of gold in lieu of managed currency. The Fed accomplished this during the Nixon administration in the 1970s. Check that one off.

You will need government control over trade, natural resources, transportation, agricultural production, organize labor unions and youth corps. You will need a youth and people dedicated to the ideology of government authorities. What part of trade doesn’t the government already control? That is of course a rhetorical question. They are certainly busy trying to control natural resources, coal, oil and natural gas; the air we breathe and the water we drink, etc. as far as labor unions are concerned I’m not sure who controls whom? Is it the government that controls labor unions or vice versa. I guess they are actually one in the same. Glenn Beck contends, and I agree, the youth and people dedicated to the ideology of government authority is Occupy Wall Street. They are the youth corps.

Heavy taxation of Estates and incomes of the wealthy is essential. Gee, who has been pushing for that for as long as I’ve been alive? I’d give that a half a checkmark, but it seems they will eventually achieve this.

There must be state control over communications and propaganda. It appears they’re well on their way to achieving this goal. We don’t call them the state-controlled media for nothing. Let’s give them a big checkmark for that.

Well now. Can I get a holy crap?!

I think it might’ve been easier to compile a list of what they haven’t accomplished instead of what they have. I guess the old saying “Ignorance is Bliss” really does apply in this case. Maybe we should all just go back to sleep and allow the government to take complete control of our lives.

By the way, Glenn Beck believes, as do I, that the reason this new propaganda film is titled “The Road We’ve Traveled”, is that these progressives believe that the journey is virtually completed. As I’ve stated before, these progressives choose their words very carefully. They did not choose this title by accident.

I truly hope that Stuart Chase is wrong and that we will be able to turn this ship around, or at least slow it long enough for a majority of our citizens to wake up.

Attribution: I would like to thank Glenn Beck for compiling this list. He and his staff are an invaluable resource.

Rush and the New Blacklist

By Patrick J. Buchanan

The original “Hollywood blacklist” dates back to 1947, when 10 members of the Communist Party, present or former, invoked the Fifth Amendment before the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

The party was then a wholly owned subsidiary of the Comintern of Joseph Stalin, whose victims had surpassed in number those of Adolf Hitler.

In a 346-17 vote, the Hollywood Ten were charged with contempt of Congress and suspended or fired.

The blacklist had begun. Directors, producers and writers who had been or were members of the party and refused to recant lost their jobs.

Politically, the blacklist was a victory of the American right.

In those first years of the Cold War, anti-communism and Christianity were mighty social, political and cultural forces. Hollywood acknowledged their power in what it produced.

Rhett Butler’s departing words to Scarlett O’Hara — “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!” — were the most shocking heard on screen.

Catholicism was idealistically portrayed in “Going My Way” and “The Song of Bernadette.” Priest roles were played by Bing Crosby, Spencer Tracy, Gregory Peck.

But over a half century, the left captured and now controls the culture.

The Legion of Decency is dead. The Filthy Speech Movement from Berkeley 1964 has triumphed. The “seven filthy words” of comedians like Lenny Bruce and George Carlin are regular fare in films and steadily creeping into prime-time.

Movies show sexually explicit scenes that make Howard Hughes’ 1944 condemned film, “The Outlaw,” starring Jane Russell, look like “Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm.”

Where Ingrid Bergman of “Casablanca” fame had to flee the country in 1950 after an adulterous affair with director Roberto Rossellini, the media today happily provide all the salacious details of every “relationship” that Hollywood stars enter into and exit.

All of this testifies to the cultural ascendancy of the left.

Yet every establishment has its own orthodoxy, its own taboos, and its own blacklist. And, despite its pretensions to be open to all ideas, our cultural establishment is no different.

While the Hollywood Ten have been rehabilitated and heroized, it is Christians and conservatives who are in cultural cross hairs now.

Traditional Catholic morality is mocked, as are Southern evangelical Christians. And the new cultural establishment has erected a new regime called Political Correctness. It writes the hate-crimes laws that citizens must obey and the campus speech codes students must follow.

The new mortal sins are not filthy talk or immoral conduct, but racism, sexism, homophobia and nativism. The establishment alone defines these sins and enforces the proscriptions against them, from which there is no appeal, only the obligatory apology, the act of contrition and the solemn commitment never to sin again.

If you still believe homosexuality is unnatural and immoral and gay marriage absurd, you are a homophobe who is to keep his mouth shut.

If you think some ethnic and racial groups have greater natural athletic, academic or artistic talents, don’t go there, if you do not wish an early end to your journalistic career.

If you think illegal aliens should be sent home and legal immigration should mirror the ethnic makeup of the nation, you are a xenophobe and a racist.

All of these terms — racist, sexist, homophobe — are synonyms for heretic. Any of them can get you hauled before an inquisition.

To control the politics of a nation, control of the culture is a precondition. For who controls the culture defines what is moral and immoral, and what is heroic and villainous. And if you can set limits on what journalists write and broadcasters say, you can shape what people think and believe.

Through history, frightened establishments have dealt severely even with peaceful challenges to their power, which is why Socrates was forced to drink poison, Christ was crucified, Sir Thomas More was beheaded and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was sent to the Gulag.

When Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a “slut” for demanding that Georgetown Law School subsidize the $3,000 women students annually require for birth control to exercise their sexual freedom, the media that piled on Rush objected less to the term than to the target he picked: one of their own.

Bill Maher routinely uses far more odious terms on Sarah Palin. Yet his $1 million gift to an Obama Super PAC was welcomed by agents of the same president who phoned Fluke to console her over Rush’s remarks.

Rush apologized. But the left still campaigns to have his voice stifled and censored, by threatening advertisers of his radio show with boycotts if they refuse to drop him.

Thus does the left honor the First Amendment.

As shown in HBO’s “Game Change,” John McCain in 2008 ruled out attacks on Barack Obama’s 20-year ties to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the Chicago preacher of “God damn America!” fame.

Why? Wright and Obama were black, and such attacks might agitate the latent racism of white America. The Republican Party censors itself so as not to antagonize a cultural establishment that wants to see it dead.

“Beautiful losers,” my late friend Sam Francis called them.

The Road They’ve Traveled

Glenn Beck uncovers the origin of The new Obama campaign documentary, or propaganda film. It is truly chilling.

If you do nothing else, watch the video discussion by Beck and his crew at the end of the article. It is a real eye opener.

Link to it here

A BOSS Farmer

From Jason Mattera of Human Events:

Bruce Springsteen is a man of the people. He stands up for the little guy. A regular blue-collar Joe. A union man. A bona fide working-class hero.

And, when he’s not busy being all that… he’s a tax-dodging liberal hypocrite worth over $200 million who pretends to be a farmer to save hundreds of thousands of dollars on his property taxes that would have otherwise funded the welfare programs he pretends to care about.

That’s right. Mr. “Union Man, Blue Collar” Springsteen is a total fraud, as I explain in my brand-new book Hollywood Hypocrites: The Devastating Truth About Obama’s Biggest Backers.

Recall that Springsteen actively campaigned for Obama in 2008, hosting free concerts that attracted tens of thousands of people in key battleground states. Springsteen’s song, “The Rising,” became a campaign staple for Obama’s speech venues and culminated in him playing for Obama’s Inauguration. And this time around, the White House plans on using the aging rocker’s new politically-motivated track, “We Take Care of Our Own,” to warm up crowds as the re-election bid kicks into high gear.

So does The Boss live by the same prescriptions he and Obama wish to inflict on the rest of America?

Consider the following.

In 2011, perhaps wanting some local free press, Springsteen decided to write a letter to the editor of his town’s newspaper. In response to an article about tax cuts and aid to entitlement programs, the Boss wrote in to praise the piece for being “one of the few that highlights the contradictions between a policy of large tax cuts, on the one hand, and cuts in services to those in the most dire conditions, on the other.”

Furthermore, Springsteen wrote, “your article shows that the cuts are eating away at the lower edges of the middle class, not just those already classified as in poverty, and are likely to continue to get worse over the next few years.” Then, with his well-honed “everyman” touch, he signed the letter along with his oh‑so-common-man-sounding town name, “Colts Neck.”

A year earlier, the Boss echoed similar concerns while emphasizing his support for Obama’s constant naggings to tax the rich.

“The biggest problem we have now is almost 10 percent unemployment, but we also have the disparity of wealth,” Springsteen told London’s Sunday Times. “You can’t have an American civilization with the kind of disparity of wealth we have. It will eat away at the country’s heart and soul and spirit.”

Now, all this would be just fine and dandy. But there’s one small problem with Springsteen’s anti-tax-cut posturing: the man is a first-rate tax evader.

Bruce Springsteen pays over $138,000 a year in taxes for his three-acre home in Colts Neck, New Jersey. He owns another 200 adjoining acres. But because he has a part-time farmer come and grow a few tomatoes (organic, of course) and has horses, his tax bill on the remaining 200 acres is just $4,639 bucks. Do the math. By being a fake farmer, the working-class zero Springsteen is making a mint by robbing New Jersey of the antipoverty program funds he says they desperately need.

“I think it is unfair to our other property taxpayers that if you are a fake farmer, and that you don’t legitimately farm, that you are getting a property tax break and forcing your neighbor to pick up your tab,” said state senator Jennifer Beck. “That was not the intent of the law. It’s a violation of the public trust.” When Fox 5 New York reporter Barbara Nevins Taylor asked a lawyer for the trust that owns Springsteen’s land to comment on the Boss’s lucrative fake-farming tax breaks, predictably, the lawyer had no comment.

The tax loophole comes from the New Jersey’s Farmland Assessment Act of 1964. Originally the provision was created to help preserve agriculture in New Jersey. To qualify for the tax break, landowners must own at least five acres of land and produce just $500 a year in goods in order to qualify. Anyone who can meet those minimum standards can reduce their farmland tax bills by an astounding 98 percent.

Now, no conservative begrudges anyone—not even a die-hard Obama Zombie like Bruce Springsteen—from lowering their tax burden by taking full advantage of every tax break available to them. That’s legal and fine. But for a guy who makes hundreds of millions pretending to be a guardian of the working class, and who vocally supports Obama’s attempts to tax the rich at higher rates, to then turn around and utilize obscure tax loopholes to pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars that would otherwise go to his beloved social programs . . . well, that’s just flat-out Hollywood hypocrisy.

Ooh, SNAP! (revisited)

Believe or not, food stamp recipients have traded their benefits with nefarious retailers in exchange for cash they used to buy drugs and weapons.

No! Corruption & fraud in a government run program?

That’s just one of many outrageous examples of abuse in the food stamp program revealed when Phyllis Fong, the Department of Agriculture’s inspector general, testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Thursday.

“In terms of fraud, we have seen many types of trafficking in SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits,” she said in prepared remarks.

“By giving a recipient $50 in cash for $100 in benefits, an unscrupulous retailer can make a significant profit. Recipients, of course, are then able to spend the cash however they like.

“In some cases, recipients have exchanged benefits for drugs, weapons, and other contraband.”

“When trafficking occurs unchecked, families do not receive the intended nutritional assistance, and unscrupulous retailers profit at the expense of the American public.”

The latest estimate places the number of food stamp recipients in this fiscal year at about 46.3 million, up from 30.8 million at the beginning of fiscal year 2009. That’s a boon for the economy, don’t you know.

The sale or purchase of food stamp benefits for monetary gain is punishable by disqualification from receiving future benefits, fines, and criminal prosecution, according to CNS News.

However, it came to light in Fong’s testimony that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the food stamp program, does not have a policy to ban food stamp retailers from the program even when they have been convicted of defrauding the government.

Fong said: “‘Suspension and debarment’ is a legal tool that Federal agencies can use to protect programs from repeat abusers and ensure that the Government does business only with responsible parties.

“If FNS (the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service) took steps to debar retailers with a proven record of dishonesty, those individuals would be prevented from abusing other Federal programs.

“However, in a recent audit, we determined that FNS did not debar any of the 615 wholesalers and retailers convicted in relation to 208 cases, even though a conviction is adequate grounds for debarment.”

That’s just great. These companies were not just charged, but convicted and are still able to conduct business as usual.

She also testified that the USDA does not review the criminal background on food stamp retailers and “therefore cannot comply with its own requirement to deny SNAP authorization to any retailers with a criminal history.”

These are the same beuracrats that will control your healthcare soon. Comforting.

In addition, the food stamp program does not even check the Social Security number of many of its recipients, countless of whom are using the numbers of dead people and invalid SSNs to get benefits that Fong said potentially total $1.1 million a month.

Attribution: Newsmax

Affordable Light Bulbs

Government Stupidity Defies Satire When a $50 Light Bulb Wins an Affordability Prize

 by: Daniel J. Mitchell

I’ve written about the government’s war on consumer-friendly light bulbs (and also similar attacks on working toilets and washing machines that actually clean), so I’m generally not surprised by bureaucratic nonsense.

But even I’m shocked the federal government gave an affordability award for a light bulb that costs $50. I’m not making this up. Here’s a blurb from ABC News.

The U.S. government has awarded appliance-maker Philips $10 million for devising an “affordable” alternative to today’s standard 60-watt incandescent bulb. That standard bulb sells for around $1. The Philips alternative sells for $50. Of course, the award-winner is no ordinary bulb. It uses only one-sixth the energy of an incandescent. And it lasts 30,000 hours–about 30 times as long. In fact, if you don’t drop it, it may last 10 years or more. But only the U.S. Government (in this case, the Department of Energy) could view a $50 bulb as cheap.

Isn’t that wonderful? My tax dollars were used to reward a company that produced a light bulb I can’t afford.

Lisa Benson has a very good cartoon about this light bulb, as well as the less-than-shocking news that Obamacare will be more costly than originally forecast.

Communism Doesn’t Work

Meet Elke. This inspiring woman was born in Hitler’s Germany and lived under communist rule for years before becoming an American citizen.

Her video explanation of what happened in Germany under communism and the parallels to our current administration and the path we are on will give you a chill.

Attribution: The Blaze