The famous political couple, who individually charge well into six figures for an address, is launching a 13-city joint public speaking tour of the U.S. and Canada titled “An Evening with the Clintons” that kicks off Nov. 18 in Las Vegas.
Tickets to see the former president and former secretary of state live on stage aren’t cheap. At the 5,200-seat Park Theater in Las Vegas, the same venue where Lady Gaga will soon have a residency, seats cost between $72.48 and $228.44. And at the Opera House in Boston, tickets go for between $120.50 and $745.50, and that doesn’t include fees to promoter Live Nation.
So what can audience members expect from the show?
“Experience a one-of-a-kind conversation with two individuals who have helped shape our world and had a front seat to some of the most important moments in modern history,” the public relations copy for the tour reads. “From the American presidency to the halls of the Senate and State Department to one of the United States’ most controversial and unpredictable presidential elections, they provide a unique perspective on the past, and remarkable insight into where we go from here.”
The tour will wrap up at the 17,505-seat Forum in Inglewood, Calif., an arena that usually hosts music stars. In the coming days, Drake, Phil Collins and the band twenty one pilots will take the stage there. Also on the schedule, however, is former First Lady Michelle Obama, who will appear in mid-November.
The Clintons aren’t novices on the paid lecture circuit. From 2001 to 2015, they raked in more than $153 million in speaking fees for 729 events. As yet, there is no word on how much the former first couple might make for the Live Nation tour.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
From Fox News: A Toronto man scheduled to be kicked out of Canada for being a member of MS-13 has asked officials not to deport him because his skull, knuckle and body tattoos could cost him his life in his native El Salvador.
René Pacheco was granted a temporary reprieve after successfully arguing that his tattoos would make him the target of rival gangs and law enforcement officials in the small Central American country.
Pacheco is a permanent resident in Canada and has not lived in El Salvador for 20 years but is not a Canadian citizen.
The 25-year-old, who goes by the nickname “Machete,” was arrested in 2016 on a number of criminal charges. While in custody and awaiting trial, Canada Border Services Agency officers interviewed him.
It was during that meeting, the National Post first reported, that Pacheco allegedly bragged to agents about his ties to the notorious gang. MS-13, short for La Mara Salvatrucha, is primarily composed of immigrants and descendants from El Salvador and is widely known for their extreme brutality.
Pacheco allegedly showed officers a tattoo of the number 13 on the back of his hand, a teardrop inking on his face as well as a number of other permanent markings on his body. He told agents he was initiated into the gang by surviving a 13-second beating. His Facebook page even featured gang graffiti and signs.
Pacheco’s story was believable enough for officers to order his deportation for being a member of a criminal organization. But he then changed his story and denied all ties to the gang.
“I made a bad decision getting these tattoos not knowing it was going to relate to this,” Pacheco said at an immigration hearing in 2017.
He claimed the number 13 tattooed on him was merely his “lucky number” and said the teardrop on his face was a tribute to his father who was murdered in El Salvador. Pacheco also claimed he learned about MS-13 by watching YouTube videos and said he was on drugs when he spoke to CBSA agents from his jail cell.
“I am not a member,” he said. “I made a mistake… Innocent people are dying back in my country and here I am getting these tattoos thinking it’s a joke not realizing the consequences that it brings.”
A federal court judge didn’t buy his reversal and upheld his deportation sentence.
Running out of time, Pacheo applied for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment, a last-ditch effort to remain in the country.
“I understand that if someone arrives in El Salvador with tattoos and they think they are in a gang they can kill them, torture them or immediately throw them in prison,” he said in his appeal. “I can be the target of gangs there for trying to impersonate them. Therefore my life is in danger and I have no hope of being protected.”
His petition was denied.
He appealed the decision to a federal court and was granted a temporary stay. Judge E. Susan Elliott noted that Pacheo’s tattoos were a catalyst for a perceived risk and ordered a new assessment by a different officer.
In coming to her decision, Elliott noted a U.S. Department of State report that highlighted the “arbitrary deprivation of life” gang members face by authorities.
“This was particularly important as he would be returned to El Salvador for being a member of the MS-13 gang, despite his post-interview denials of such membership,” she wrote in her decision.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Last Flag Flying is a movie from Amazon Studios that opened on November 3. The premise, from Rotten Tomatoes: “In 2003, 30 years after they served together in the Vietnam War, former Navy Corps medic Richard “Doc” Shepherd (Steve Carell) re-unites with Former Marines Sal (Bryan Cranston) and Richard Mueller (Laurence Fishburne) on a different type of mission: to bury Doc’s son, a young Marine killed in the Iraq War. Doc decides to forgo a burial at Arlington Cemetery and, with the help of his old buddies, takes the casket on a bittersweet trip up the East Coast to his home in suburban New Hampshire.”
Since its debut, the movie has made almost $48,000 (at the time I scheduled this post on Nov. 8). That means it ranked #47 on its weekend debut.
The movie stars Steve Carell, Laurence Fishburne and Bryan Cranston.
Last November, before Trump was elected, I did a post on Bryan Cranston. He was going to say farewell to the United States after the election results were announced, warninghe would move to Canada if Donald Trump became the next president.
From my post: “I would definitely move,” he told The Bestseller Experiment podcast when asked what he would do if Trump was elected over Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. ‘It’s not real to me that, that would happen. I hope to God it won’t,’ he added. ‘It wouldn’t be a vacation. I’d be an expatriate,’ Cranston added. Cranston, who more recently played Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson, has been an outspoken critic of Trump, branding him a ‘supreme narcissist’ and an ’emperor without any clothes’ following his controversial campaign. ‘He’s crude and crass and empty headed. If it weren’t serious, it would be laughable. Here we have a reality show, game show guy who’s now at the top of one of the two parties. That there are millions of people who are going to vote for him says something about, perhaps, disenfranchisement. People who are left out. People who don’t feel they are being listened to.”
Since the election, Cranston has since made a few digs at Trump on his Twitter timeline. He’s also made fun of Barron Trump. But now, apparently, Cranston has had a change of heart – shortly before this movie was to debut.
On October 30, Breitbart reported the following: “Cranston — perhaps best known for his role as Walter White in the television show Breaking Bad — slammed Hollywood stars, pundits, and Trump opponents who have previously said they wish to see him fail in office. “It’s just astonishing to me. President Trump is not the person who I wanted to be in that office, and I’ve been very open about that,” Cranston said. “That being said, he is the president. If he fails, the country is in jeopardy. It would be egotistical for anyone to say, ‘I hope he fails.’ To that person I would say, f*ck you. Why would you want that? So you can be right?” “I don’t want him to fail. I want him to succeed. I do. I honestly do,” Cranston continued. “And if you’ve got a good idea that helps the country, oh man, I’m gonna support you. I don’t care if you’re a Republican and I’m a Democrat or whatever, I don’t care. A good idea’s a good idea. Let’s do that. We’ve got to get away from this idea that our country is political football, and someone with a different opinion is the enemy. Assume they love this country as much as you do, and there’s always room for improvement. How can we make it better?”
Gee, Hollyweird’s box office sales are in the tank and Sexgate is destroying their reputation. Isn’t it convenient for Cranston to have such a vocal turnaround of Trump right before promotion of his latest movie? What a coincidence!
Another movie I won’t be seeing.
From Fox News: A Canadian landlord who was fined $12,000 for wearing shoes in a Muslim tenant’s home said he felt “humiliated” by the harsh penalty levied by a national human rights tribunal.
In an interview with the Toronto Sun, John Alabi, 52, of Brampton, recounted how he went above and beyond trying to accommodate the Egyptian-born couple who lived in the apartment for two months – just to be slapped with a steep fine for the shoe incident.
“I go beyond all that. I just see everybody as human beings like me. That’s why I took them in,” Alabi told the Toronto Sun in May. “We got along. And then all of a sudden I’m a racist?” The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ordered Alabi in April to pay the tenants $6,000 each after he failed to take his shoes off in the bedroom where the couple prayed while he was showing the home to potential renters. The couple, who moved into first floor of the home in December 2014, terminated their lease on Feb. 28, 2015. The tribunal also said Alabi “harassed” the couple and “created a poisoned housing environment.” Though he would give them 24-hour notice of the showing, he would often fail to provide a 5-minute warning, according to the Toronto Sun.
“I was humiliated, I was made to feel I have no rights, I was made to feel that I’m not wanted in society,” Alabi said. “I feel powerless. They rented my place for only two months. Two months! It’s just not fair.” Alabi told the news site the couple never had an issue when he wore his shoes in the home to do repairs. Then they filed a grievance eight months after the last incident, the Toronto Sun reported.
“I have been victimized,” Alabi said. “They are using their religion to victimize me.”
The couple even found a Facebook post on Alabi’s page to help their case. (According to The Sun: “They even searched his Facebook page and found a joke they considered offensive to bolster their case.)
The landlord claimed he doesn’t have the money to pay the fine on top of legal fees.
“I don’t have the money. I work very hard. If they go into my bank account right now, I don’t have $12,000 there,” Alabi said, adding that he has rented the space for 15 years to help pay his mortgage.
Last week (this was originally published in May) news site Rebel News Service launched a crowdfunding page to help Alabi pay for the fine.
Killer Omar Khadr: Laughing all the way to the bank
I swear, up is down and down is up in this world.
From Daily Mail: The Canadian government will apologize to former Guantanamo Bay inmate Omar Khadr and pay him around $8m (Canadian $10m) to compensate him for the abuse he suffered in detention, two sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.
A Canadian citizen, Khadr, now 30, was captured in Afghanistan in 2002 at age 15 after a firefight with U.S. soldiers. He pleaded guilty to killing a US army medic and became the youngest inmate held at the US military prison in Cuba. Khadr later recanted and his lawyers said he had been grossly mistreated. The Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that Canada breached his rights by sending intelligence agents to interrogate him and by sharing the results with the United States. (According to ABC News, the abuse included sleep deprivation during interrogations.)
Khadr spent a decade in Guantanamo before being returned to Canada in 2012 to serve the rest of his sentence. He was released on bail in 2015 and lives in Edmonton, Alberta.
The Canadian government and Khadr’s lawyers reached the compensation deal, said the sources, who asked to remain anonymous given the sensitivity. Canada has reached a series of expensive settlements with citizens imprisoned abroad who alleged Ottawa was complicit in their mistreatment. Khadr had sued Ottawa for around $15m (Canadian $20) on grounds of violating his human rights. News of the settlement was first reported by the Globe and Mail newspaper. Khadr was taken to Afghanistan by his father, a senior al Qaeda member, who apprenticed the boy to a group of bomb makers who opened fire when U.S. troops went to their compound. The father was killed in a battle with Pakistani forces in 2003.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in Ireland for a visit, said the judicial process should be ending soon but declined further comment.
Spokespeople for Trudeau and Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Nor did Khadr’s lawyers. The U.S. Embassy was closed for the July 4 U.S. holiday. ‘It is the right decision in light of the callous and unlawful treatment meted out to Mr. Khadr with the complicity of Canadian officials,’ said Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims.
Just because one parent is confused about its upbringing doesn’t give them the right to transfer that chaos to their child.
Via The Sun: Canadian Kori Doty, who has a moustache and claims to be neither male or female, has been fighting to keep Searyl Atli’s gender off government records since giving birth last November.
Doty, who prefers to be referred to as “they” rather than “he” or “she”, told CBC they are “raising Searyl in such a way that until they have the sense of self and command of vocabulary to tell me who they are.”
They added: “I’m recognising them as a baby and trying to give them all the love and support to be the most whole person that they can be outside of the restrictions that come with the boy box and the girl box.”
Doty is trying to get British Columbia to issue the child with a birth certificate which does not have a gender marker. But while the Canadian province has sent the baby health cards with an “undetermined” gender, authorities have refused to issue the certificate. Doty’s lawyer says BC only issues birth documents which have a male or female designation.
And while another Canadian province, Ontario, says it is reviewing its policies to include non-binary genders, critics claim such children could be become a target for bullies or discrimination. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal is helping Doty fight to get all government documents to accommodate non-gendered people.
Doty said: “When I was born, doctors looked at my genitals and made assumptions about who I would be, and those assignments followed me and followed my identification throughout my life. Those assumptions were incorrect, and I ended up having to do a lot of adjustments since then.”
Good luck Canadian taxpayers. Enjoy paying for their hotel stays and gym visits.
From Daily Mail: Thousands of people who fled to Canada to escape President Donald Trump‘s crackdown on illegal migrants have become trapped in legal limbo because of an overburdened refugee system, struggling to find work, permanent housing or enroll their children in schools.
Refugee claims are taking longer to be completed than at any time in the past five years, according to previously unpublished Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) data provided to Reuters. Those wait times are set to grow longer after the IRB in April allocated ‘up to half’ of its 127 tribunal members to focus on old cases. The number of delayed hearings more than doubled from 2015 to 2016 and is on track to increase again this year.
Hearings are crucial to establishing a claimant´s legal status in Canada. Without that status, they struggle to convince employers to hire them or landlords to rent to them. Claimants cannot access loans or student financial aid, or update academic or professional credentials to meet Canadian standards. Canada’s refugee system was struggling to process thousands of applications even before 3,500 asylum seekers began crossing the U.S. border on foot in January. It lacks the manpower to complete security screenings for claimants and hear cases in a timely manner. Often there are not enough tribunal members to decide cases or interpreters to attend hearings, the IRB said. More than 4,500 hearings scheduled in the first four months of 2017 were cancelled, according to the IRB data.
The government is now focused on clearing a backlog of about 24,000 claimants, including people who filed claims in 2012 or earlier. That means more than 15,000 people who have filed claims so far this year, including the new arrivals from the United States, will have to wait even longer for their cases to be heard.
Asylum cases are already taking longer to finalize, on average, than at any time since Canada introduced a statutory two-month time limit in 2012. This year, it has been taking 5.6 months on average, compared to 3.6 months in 2013.
Mohamed Daud, 36, left his family and a pending refugee claim in the United States and walked into Canada in February after hearing rumors of U.S. immigration raids.
Daud, originally from Somalia, had been living and working legally in Nebraska but feared he would be detained and then deported at an upcoming check-in with immigration officials. His May 8 hearing with a Canadian refugee tribunal was cancelled three days beforehand. He has not been given a new date.
‘I don´t know when they will call me. I can´t work. It isn’t easy,’ said Daud. While waiting for a work permit, he gets approximately C$600 ($453) a month in government social assistance and shares a room in an apartment with six other asylum seekers.
Still, Daud doesn’t regret abandoning his life in the United States. ‘The worry, the fear is the same,’ he said.
To try to speed cases through, Canada’s refugee tribunal has put people from certain war-torn countries such as Syria and Yemen on an expedited track that requires no hearings.
Border agents are working overtime to address the backlog in security screenings, said Scott Bardsley, spokesman for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, who oversees the Canada Border Services Agency.
Asylum claimants are eligible for work permits while awaiting hearings, but employers are often reluctant to employ people with temporary social insurance numbers whose future is uncertain, refugee lawyers told Reuters. ‘How do you establish yourself when your status is unknown?’ said Toronto-based lawyer Aadil Mangalji. This year is on track to be the highest year for refugee claims since at least 2011, according to government statistics.
The stresses on the Canadian system mirror those of other countries with an open door policy. In Sweden, rising financial strains involved in resettlement were partly behind a move to introduce tough asylum laws.
Honduran Raul Contreras, 19, who walked across the Quebec border in March and whose hearing has been postponed indefinitely, is staying in a government-subsidized Toronto hotel with his mother, step-father and uncle. Contreras, who spends his days at a local library or working out in the hotel gym, says he has been repeatedly rejected by landlords. ‘They just said that they didn’t rent places to refugee claimants,’ he said. ‘(They) said that refugees don’t have jobs and probably wouldn’t pay.’
Oh look, another liberal performs virtual signaling. How quaint.
He forgot to check the Ramadan Bombathon tally.
From Breitbart: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wore Ramadan-themed socks during an LGBT Pride parade in Toronto on Sunday.
Trudeau was photographed wearing the socks at a service just before the parade, where he also wished attendees a happy “Pride Mubarak” in celebration of the end of Ramadan.
“Trudeau was joined by his wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, and their children Xavier and Ella-Grace. Grégoire Trudeau waved a rainbow flag, one of the symbols of the LGBTQ community,” reported TheStar.com. “Trudeau also wished the crowd a happy ‘Pride Mubarak,’ a play on words referring to the end-of-Ramadan celebrations happening in the Muslim community Sunday — celebrations Trudeau honoured with a pair of brightly coloured socks.”
In his speech, Trudeau declared “This is all about including people.”
“It’s all about how we celebrate the multiple layers of identities that make Canada extraordinary and strong, and today we celebrate with the entire LGBTQ community,” he continued. This did not extend to Toronto police officers, who were reportedly asked not to march in uniform following demands from Black Lives Matter activists in 2016. According to TheStar.com, dozens of officers traveled from Toronto to New York to march in uniform as part of the New York Pride parade. Being gay or bisexual is punishable by death in thirteen countries, all of which are majority-Muslim nations.
Read the rest of the story here.
I’ve never seen this show before because 1) I have no desire to watch it and 2) it airs in Canada. I’m sure American audiences can find it somewhere. I’ll pass.
The background on this “rom-com” (romantic comedy) show: “You Me Her is a Canadian television show that revolves around a suburban married couple who is entering a three-way romantic relationship, otherwise known as a polyamorous relationship. The series is set in Portland, Oregon and was created by John Scott Shepherd. The series is also promoted as TV’s “first polyromantic comedy”. On June 9, 2016, Audience Network renewed the series for a second and third season. The second season premiered on February 14, 2017.”
The show’s premise: “The series revolves around married thirty-somethings Jack and Emma Trakarsky, from Portland, Oregon, whose sex life has been slowly dying. In an effort to reinvigorate their sex life and possibly conceive a child together, they decide to bring Izzy, a 25-year-old college student and part-time escort, into their marriage, initially intending it to be a purely business-like arrangement. When both start to develop romantic feelings for Izzy, and vice versa, they find themselves having to navigate their way through a minefield of prying neighbours, social norms and prejudices, all while struggling to confront their own feelings and adjust to the unfamiliar dynamic of a polyamorous relationship.”
Another attempt by media to discredit social norms and slam the “prejudiced” people who uphold them.
Don’ be fooled by Leah’s innocent-looking Twitter profile picture. The womyn is a whack job.
The author of this piece is Leah McLaren, a Canadian author and newspaper columnist. She’s also a proud libtard who likes to mess with others’ children as well as her own. From her past, according to Wikipedia: “Leah McLaren came under fire for a controversial column she wrote for The Globe and Mail on March 22, 2017 where she admits she once attempted to breastfeed the infant child of Conservative leadership candidate Michael Chong without his or his wife’s consent, and while she was not lactating. The paper later removed the piece from its website. Five days after its publication Chong confirmed via Twitter that the incident occurred over ten years previously, describing it as “no doubt odd, but of no real consequence.” To make her story true, McLaren would have been at least 29. On March 30, 2017 the Toronto Star reported that McLaren was suspended for one week by The Globe and Mail.”
The author is also divorced; her 2009 marriage ended in 2011 (her ex-husband is not the father of her children, from what I can interpret). In her own words: “From the beginning, Patrick and I prided ourselves on having a modern marriage. I never considered taking his name. We shared no assets, not even a bank account. I owned a house in Toronto, he had the cottage in Muskoka—our marital home was a furnished rental flat. We even had separate book and music collections thanks to the wonders of Kindle and iTunes. Apart from the piece of paper declaring us legally married, there was nothing tangible holding us together. And that was the way we liked it.”
Man, I feel sorry for her kids.
From The Globe and Mail: The other day I was sitting in the park with James, 3, when I picked a dandelion and handed it to him as a present. “No way, Mummy,” he said, pushing away my gift. “Flowers are pretty and I’m a boy.”
And I thought: That’s it. I’m signing him up for ballet.
Until recently, I’ve been quite happy to be surrounded by boys in all their stereotypical boyishness. I don’t have to struggle with what most parents of girls I know refer to, shudderingly, as “the whole princess thing.” And frankly, from an aesthetic as well as political perspective, I have always been glad of it.
Thank god for boys, who just muck about in their saggy track pants, smashing up toys and teaching each other to belch the alphabet (Freddy, 7, can now get all the way up to “K” in one breath). Sure, they’ll destroy the furniture building forts, but at least they won’t fill your house with plastic engagement rings and insist on wearing hideously flammable poly-blend prom dresses for five years straight. Boys loathe that stuff, and as a feminist mom so do I – so we’re on the same page then, right? Wrong.
As James gets older and begins to discover himself, I realize that he is being guided just as much by what he vehemently rejects as what he genuinely loves (zombies, magic, ice cream, dogs and dancing). Some of the things he now pushes away he truly seems to dislike (yogurt, itchy sweaters, going to bed), but other things he is starting to turn on for reasons of obvious cultural conditioning. James isn’t entirely sure who he is yet, but he definitely knows what he’s not, and that’s 1) a baby or 2) a girl. Lately, anything that falls into either of those two categories is verboten to him.
When his older brother complained about having to watch Frozen because it was “girlish,” James instantly struck it off his list of favourite movies and now refuses to play Elsa and Anna even when his best nursery school girlfriends insist. You might think this is no big deal, that my son is just behaving “naturally,” but I’m automatically wary of notions of biological determinism. When he hands me back a flower because pretty things are for girls, I think, what’s next? Kindness? Decency? Dancing?
Jerramy Fine is an American expat in London and what you might call a professional princess advocate. She’s a royalist by trade and nature and her latest book, In Defense of the Princess, is an unapologetic argument in favour of letting your daughter drown herself in plastic tiaras and fairy-tale fantasies.
In her view, “second wave princesses are headstrong and independent. They engineer their own fates and believe that respect is a precursor to love. And if there is one thing any of the modern princesses are not doing, it’s sitting around waiting to be rescued.”
I’ve known Fine for years, and the whole time she has been trying to convince me of the inherent value of princess culture and all things pretty, sparkly and “feminine” (her term – and one I automatically reject). She even dragged me to the Princess Diana biopic after I made her come with me to see Meryl Streep play Margaret Thatcher.
Both movies were pretty bad, but if I had to pick a role model, I’d still choose the Iron Lady over the people’s princess (subtract the union busting of course).
But as I watch my son reject flowers and dolls and even pink Popsicles – all things that until, very recently, he adored – on the grounds that they are “girlish,” I have come to see Fine’s point. There is something inherently sexist, even covertly misogynist, in the way we discourage boys away from pretty things while telling girls they can have it all. This sort of messaging is a bad thing for boys because it’s culturally limiting, but in the broader sense it’s even worse for girls. Because what it is saying is this: Boy stuff is universally cool and girl stuff is silly and worthless. “Encouraging boys to reject princess culture is dangerous because what other traditionally feminine concepts are they in turn going to reject later on?,” Fine pointed out the other day. “Will they see romantic love as abhorrent? What about parenting and housework? Or even just being polite?”
Much as I dislike the idea of anything being categorized as inherently feminine or masculine, it’s hard to explain poststructuralist gender theory to a three-year old. For James, the world is pretty much binary at the moment, and trying to shift that perspective – little by little – has become my pet project. It’s also a window into what a strange place the world must be for transgender or gender-non-conforming kids.
If I want my son to love and respect women, I am going to have to teach him to embrace – and ideally appreciate – “girlish” things. That’s why I’m weaving him a dandelion crown and signing him up for ballet. I’m going to turn the little alphabet belcher into a proud princess whether he likes it or not.