Connect with us

News

Koch Organizations Push Illegal Alien Art Propaganda in Support of Obama’s DACA

Published

on

Non-profit organizations connected to the notorious mass migration advocate Charles Koch are showcasing an art exhibit in Washington, D.C. that portrays the benefits of immigration according to a report from The Hill.

This “Common Ground” exhibit’s unveiling comes before a Supreme Court hearing on November 12 that tackles the issues of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. This executive overreach by President Obama was eliminated by President Trump, but so-called Dreamers have sued leading to this landmark case.

The exhibit features nine doors with life-size video screens that portray different facets of immigrant life in America.

Trending: Los Angeles Enacts Full Coronavirus Lockdown for Three Weeks

Stand Together, the principal non-profit arm of the Koch network, brought forward this exhibit alongside non-profit groups such as Americans For Prosperity and the Libre Institute, which are also part of the Koch network.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This pro-immigration immigration exhibit will be open on Tuesday in Washington’s Wharf area, after preliminary showings at Nashville’s Politicon Convention and Miami’s Wynwood Art District.

It portrays nine aspects of immigrant life, beginning with a door title, “Meet Dreamers.” The term Dreamers is a euphemism for illegal aliens who benefit from DACA.

The status of Dreamers will be at the center of the immigration debate before the Supreme Court on November 12, when the Court will rule on the constitutionality of President Trump’s 2017 executive order to rescind the program from the Obama administration.

Under DACA, illegal aliens who came to the country as minors were barred from deportation after registering, paying a fee, and passing a background check. In addition, they were given permission to work in the country, with work permits that are renewable every two years.

The program was supposed to be a temporary measure while Congress tried to create a permanent solution for Dreamers.

In September of 2017, Trump rejected the program, arguing that President Obama overstepped his constitutional boundaries by legislating on immigration by granting work permits on top of deferred action on deportation.

Lower courts in California, New York, and the District of Columbia have blocked Trump’s order so far, thus allowing DACA recipients to keep their benefits and apply for renewals.

In June, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to determine if it agrees with the rulings from the lower courts, which includes the Ninth Circuit’s findings that Trump’s order was unconstitutional because of how it was “arbitrary and capricious.”

The Koch portrayal of illegal immigration is simplistic given the demographic and quantity of migration coming into the America.

Conservative firebrand, Michelle Malkin blasted the blatant propaganda, “Koch’s #openbordersinc propagandists put illegal alien students over Americans.” the author tweeted. “Speak up, young conservatives. They’re stabbing you in the back.”

Since the 1965 Immigration Act was passed, the character of migration to the United States has become overwhelmingly Third World and low-skilled.

As a result, there have been strong socio-economic effects such as depressed wages, increased housing demand, and strains on public infrastructure that negatively affect working and middle class Americans.

Not only that, the political effects, which overwhelmingly favor Democrats in the long-term, and the public security impact thanks to the rise of migrant ghettoes, should have Americans across the political spectrum worried.

A move towards a simpler immigration system based on merit, not family reunification, makes more sense at this point.

Culture

Starbucks Barista FIRED After Refusing to Wear “Pride” T-Shirt for Religious Reasons, According to Lawsuit

She is a Christian and was apparently told by her manager that she didn’t have to wear it.

Published

on

A former Starbucks barista is filing an unlawful discrimination lawsuit against the coffee giant, claiming they fired her for refusing to wear a “Pride” t-shirt that violated her Christian religious convictions.

Betsy Fresse started working as a barista in December 2015. After transferring to a Glen Ridge, New Jersey, store in early 2019, managers apparently “assured” her that her Christian faith wouldn’t be an issue.

Then in June 2019, she noticed a box of Pride shirts on a desk and asked if they’d make her wear one. Her store manager said she wouldn’t have to, but two months later she found herself out of a job after being terminated by a district manager.

A notice of separation claims that Fresse was fired for violating Starbucks’ “core values.” It specifically mentions an incident where she said her colleagues “need Jesus” when given the “Pride” shirt.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Starbucks maintains that “no part of our dress code requires partners to wear any approved items that they have not personally selected” and that Fresse’s claims are “without merit,” in a comment to the New York Post.

So Starbucks denies that she was fired for not wearing the shirt, yet their notice of separation appears to claim that they fired her for something she said about Jesus. Not a good look either way.

Fresse is seeking backpay, punitive damages, money to cover the cost of an attorney, and a permanent injunction that prevents Starbucks from “failing to accommodate […] sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Starbucks has long been a major player in the world of Woke Capital. Back in February Big League Politics reported on how the British branch of Starbucks was raising money for a pro-transgender lobbying group:

The U.K. branch of Starbucks is raising money to push for the chemical castration and surgical mutilation of children.

Nathanael Blake at The Federalist reported that the multinational titan is selling special mermaid-shaped cookies to help the pro-transgender lobbying group Mermaids. Curiously, the group’s founder took her underage son to Thailand to undergo a castration procedure.

Blake correctly observed “That Starbucks is supporting this group illustrates how thoroughly radicals have conquered both the LGBT movement and corporate culture.”

He also called attention to how “In a few years the fight has shifted from government recognition of same-sex relationships as legal marriages to mastectomies, sterilization, and castration for children.”

Here’s hoping that Betsy Fresse is successful in her lawsuit.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending