The February Club meeting at Flavor of India Restaurant was the scene of a special presentation by Carrie Sheffield, founder of Bold TV and a forum of candidates for NYC Public Advocate. A special election will be held on February 26, 2019 to fill former Public Advocate Letitia James’ vacated seat. All Public Advocate candidates have been invited. The following four were represented in the video of the forum.
Video credit: James Doukas
Carrie Sheffield, our special guest speaker discussed the topic: “How the GOP can improve its messaging with millennials, minorities and women.” Carrie is the founder of Bold, a digital news network committed to bipartisan dialogue & innovation for people, business & communities.
Video credit: James Doukas
Special thanks goes to James Doukas, our videographer: jaydees2002@yahoo.com
There is probably not one elected official in Washington DC
more focused on the decision of Democrat Susan Rice to run or decline to run
for the Maine U.S. senate seat up for grabs in the 2020 election than Senator
Susan Collins, the state’s moderate Republican incumbent, who would have to
defend the seat she has held since 2009 against Rice.
Rice, who had served in several high level foreign affair
positions in both the former Presidents Clinton and Obama Administrations,
first spoke of her interest in taking on Collins early this past October, days
following the Republican Senator’s announcement that she planned to vote to
confirm Brett Kavanaugh (who shortly later was approved by a 52- 48 margin) as
an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court. Speaking at a NYC
media event several days after Collins pledged to cast her vote for Kavanaugh,
Rice accused her potential senate opponent of “putting politics” over the
rights of victims of sexual assault.
There was one specific, now famous, victim Rice was
referring to: Christine Blasey Ford. As
reported in the media throughout the world last fall, Ford had come forward
during the senate confirmation hearings to accuse then nominee Brett Kavanaugh
of committing sexual assault against her while both were in high school in the
mid-1980’s. While Ford was unable to
remember the date or location of the alleged assault, was unable to identify
even one corroborating witness, and could not produce any evidence to support
her accusation, Susan Rice, just like the entire American left, found Kavanaugh
guilty of the charge, and denounced Collins, who had based her support of
Kavanaugh on “legal principles about due process, the presumption of innocence
and fairness”.
Such an argument by Collins, while seemingly reasonable,
might prove to be a problem in a race against Rice in a state whose registered
Independents, a crucial 34.9%, have been known to swing left on women’s
issues. Those independent voters combined
with the almost one third of registered Democrats (Republicans have just over
one third) would seem to present a difficult obstacle for Collins to overcome
to best Rice in 2020.
But if Collins finds herself able to overcome her penchant
for praising those who merit condemnation, she might find Rice to be an easy
candidate to defeat, for foremost of the underserving beneficiaries of the
Republican Senator’s over the top rhetorical kindness, was, ironically, Susan
Rice herself. That kindness goes back to January 2009, the early days of the
first Obama Administration. At that time
Rice was in the process of being confirmed by the senate in what turned out to
be a one hundred to zero vote in her favor for the post of U.S. Ambassador to
the United Nations.
Following that rare bi-partisan, unanimous confirmation,
Rice received lavish praise from Republican and Democratic lawmakers
alike. But few were more effusive in
their praise than Susan Collins, who in a press release praised Rice as a
“remarkable woman”, whom she had met in the past at foreign policy
seminars. The senator then fulsomely
added that she had been “so impressed with her brilliance and nuanced insights
as we discussed foreign policy”.
To defeat Rice in 2020, and perhaps even to be able to fall
asleep at night, Collins must find a way to throw those words in the sewer.
Where else do words that praise an enabler of genocide belong?
In Rwanda over the span of 100 days, then 29 year- old Susan
Rice, who held the key position of Assistant Secretary of State for African
Affairs under then President Clinton, was – along with her boss Richard Clarke,
the special presidential assistant in global affairs in the National Security
Council (NSC), and, of course, President Clinton himself- nothing less than an enabler of the genocide
that ravaged that tragic African nation. That genocide, which took place from
April 6, 1994 through July, 16, 1994, ended with the slaughter of an estimated
800,000 Rwandan men, women and children from a population of 8 million. The victims were members of the Tutsi
community, a minority ethnic group living in that beleaguered nation. Their
murderers belonged to the extremist faction of the majority ethnic group, the
Hutus, who used the Tutsis as their scapegoats to blame for the country’s
increasing economic, social and political troubles.
Tragically, rather
than taking immediate military and diplomatic action to stop the massacre President Clinton, with Susan Rice and
Richard Clarke at his side, took the opposite path. During the first five days of the slaughter, he devoted all of our
nation’s efforts solely to the evacuation of the approximately 250 Americans
living there at the time. Completed
within five days, the evacuation would have been laudatory had Clinton not kept
silent and inert about the horrors that precipitated it.
Then in early May, Clinton, again with Rice and Clarke as
his major advisors on African affairs, went a step further to enable the
slaughter in Rwanda- by now 6 men, women and children murdered every minute of
every day: And their dirty deed was committed in the halls of the United
Nations. There American diplomats succeeded in pushing a resolution through the
security council reducing the then already understaffed 2,500 U.N. peace
keeping forces in Rwanda to a mere 270, even as humanitarian organizations,
such as the Human Rights Watch, had been warning that if the U.N. forces were
removed “Rwandans will quickly become victims of genocide”.
In fairness to Clinton, Clarke and Rice, it needs to be
remembered that during the time leading up to the Rwandan genocide, Congress
had been pressuring the Administration to cut the costs of U.N. peacekeeping
forces, which were largely paid for by America. In addition, the three had been
faced with an increasing isolationist mood in our nation, which had been
hardened after 18 U.S. Rangers had been killed while on a mission in civil war-
torn Somalia on October 3rd, 1993, only six short months before the
genocide in Rwanda was to tragically begin, and, significantly, only one short
year before the November 1994 United States Congressional elections were to be
held.
In fact, to the Human Rights Watch and other critics of the
Clinton Administration, its seeming indifference to the mass slaughter in
Rwanda was predicated on the political considerations attending to those 1994
Congressional elections. And it turned
out to be Susan Rice, above even Clarke, whom the Clinton Administration
selected to author the political talking points on its Rwanda policy. It was a job she performed with gusto.
On May 6, 1994- a
date that marked the first month anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda and
which pre-dated the crucial October Congressional elections by nearly a full 6 months-
Susan Rice composed a series of talking points on America’s position on Rwanda
for then Vice- President Al Gore.
First delivered by Gore to U.N. Secretary General Boutros
Boutros- Ghali, the initial talking point, generally interpreted as a
declaration of American policy in Rwanda read, “We have serious reservations
about proposals to establish a large peace enforcement mission, which would
operate throughout Rwanda with a mandate to end the fighting, restore order and
pacify the population”.
One week later, those American “reservations” about a U.N.
peacekeeping force were evidenced again in a handwritten note that Rice had
written during a White House meeting on Rwandan genocide: “I.O. (International
Organizations- the division in the state department and National Security
Council that effects American United Nations policies) is looking proactive
while vetoing this resolution {to maintain a U.N. peacekeeping force in
Rwanda}.”
The threat of America vetoing such a U.N. resolution proved
to be the excuse used by the world body’s aforementioned withdrawal of its
peacekeeping forces in Rwanda- a withdrawal that resulted in the last chance
the world possessed to end the mass murder of the people of that tragic nation.
The question of what could have been on Susan Rice’s mind
during this time appears to have been provided by Samantha Power, Rice’s
successor at the U.N. In a September 1, 2001 column she had written for the
magazine the “Atlantic”, Power quoted one of the several participants of a late
April, 1994 U.S. Government interagency teleconference, joined in by Rice, on Rwanda.
That particular participant, Lieutenant Colonel Tony Marley,
as Power wrote, revealed to her that during the teleconference Rice had
shocked the government officials on the line when discussing the mounting death
toll in Rwanda she asked, “If we use the word ‘ genocide’, what will the effect
be on the November { Congressional elections} ?” Here, to paraphrase the words that Rice
herself was to use nearly a quarter of a century later in her criticism of
Senator Collins’ support of Brett Kavanaugh, it might be stated, ‘Susan Rice
placed politics over the lives of the 800,000 children, women and men who were
slaughtered in Rwanda.’
Rice, of course, would never agree to such an assessment.
Rather over the years she has denied the major role she played in the
formulation of the Clinton Administration’s policy of inaction during
the Rwandan massacres. The standard
excuse she has repeated over the years has been that she was only a “low- level
official” during the genocide in Rwanda.
As if believing her
own lie, Rice, in a 2012 interview with the magazine the “New Republic”, seemed
to lack any feelings of guilt about her role as an enabler of the slaughter in
Rwanda. “To suggest that I’m repenting
for {Rwanda} or that I’m haunted by that or that I don’t sleep at night because
of that or that every policy I’ve implemented subsequently is driven by that is
garbage”, she told the magazine’s reporter.
But Rice might well have lost sleep over another lie she
delivered that same year, this time at the behest of then President Obama. Appearing on five separate political talk
shows on Sunday September 16, 2012 to be questioned on the then recent murders of
four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, in the
city of Benghazi, Rice, at the time the American Ambassador to the U.N., contended
that the murders had been the result of a spontaneous response by a group of ordinary
Libyan citizens consumed by anger over an anti- Muslim video posted over the
internet from American airwaves.
As Republicans were to later discover, however, Rice had
lied that day: Within two days after the attack, the Obama Administration,
including Rice herself, had learned that the slaughter, rather
than being a spontaneous assault spawned by a video, had been planned long in
advance by a group of Islamic terrorists intent on killing Americans. It was a lie that Republicans were to soon
later use to stop Rice’s promotion from UN Ambassador to Secretary of State.
It was also a lie that up to this day has made the name ‘Susan
Rice’ and the 8 tragic words, ‘The murder of four Americans in Benghazi’ inseparable.
Also inseparable should be the name ‘Susan Rice’ and the
words, ‘one of the callous and
calculating enablers of the murder of an estimated 800,000 innocent
human beings in the nation of Rwanda.’
Robert Golomb is a
nationally and internationally published columnist. Mail him at MrBob347@aol.com and follow him on
Twitter@RobertGolomb
It is the responsibility of Republicans to stop this. The time for grumbling, finger-pointing and waiting for some other leader or institution to step into the breach are over. The cavalry isn’t coming. Either we lick our wounds, begin to turn back the tide immediately or we all eventually get driven out of the state we love by the policies we hate.
Meeting at new venue: Flavor of India Restaurant 259-17 Hillside Ave. Floral Park, NY
NYC PUBLIC ADVOCATE CANDIDATES NIGHT
Meet the candidates for Public Advocate. A special election will be held on February 26, 2019 to fill former Public Advocate Letitia James’ vacated seat. All Public Advocate candidates have been invited. The following are confirmed so far:
Michael Zumbluskas: Over the past 25 years Mike has led voter registration and party enrollment drives throughout New York, and worked as a campaign advisor for numerous Independent, Republican and Democratic candidates, and as a consultant on numerous campaigns from local city council races to presidential campaigns and served as the New York County Chairman of the Independence Party. He has appeared on many television programs as a studio panelist on electoral reform and grassroots activism. Mike currently works as a resource management analyst for the New York City Department of Transportation. Visit website.
Daniel Christmann: AM620 Radio Show Host. “Humanity for ALL of the World starts and ends in NYC! As Public Advocate I will not stand for these thieving politicians, or these inhumane bureaucracies. The Environment. Housing, and our Transportation systems are under duress! The government, bankers, and corporations have exploited our poor and middle-class. They are starting to ramp things up in ways we can barely even imagine! Our Transportation Systems are collapsing, many road closures coming.” Visit website for more.
Manny Alicandro: Financial law expert and attorney from Brooklyn, a 2018 Republican candidate who ran for New York State Attorney General. He is running for NYC Public Advocate to clean up City Hall. “As I pass by the many homeless people in the freezing cold weather, I realize that the ban on styrofoam goes into effect today. This is one of the many reasons why I am running for PA – to stop the madness” @Manny_Alicandro
Tony Herbert: A Community Leader who has a broad range of corporate, political, community and business leadership experience. Tony is a community activist and media personality who is best known for providing a voice to those who have been disenfranchised. He currently serves as the President/CEO and Chairman of the Multi-Cultural Restaurant & Night Life Chamber of Commerce, as the Founder and President of the Advocates Without Borders Network, executive committee member of the NAACP-NYCHA Branch Chapter. Visit website for more.
Also guest speaker:
Carrie Sheffield: founder of Bold, a digital news network committed to bipartisan dialogue & innovation for people, business & communities, will discuss: “How the GOP can improve its messaging with Millennials, minorities and women”
As a Goldman Sachs analyst, Carrie managed municipal credit risk, and at Moody’s Investors Service, she rated healthcare bonds. In foreign affairs, Carrie reported on the 25th anniversary of perestroika in Moscow, North-South Korean relations from Seoul, the Beijing Olympics in China, and Egyptian political reforms in Cairo. She wrote on geopolitical positioning and freedom of speech in Qatar and covered the Israeli parliament for The Jerusalem Post. Carrie covered Congress for The Hill newspaper and served as a founding reporter at POLITICO. See full bio below.
Additional Public Advocate candidates
to be announced.
Below is what I believe President Donald Trump should say in his State of the Union Address (February 5, 2019). Given the gravity of the current internal threat to freedom and to everything America has stood for, the address should be short; and without the usual lists of proposals and accomplishments most presidents use for applause lines.
The Constitution requires that the president “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union.” However, given the disreputable dishonesty of most of the media, it is appropriate that I use these remarks to talk directly to the American people. This is the best chance a president has to reach them, without his words being twisted beyond recognition by most who call themselves journalists.
I have done my best during the last two years to Make America Great Again. But I accept Alexander Hamilton’s wisdom: It is “my duty to [portray] things as they are ….” Today, our Union is more divided than at any time since before and during the Civil War. While a significant number of Americans enthusiastically support my efforts, a true account of the state of the union must recognize the existence of extremist resistance to American greatness.
Because of the current internal war against American history, traditions and values, and especially against the United States Constitution, it would be inappropriate for me to deliver a standard State of the Union address providing a laundry list of proposals and boasting of my accomplishments, which can be found at whitehouse.gov. Instead, this will be short, in order to focus a spotlight on the threats from within facing all decent, freedom-loving Americans.
Much bitter opposition is the result of deception. The presence of the woman in the seat behind me is proof positive of how many in front of me obtained their seats by fooling voters. Remember, this woman objects to my denouncing brutal murderers as “animals” instead of “humans.” After vowing not to vote for her to be Speaker, they broke their promises on the very first roll call vote of this Congress. Despite “dozens who originally pledged to oppose her return to power,” only 15 kept their word, probably only because their votes were not needed for their party to break faith with their voters. During the next two years, I urge all Americans to scrutinize the performance of these people and ask: “Is this what I voted for?”
As president, in the face of bitter resistance, I have worked very hard to keep my promises. The refusal of professional politicians to keep their word is now a major threat to representative self-government. Were today’s politicians in business, they would be sent to jail for violation of the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act. When citizens cannot know what those for whom they vote are going to do once elected, the right to vote is meaningless. (Incidentally, the punishment of private citizens but not politicians, for false advertising and labeling, is just one of countless scandalous examples of how hypocritical out-of-touch legislators exempt themselves from the very laws, rules and regulations they impose upon ordinary Americans.)
Returning to the ferocious and hateful opposition to me for keeping my promises, my staff has found no prior examples of major media outlets having suggesting the assassination of a president. Yet major TV networks, such as CBS and CNN, repeatedly (p. 205) have suggested that about me. So too has the New York Times, which used to be considered the most influential newspaper in the country; and still has influence among many people. Also, most regrettably, officials of a prior administration have advocated a coup d’etat.
I was not a professional politician and had a good life before I sought the presidency. I ran for president because I was appalled by the utter contempt the Washington establishment has for both the American people and the Constitution they cherish. This establishment consists of most in the media, many members of the Congress, including most Democrats, as well as holdover Deep State bureaucrats who daily violate the law and their oaths of office. Their war is not just against me but against the people and their constitutionally prescribed right to choose who governs them.
Regrettably, the establishment, with utter contempt self-government, also includes unelected federal judges who arrogantly abuse their authority by issuing orders against the entire country rather than confining them to their own local districts and to the parties in the cases before them. These judges have caused great harm. Their abuses have resulted in barbaric murders of American citizens by foreign criminals who have no right to be here; and are a continuing threat to public safety.
Once rare, federal judge-shopping is now rampant. What authority to make nationwide immigration policy does an unelected local judge have in Hawaii, which is nowhere close to the southern border where an organized massive invasion by illegal immigrants is a major problem? Why is a judge in the Northern District of California asked to decide an immigration case rather than a judge in the Southern District, which is right on the border?
Make no mistake. Although we are not in a shooting war, we are in a war nevertheless — a war against American values, a war against American culture, a war against the American way of life and, above all, a war against constitutionally-protected freedoms, the rule of law and representative self-government. For short-term political gain, many current members of Congress would abolish the basic hard-won rights of freedom of speech and due process of law.
For elections to mean anything, voters need information upon which to base their choices. But not many Americans know what the fake news media has refused to report: Four years ago, every single Democrat senator voted to abolish First Amendment free speech protection, ceding to Deep State Swamp officials the power to prohibit speech they considered “unreasonable.” Tellingly, the anti-freedom Democrats made an exception for their allies, the fake news media. (The official roll call vote and official Democrat amendment to mutilate the sacred First Amendment are now posted on the WhiteHouse.gov website.)
My obligation as president is to do the best I can. I have lived most of my life and I do not fear assassination regularly advocated by leftist fanatics. However, I do fear the prospect of what would happen if citizens conclude that they have been cheated out of what they voted for in a constitutionally legitimate election. This is made all the more ominous when the leaders of a major political party no longer accept the results of elections they lose.
Just recently, a defeated Democrat presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, declared that there is no reason to be civil when Democrats lose. This is in stark contrast to Richard M. Nixon, another president whose legitimacy leftist Democrats refused to accept, despite his having won re-election by a landslide in 1972. Just 12 years earlier, in 1960, Nixon lost a very close election. But he rejected pleas by his supporters to contest disputed vote counts in Illinois and Texas. Instead, in his constitutional role as Vice President presiding over a joint session of Congress, he delivered one of the most eloquent forgotten brief statements in American history. For the benefit of today’s impatient sore losers who never have accepted the constitutional results of the 2016 election and are unable to wait until next year to vote me out of office, it is worth quoting Nixon’s eloquence 58 years ago:
This is the first time in 100 years that a candidate for the Presidency announced the result of an election in which he was defeated and announced the victory of his opponent. I do not think we could have a more striking and eloquent example of the stability of our constitutional system and of the proud tradition of the American people of developing, respecting, and honoring the institutions of self-government.
In our campaigns, no matter how hard-fought they may be, no matter how close the election may turn out to be, those who lose accept the verdict, and support those who win … [I]t is indeed a very great honor … to extend to John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson … my heartfelt best wishes [as they] work in a cause … bigger than any man’s ambition, greater than any party. It is the cause of freedom, of justice and peace for all mankind.
Tragically, many now seated here scornfully reject Nixon’s gracious wisdom. They and their corrupt, dishonorable and disloyal Deep State cronies pose a monumental threat to the United States Constitution. I urge all Americans who love our country and the great Constitution bequeathed to us over 200 years ago to resist the resistance to constitutional self-government. Only the American people can stop them from getting away with their tactics of stealing elections, vote fraud, speech suppression, intimidation and seeking to overturn elections they lose.
One of the most deplorable tactics of the Deep State and FNM resistance is to accuse their opponents of the very sins of which they are guilty. A group called Antifa regularly smear proponents of freedom as fascists. In truth, it is the left that today is fascist as witnessed by repeated actual and attempted suppression of free expression of any opposing views.
Many decent American citizens are rightly concerned about the radical left Democrat assault on the Second Amendment. But we must not forget that that amendment is second for a reason. Without freedom of speech and the right to petition for redress of grievances secured by the First Amendment, there will be no right to defend and safeguard the Second Amendment. The right to petition already has been seriously undermined. As noted,just four and one-half years ago, every Democrat Senator voted to abolish First Amendment protection for their political opponents. These U.S. senators – all Democrats – supported government regulation of speech critical of the government, or, as they put it, the power to “reasonably limit” money spent to “influence elections.” Do you want the deep state swamp to decide if what you say is “reasonable”?
The 54 anti-free speech Democrats included 35 still in the senate. They should be exposed for the freedom they seek to suppress: Baldwin (WI), Bennet (CO), Blumenthal (CT), Booker (NJ), Brown (OH), Cantwell (WA), Cardin (MD), Carper (DE), Casey (PA), Coons (DE), Durbin (IL), Feinstein (CA), Heinrich (NM), Hirono (HI), Kaine (VA), King (ME), Klobuchar (MN), Leahy (VT), Manchin (WV) Markey (MA), Menendez (NJ), Merkley (OR), Murphy (CT), Murray (WA), Reed (RI), Sanders (VT), Schumer (NY), Shaheen (NH), Stabenow (MI), Tester (MT), Udall (NM), Warner (VA), Warren (MA), Whitehouse (RI), Wyden (OR).
Leftist contempt for the freedoms provided by the Constitution does not end with the First and Second Amendments. This contempt extends to elimination of due process for their opponents. For Senators such as Feinstein, self-proclaimed “Spartacus” Booker, Harris, Hirono, Gillibrand, Klobochar, to name just a few of the worst, the mere making of a charge against one of their political opponents is proof of its truth. This is the stuff of the Inquisition of the middle ages, where torture extracted false confessions or the old English Star Chamber, which the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were intended to protect against. And if false charges does not work, harassment and intimidation of Storm Trooper days are advocated by the likes of Senator Spartacus Booker, Represenative Maxine Waters and hate-filled Hillary Clinton.
These are perilous times. After Jan. 20, 2025, I will no longer be president. Therefore, it is ultimately up to the American people to decide whether to fight for their freedom or to allow it to be destroyed by the very fascists who smear as fascists all decent Americans who oppose their march toward tyranny. As demonstrated by many examples of book-burning throughout history, one of the keys to totalitarianism is the elimination of any and all persuasive opposing ideas. President Ronald Reagan often pointed out that “[f]reedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” Reagan echoed another famous warning: “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
Finally, it is long overdue for people who have never discriminated against anyone because of race, religion or sex and do not believe in such discrimination to fight back against the libels against them by those fanatically devoted to these practices. In particular, for many years, leftist Democrats have been libeling and defaming as racist and sexist anyone who disagrees with them or opposes them in any way.
And yet, it is the Democrat Party that has a long history of defending slavery, racial discrimination and even lynching. It was the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, who ended slavery. Just a year ago and six weeks after smearing me as a racist, the Democrat Leader of the Senate explicitly voted against a judicial nominee solely based on the nominee’s race and sex. And just a year ago, shamelessly and publicly, Democrats refused to applaud low minority and female unemployment; and they showed complete disrespect for the grieving parents of black rape and murder victims. Right now leftists are warning the Democrat Party not to nominate a presidential candidate next year who is of the “wrong” race or sex.
Long ago, the Democrat Party and its leftist allies abandoned the late Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream that people “will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” They are almost exclusively fixated on racial and sexual identity rather than on actual qualifications and the policies the candidates represent. They don’t care what’s best for the country but, instead, focus on the race and sex of those who hold office. They don’t care if minority unemployment is high rather than low if the president is of a politically correct race or sex. They don’t care if innocent people are raped and murdered as long as officeholders are in lockstep with preferred identity politics.
In closing, I sincerely hope that God grants all liberty-loving Americans the will and the strength to resist a resistance fanatically devoted to denying all that has made America great: its history, traditions, values and Constitution. God bless America.
“The Great Awakening: Breaking the Chains of the Democratic Party” is the world’s first “documonial” film. This is a testimonial documentary created entirely by using #WalkAway™️ Campaign testimonial videos. These are the true stories of black American patriots about the history and present of the Democratic Party. Please share this documonial film everywhere.
Assemblyman Kieran Lalor: Assemblyman from Dutchess County, NY. Marine Corps veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and a frequent guest on the Fox News discusses the new Amazon HQ Boondoggle and the longterm corruption of New York State government projects.
Video Credit: James Doukas
Curtis Sliwa: Founder and CEO of the Guardian Angels, radio talk show host, WABC Radio, former Chairman of NYS Reform Party, and he was a candidate for NYC Public Advocate. Here he regales the audience with the message that when people take an active role in their community it makes things better for all of us.
“Carlson’s populist manifesto offers the one hope for the GOP to regain any relevance in Queens, Archie Bunker’s borough that is now home to so many new arrivals from around the world who share his devotion to family, faith and the American Dream.”
Our club stands out as the beacon of hope and freedom in our divided nation. The Lincoln Dinner is the exciting event of the year where we carry the torch for the Republican Party here in Queens and electrify the nation. Make your reservations today and bring your friends, family and neighbors!
“The November Ninth Club refers to an untold number of Washington insiders. These insiders covertly opposed Donald Trump when they thought he would never be elected president”, he stated. “However, beginning on, or soon after, November 9th, the day after Mr. Trump’s historic victory, these self- servers suddenly became Trump supporters. And more than a few of them were, unfortunately, able to tunnel their way into the White House.”
