As Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) continues to move closer to a presidential campaign, the Republican senator spends quite a bit of time on the road, talking to as many possible supporters as he can. Unfortunately for Paul, his father, who ran several failed presidential races, continues to maintain a high public profile, too.

Former Republican presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul says secession is happening and its good news. Paul later predicted the states would stop listening to federal laws.

I would like to start off by talking about the subject and the subject is secession and, uh, nullification, the breaking up of government, and the good news is its gonna happen. Its happening, Paul, the father of potential Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul, told a gathering at the libertarian Mises Institute in late January.

Of course, there are plenty of former congressmen running around saying strange things at strange conferences; the question is when (and whether) this will start to cause problems for his presidential candidate son.

I continue to believe that its generally unfair to hold candidates responsible for the views of their family members. I know I wouldnt want to be blamed for some of what my relatives say, so my general inclination is to argue that a politicians kin should be off limits.

But with Rand and Ron its not quite so simple. Much of Rand Pauls political life was spent urging people to put his father in the White House, making public appearances to espouse his fathers bizarre ideas, and often speaking on his fathers behalf as a surrogate.

In this sense, Ron Paul isnt just Rand Pauls father; hes his sons political mentor. Their familial relationship isnt even whats important in this dynamic any political figure who worked with a fringe presidential candidate who espoused ridiculous views should expect some scrutiny.

And as recently as a few weeks ago, Rand Pauls mentor insisted publicly that American secession is gonna happen and thats good news.

One assumes the senator will argue that he shouldnt be blamed for his fathers off-the-wall ideas, and that defense might even be compelling under normal circumstances. But given that Rand Paul had a leading role in Ron Pauls operation, this isnt quite so easy.

Read more from the original source:

Ron Paul: U.S. secession is already 'happening' | MSNBC

The 2012 presidential campaign of Ron Paul, U.S. Representative of Texas, began officially in 2011 when Paul announced his candidacy for the 2012 Republican Party nomination for the U.S. Presidency.

On April 14, 2011, Paul announced the formation of a "testing-the-waters" account, and had stated that he would decide whether he would enter the race by at least early May. Paul announced the formation of an exploratory committee on April 26, 2011, in Des Moines, Iowa. He declared his candidacy for President of the United States on May 13, 2011 in Exeter, New Hampshire.[4]

On July 12, 2011, Paul announced that he would not seek another term as the Representative of Texas's 14th District to focus on his presidential campaign.[5] By April 2012, the campaign had raised more than $38 million.[6][7][8][9][10]

On May 14, 2012, Paul announced that he would end active campaigning for the remaining primary states and instead focus on delegate selection conventions at the state level.[11] On July 14, 2012, Paul failed to win a plurality of delegates at the final convention in the state of Nebraska, which ended his ability to ensure a speaking spot at the Republican National Convention.[12] At the 2012 Republican National Convention, Paul's campaign won 190 delegates.[13]

Heavily speculated as a possible Republican candidate in the 2012 presidential election, Paul appeared in the 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) straw poll. Paul won the poll, defeating Mitt Romney, who had won it the previous three years.[14] Paul also won the 2011 CPAC straw poll with 30 percent of the vote. Following that, he also won the paid, online Arizona Tea Party Patriots straw poll on February 28, 2011 with 49% of the vote.[15]

In February 2011, Paul asked supporters to donate to his Liberty Political Action Committee to fund trips to Iowa and elsewhere to explore a possible 2012 presidential candidacy. On February 21, a Presidents' Day money bomb raised around $400,000 in 24 hours. Liberty PAC raised more than $700,000 during its February relaunch.[16][17] By the end of March, Liberty PAC had raised more than $1 million.[6]

On April 14, 2011, it was announced that Paul had formed a "testing-the-waters" organization, similar to Newt Gingrich's efforts in exploring his potential candidacy. Paul's spokesman, Jesse Benton was quoted as saying, "He remains undecided on what his plans will be, but as a final decision draws closer, his team has put the pieces in place for him to flip a switch and hit the ground running if he decides to run for president."[18] Paul announced the formation of an exploratory committee in Des Moines, Iowa on April 26 in preparation for a potential bid for the Republican presidential nomination.[19][20]

On May 5, Paul participated in a debate in Greenville, South Carolina among only five candidates.[21] A moneybomb was scheduled for the same day, which raised over $1 million for Paul's campaign.[22]

On May 13, 2011, in Exeter, New Hampshire, Paul announced his decision to seek the Republican nomination in the 2012 election. The announcement was broadcast live nationally on ABC's Good Morning America.[4]

On May 14, 2012, Paul made a statement on the campaign's website that he would no longer be actively campaigning in remaining state primaries, but would instead continue his presidential bid by seeking to collect delegates at caucuses and state conventions for the Republican National Convention in August 2012.[23]

He participated in a debate on June 13, 2011 at Saint Anselm College in Goffstown, New Hampshire.[24] On June 18, 2011, Paul won the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll with 41%, winning by a large margin on Jon Huntsman, who trailed second with 25% and Michele Bachmann with 13% (Mitt Romney came in fifth with 5%).[25] On June 19 he again won the Clay County Iowa StrawPoll with 25%, while Michele Bachmann trailed second with 12%.

Paul also participated in another debate on August 11, 2011, in Ames, Iowa, and overwhelmingly won the post-debate polls.[26] He then came in second in the Ames Straw Poll with 4,671 votes, narrowly losing to Michele Bachmann by 152 votes or 0.9%, a statistical first-place tie finish according to some in the news media.[27][28][29][30] He received the fourth most votes for a candidate in the history of the Ames Straw Poll.

On August 20, in the New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll Paul came again first, again overwhelmingly, with 45%, Mitt Romney trailing second with 10%.[31] On August 27, in the Georgia State GOP Straw Poll Paul came in a close second place behind Georgia resident Herman Cain, who had 26% of the vote, with Paul receiving 25.7%.[32]

On September 5, Paul attended the Palmetto Freedom Forum in South Carolina along with fellow candidates Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich. The forum was paneled by congressmen Steve King of Iowa, senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Dr. Robert P. George, the founder of the American Principles Project which hosted the event.[33]

On September 12, Paul attended the Tea Party Republican Presidential debate broadcast by CNN. During the event, Paul received both unexpected "cheers" and "boos" for his responses to the questions posed by the debate moderators and fellow debate participants.[34][35] When Rick Santorum questioned Paul about his position regarding the motivation behind the September 11 attacks, some of the audience jeered his response that U.S. foreign occupation was the "real motivation behind the September 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism".[34]

When one of the moderators posed a hypothetical scenario of a healthy 30-year-old man requiring intensive care but neglected to be insured pressing Paul with "Are you saying that society should just let him die?", several audience members cheered "yeah!" Paul disagreed with the audience reaction stating that while he practiced as a doctor in a Catholic hospital before the Medicaid era, "We never turned anybody away from the hospital."[35] Paul elaborated further a few days later that he believed the audience was cheering self-reliance and that "the media took it and twisted it".[36]

Jack Burkman, a Republican Party (GOP) strategist, was asked of Paul's performance in the debate. While Burkman stated that his national radio program's polling suggested Rick Perry won the debate (156 Perry votes to 151 Paul votes), he believed Paul's support is extremely deep like Democrat support for Bobby Kennedy decades before and predicted "he could come from behind as the horses turn for home and win the nomination."[37]

On September 18, Paul won the California state GOP straw poll with 44.9% of the vote, held at the JW Marriott in downtown Los Angeles. Out of 833 ballots cast, Paul garnered the greatest number of votes with 374, beating his nearest competitor Texas Gov. Rick Perry by a wide margin.[38]

On September 24, Paul finished fifth in the GOP's Florida Presidency 5 straw poll with 10.4% of the vote.[39] Paul won with 37% of the vote at the Values Voter Summit on October 8;[40] the highest ever recorded at the event.

On October 22, Paul won the Ohio Republican straw poll with the support of 53% of the participants, more than double the support of the second-place candidate, Herman Cain (26%).[41]

Paul won the National Federation of Republican Assemblies Presidential Straw Poll of Iowa voters on October 29 with 82% of the vote.[42]

On November 19, Paul won the North Carolina Republican Straw Poll with 52% of the vote, finishing well ahead of the second-place candidate, Newt Gingrich, who received 22% of the vote.[43]

In an August Rasmussen Reports poll of likely voters across the political spectrum asking if they would vote for Paul or Barack Obama, the response narrowly favored Obama (39%) over Paul (38%), but by a smaller margin than the same question asked a month ago (41% 37%).[44] Paul finished 3rd in a late-August poll of likely Republican primary voters, trailing Rick Perry and Mitt Romney and ahead of Michele Bachmann,[45] climbing from 4th position which, according to another poll, he occupied only a few days earlier.[46]

In a September Harris Poll, respondents chose Paul (51%) over Obama (49%).[47]

In the Illinois Republican Straw Poll held in the beginning of November, Paul took 52% of the votes of those polled with Herman Cain coming in second with 18%.[48]

In a November 1012 Bloomberg News poll of Iowans likely to participate in the January 3, 2012 Republican caucuses, Paul was in a four-way tie at 19 percent with Cain, Romney and Gingrich at 20, 18 and 17 percent respectively.[49]

A Bloomberg News poll released on November 16, 2011 showed Paul at 17% in New Hampshire, in second place to Romney's 40%.[50]

A Public Policy Polling poll released on December 13, 2011 put Paul in a statistical tie for first in Iowa with Newt Gingrich, polling 21% and 22%, respectively.[51] The RealClearPolitics.com average shows Paul in second place in New Hampshire at 18.3% on December 28, 2011.[52] Public Policy Polling results from December 18 show that Paul is now leading in Iowa with 23%, followed by Romney at 20% and Gingrich at 14%.[53]

A January 2012 Rasmussen Reports poll of likely voters across the political spectrum found that in a hypothetical two-candidate race between Paul and Barack Obama, respondents preferred Obama (43%) over Paul (37%).[54] The RealClearPolitics.com average of polls also found Obama (47%) favored over Paul (42%), in a two-candidate race.[55]

A January Pew Research Center poll of registered voters across the political spectrum on the eve of the South Carolina primary found that in a hypothetical three-way race between Obama, Romney, and Paul, with Paul running as a third-party candidate, respondents would choose Obama (44%) over Romney (32%) and Paul (18%). (Paul had repeatedly stated he had no plans for a third-party run.)[56][57]

In polls of likely Republican primary voters on the eve of the South Carolina Republican primary, Paul placed third both in South Carolina (15%)[58] and nationally (14%),[59] trailing Romney and Gingrich.

A Rasmussen poll in April 2012 showed Paul as the only Republican candidate able to defeat Obama in a head-to-head match-up. Paul beat Obama by one point in the poll with 44% of the vote.[60]

Paul's second moneybomb (the first being before his official announcement) was scheduled for June 5, 2011, the anniversary of the 1933 joint resolution which abolished the gold standard. The June 5 moneybomb, which was themed as "The Revolution vs. RomneyCare: Round One", raised approximately $1.1 million.[61] A third moneybomb themed "Ready, Ames, Fire!" was executed on July 19, 2011 to provide support leading up to the Ames Straw Poll on August 13, 2011, raising over $550,000.[62]

In the second quarter of 2011, Paul's campaign ranked second, behind Mitt Romney, in total dollars raised with $4.5 million.[63] This was $1.5 million more than his original goal of $3 million.[64] During that quarter, the Paul campaign had raised more money from military personnel than all other GOP candidates combined, and even more money than Barack Obama, a trend that has continued from Paul's 2008 presidential campaign.[65]

A fourth moneybomb took place on Paul's 76th birthday on August 20, 2011. It raised more than $1.8 million despite a cyber-attack against the site that took it down for several hours, after which the donation drive was extended for another twelve hours.[66]

A fifth moneybomb began on September 17, the date of the 224th anniversary of the creation of the United States Constitution. Continuing throughout the following day, it raised more than $1 million.[67] Shortly after the Constitution Day moneybomb, a sixth moneybomb, entitled "End of Quarter Push", began on September 22 in an attempt to generate $1.5 million before the 3rd Quarter fundraising deadline.[68]

In the third quarter of 2011, Paul raised over $8 million.[8] A three-day moneybomb entitled "Black This Out" brought in more than $2.75 million in mid-October.[69][70]

On December 16, a moneybomb titled the "Tea Party MoneyBomb" took place and raised upwards of $4 million over a period of two days.[71]

Paul was also supported by a Super PAC, Endorse Liberty. By January 16, 2012, the PAC had spent $2.83 million promoting Paul's campaign.[72]

In June 2011, online publisher Robin Koerner coined the term "Blue Republican" to refer to U.S. voters who consider themselves to be liberal or progressiveor who generally vote Democraticbut plan to register as Republicans and vote in the U.S. 2012 Republican presidential primaries for Paul. The phrase "Blue Republican" quickly spread after Koerner's article "If You Love Peace, Become a 'Blue Republican' (Just for a Year)" was published in The Huffington Post on June 7. Social media entrepreneur Israel Anderson then promoted the term on Facebook, later teaming with Koerner to expand the movement.[73]

Five days after his original article coining the term, Koerner published a follow-up article on the term's popularity: "'Blue Republicans': an Idea Whose Time Has Come."[74] The article was shared on the social networking site Facebook more than 11,000 times by the time the second article was published.[75]

On June 21, 2011, Paul was the first 2012 Republican presidential candidate to sign the Cut, Cap, and Balance Pledge.[76] This pledge seeks commitments from politicians for changes of the debt limit, spending decreases, and taxation. The pledge also implores signers to endorse passage of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

During his previous presidential campaign, it was alleged by many supporters that there was a media blackout and suppression of coverage of Paul.[77] Similar allegations have arisen in the 2012 campaign and received some media coverage.[78] Politico columnist Roger Simon noted on CNN's Reliable Sources that Paul has received considerably less coverage than Michele Bachmann, despite earning a close second to her at the Ames Straw Poll.[79] Simon later opined in Politico that the media was treating Paul unfairly.[80]

Comedian Jon Stewart similarly complained about the lack of coverage, despite Paul polling much better than candidates who received coverage. Stewart presented a montage of mainstream media clips that showed commentators ignoring, and two CNN correspondents admitting to suppressing, coverage of Paul.[81] Will Wilkinson opined in The Economist that "Ron Paul remains as willfully overlooked as an American war crime", arguing that if Paul had won the Ames straw poll, it would have been written off as irrelevant, but since Bachmann had won, it was claimed to boost her campaign.[82] Other commentators noted that Paul has had success at past straw polls but has not turned that into broader success as a reason for the relative lack of media attention.[83]

Paul was asked in a Fox News interview "What are they [the media] afraid of?"[84] He answered "They don't want to discuss my views, because I think they're frightened by me challenging the status quo and the establishment." Later, he continued on Piers Morgan Tonight: "They don't want my views out therethey're too dangerous ... We want freedom, and we're challenging the status quo. We want to end the war, we want a gold standard, and their view is that people just can't handle all this freedom."[85]

During the November 12 CBS/National Journal Debate, Paul was allocated 90 seconds speaking time. Paul's campaign responded, saying, "Congressman Paul was only allocated 90 seconds of speaking in one televised hour. If we are to have an authentic national conversation on issues such as security and defense, we can and must do better to ensure that all voices are heard. CBS News, in their arrogance, may think they can choose the next president. Fortunately, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and across America get to vote and not the media elites."[86]

Paul Mulshine a columnist with The Star-Ledger noted that the New York Times admitted to suppressing coverage of Paul. He quoted a column by Times editor Arthur Brisbane that said: "Early in the campaign, The Times decided to remain low key in its coverage of Ron Paul, the libertarian Texas congressman."[87][88]

The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism found in August 2011 that Paul received substantially less coverage than other candidates in the 2012 race.[89][90][91][92] Pew released another study in October 2011 confirming that Paul has been receiving disproportionately low coverage in the media. Paul polled 6.09.8% during the study period, but only received 2% of media coverage, the lowest of all candidates. It also noted that Paul's coverage among blogs was the most favorable of all candidates.[93] In January 2012, The Atlantic cited the weekly Pew study. They noted that despite steadily rising in the polls, Paul has been losing his share of press coverage, going from 34% in late-December 2011 to about 3% in mid-January 2012. They also noted a sharp drop in positive coverage and a small rise in negative.[94]

In June, a group of lawyers and legal experts filed a lawsuit[95][96] in the US District Court against the Republican National Committee and 55 state and territorial Republican party organizations for depriving Paul delegates of voice in the nominating process as required by law, and illegally coercing them to choose Mitt Romney as the party's presidential nominee.[97] Supporters of the effort say there is "evidence that the voting rights of Ron Paul Republican delegates and voters have been violated by nearly every state GOP party and the RNC during the 2012 primary election phase."

The plaintiffs claim that the party violated federal law by forcing delegates to sign loyalty affidavits, under threat of perjury, to vote for Mitt Romney, before an official nominee is selected. The suit alleged that there had been "a systematic campaign of election fraud at state conventions," employing rigging of voting machines, ballot stuffing, and falsification of ballot totals. The suit further pointed to incidents at state conventions, including acts of violence and changes in procedural rules, allegedly intended to deny participation of Paul supporters in the party decision-making and to prevent votes from being cast for Paul. An attorney representing the complainants said that Paul campaign advisor Doug Wead had voiced support for the legal action.[97] Paul himself told CNN that although the lawsuit was not a part of his campaign's strategy and that he had not been advising his supporters to sue, he was not going to tell his supporters not to sue, if they had a legitimate argument. "If they're not following the rules, you have a right to stand up for the rules. I think for the most part these winning caucuses that we've been involved in we have followed the rules. And the other side has at times not followed the rules."[98]

In August 2012, the lawsuit was dismissed by U.S. District Judge David Carter, who described most of the plaintiffs' claims as vague and largely unintelligible. The judge said that the one intelligible claim they had lodgedthat the Massachusetts Republican Party had illegally excluded 17 elected state delegates from participating in the national convention because they had refused to commit to a particular nomineefailed because political parties have a right to exclude people from membership and leadership roles. The judge left the plaintiffs "a third and final opportunity" to amend their complaint.[99] The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint just days before the scheduled start of the convention.[100]

Despite ceasing most campaign activities, the Paul campaign did some fundraising in July 2012, in an attempt to fund the transportation expenses of Paul delegates traveling to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida.[101] Paul said one of his goals at the convention was to "plant our flag and show that our Liberty movement is the future of the GOP".[101] He also said he was expecting a conflict over "credentials" and the party's platform.[101] As of late August, Paul's pet issue of auditing the Federal Reserve is on the draft version of the Republican Party's national platform.[102] Presumptive candidate Romney is calling for the plank's final inclusion.[103]

Paul finished third in the Iowa Republican caucuses, held on January 3, 2012. While all of the votes have not yet been counted, he is behind leader Rick Santorum (24.56%, 29,839 votes), and second-place Mitt Romney (24.54%, 29,805 votes), with 21.43% of the vote (26,036 votes).[104][105] Paul has been projected to receive 7 delegates out of 28, as many as Mitt Romney and one less than Rick Santorum, making him tied for second place in the delegate count at the time.[106][107]

Paul placed second in the New Hampshire Republican primary, held on January 10, with 22.9% of the vote, behind Mitt Romney with 39.4%. He gained 3 delegates from this contest. In the South Carolina Republican primary on January 21, Paul placed fourth and gained no delegates. Paul also gained no delegates in the Florida Republican primary on January 31, after he did little campaigning in the state because of its "winner-take-all" delegate apportionment.

The Nevada Republican caucuses were held on February 4. Paul finished third behind Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney with 18.73% of the votes and 5 of the delegates, behind the winner Romney's 50.02% and Gingrich's 21.10%.[108] The Colorado and Minnesota Republican caucuses were held on February 7. In Colorado, Paul finished fourth with 11.77% behind Santorum (winner with 40.24%), Romney, and Gingrich. In Minnesota, Paul finished 2nd (27.1%) behind winner Rick Santorum (44.9%), with Romney (16.9%) and Gingrich (10.8%) placing 3rd and 4th.[109] A non-binding vote in the Missouri Republican primary was held on February 7 as well, and Paul got 12.2% of the vote. The primary did not apportion any delegates; that will be done at the Missouri caucuses, scheduled to begin on March 17.[citation needed]

On February 17, with 95% of precincts in the Maine Republican caucuses reporting, Paul was running second to Mitt Romney with 34.9% of the vote to Romney's 39%.[110] Neither of the frontrunners have pressed for a recount, and the Maine Republican Party's chairman has stated that recounts are impossible due to the votes being physically thrown away.[111]

The Michigan and Arizona Republican primaries were held on February 28. Paul came in third place in Michigan, with 11.9%; and fourth in Arizona, with 8.45%.

A large portion of the delegates for the Republican National Convention were awarded in March, which includes the Washington Republican caucuses on March 3, Super Tuesday on March 6, and several other states later in the month. Paul came in second in the Washington caucuses, with 24.81%. On March 10, he picked up one delegate in the U.S Virgin Islands Caucuses while Romney added four delegates to the three super-delegates previously known to support him.[112]

Paul received 1.23% of the vote in the Puerto Rico primary, coming in sixth, his lowest polling of any territory during the campaign.[113][114][115]

On The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Paul said he forewent Secret Service protection because he considered it "a form of welfare" and that he believed he should pay for his own protection.[116]

The Paul campaign pursued a strategy of gathering support from state delegates as opposed to outright winning states.[117] For example, Paul had a strong showing in Romney's home state, Massachusetts, with supporters getting the majority of delegates there (though they are compelled to vote for Romney in the first round), causing a battle between the Paul delegates, the Massachusetts Republican Party, and the Republican National Convention Committee.[118] A similar situation played out in Louisiana, with the Paul campaign initially winning 17 of 30 available delegates before procedural and legal challenges changed the allocation.[119] Paul also managed a delegate win in Nevada, with 88% of delegates supporting him.[120] Paul won 21 of 25 delegates in Iowa.[121]

On May 14, 2012, Paul announced that he would no longer actively campaign in states that have not held primaries, but rather focus on a strategy to secure delegates before the convention.[122] Paul remained active in the race through the 2012 Republican National Convention.[123] Leading up to the convention, he won bound-pluralities of the official delegations from the states of Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, and Oregon (but not the Virgin Islandsdespite winning the popular vote there). During the credentials committee meetings the week prior to the official opening of the convention, the Paul members of the delegations from Louisiana, Maine, and Oregon were disputed (as well as the Paul delegates from Massachusetts), and many of his delegates from those states were unseated. At the same time, Paul delegates from Oklahoma disputed the credentials of the official Oklahoma delegation, but they did not succeed. In the end, he had bound-pluralities from Iowa, Minnesota, and Nevada; however, he additionally had nomination-from-the-floor-pluralities in the states of Oregon and Alaska, plus the territory of the Virgin Islands. Under the 2012 rules, this total of 6 from-the-floor pluralities was sufficient to earn a fifteen-minute speech on national television; the rules were changed at the last minute to require 8 from-the-floor pluralities, and thus he did not speak at the convention.[124] Although he wasn't named the 2012 Republican nominee, he did not officially end his campaign or endorse nominee Mitt Romney for president.[125][126] At the convention, he received second place with 8% of the delegates; Gingrich and Santorum had released their bound delegates to Romney the week before the official opening of the convention. Paul's state-by-state delegates tallies were not verbally acknowledged by the RNC.

Paul would end the campaign with 118 delegates, coming in fourth behind Gingrich, Santorum, and Romney."2012 Republican Delegates".

A Ron Paul rally was held in Tampa, Florida, the site of the 2012 Republican National Convention, the day before the convention was to begin.[127]

State officials

According to Forsythe, Paul has received support from 20 of New Hampshire's 400 state representatives as of early July 2011.[172]

Political organizations and officials

Democratic Party officials

Republican Party officials

Others

Original post:

Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2012 - Wikipedia

Apple has finished filling up the cast of its upcoming thriller series Are You Sleeping with big names like Aaron Paul and This Is Us star Ron Cephas Jones, an individual with knowledge of the casting tells TheWrap.

Elizabeth Perkins (Weeds),Mekhi Phifer(ER, 8 Mile),Tracie Thoms(Rent, UnReal), Michael Beach (Aquaman) andHaneefah Wood(Baskets, One Day at a Time) have also been added to the line-up of the tech giants new project one of several they are doing in collaboration with Reese Witherspoons Hello Sunshine banner. The two previously announced leads are Octavia Spencer and Lizzy Caplan.

Are You Sleeping is created and written by Nichelle Tramble Spellman (who will serve as showrunner) and based on the true-crime novel by Kathleen Barber, which focuses on Americas obsession with true-crime podcasts.

Also Read: Lizzy Caplan to Star Opposite Octavia Spencer in Apple Drama 'Are You Sleeping'

Spencer stars as Poppy Parnell, a relentless investigative reporter who looks to uncover the truth behind a decades-old questionable murder verdict through her new podcast. Paul plays convicted murderer Warren Cave whose guilt or innocence has remained a question in many peoples minds for the past 20 years. Jones is in as Leander Shreve Scoville, Poppys father. Caplan plays twin sisters Josie and Lanie, whose lives have taken very different paths.

Perkins plays Melanie Cave mother of Cave and the subject of Poppys podcast. Phifer is Markus Knox, a former detective and longtime friend of Parnell. Beach plays Ingram Rhoades, a successful attorney and Poppys husband. Thoms is Desiree Scoville, Poppys older opinionated sister. Wood plays Cydie Scoville, Poppys fiercely loyal sister.

The series is executive produced by Spencer under her Orit Entertainment banner, Tramble Spellman, Witherspoon and her Hello Sunshine partner Lauren Neustadter, as well as Peter Chernin, Jenno Topping and Kristen Campo for Chernin Entertainment.The premiere episode will be directed by Anna Foerster (Outlander).

Also Read: JJ Abrams, Sara Bareilles Dramedy Gets Series Order at Apple

Are You Sleeping is one of three series Apple has ordered from Witherspoons Hello Sunshine, including the actress morning show drama with Jennifer Aniston and the Kristen Wiig-led comedy, You Think It, Ill Say It.

Dead is dead is dead. Unless you're on TV. Whether it was planned out carefully over several seasons by writers or thrown in without a solid explanation, small-screen deaths don't always stick. It's not uncommon for a TV character to be resurrected after you were sure, so sure, that they were gone for good. Seriously, the trope has been done to death at this point. Click through TheWrap's gallery to see the best examples. And, it really should go without saying, but spoiler alert.

Buffy Summers, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" -- Here lies Buffy Summers. She saved the world. A lot. Yes, the titular heroine of Joss Whedon's OG supernatural series died at the end of Season 5, just before the show jumped to UPN. She sacrificed herself as a "gift" to the world. But not to worry, her super powerful witch BFF Willow was able to resurrecther by the Season 6 premiere.

Also Read: Joss Whedon Female Detective Comedy Series in Development at Freeform

Taylor Hayes, "The Bold and the Beautiful" -- Taylor died and came back to life twice and both incidents involved the sameMoroccan prince. Look, we get that it's a soap opera, but even that was a bit much.

Also Read: 11 Highest-Rated TV Shows of 2017-18 Season (Photos)

Michael Cordero, "Jane the Virgin" -- Jane's husband Michael died halfway through Season 3 of The CW series, collapsing suddenly after recovering from a gunshot wound to the chest months earlier. The show immediately jumped ahead a few years, where Jane was finally able to find love again with Rafael. However, in the final moments of the recent Season 4 finale, we discovered Michael is still alive, but we have no idea how. Fans should find out when the fifth season premieres this fall and that reveal can't come fast enough.

Also Read: The CW to Program Original Shows on Sunday Nights for First Time in 9 Years

Dan Conner, "Roseanne" -- The ABC sitcom's revival explained away Dan's death on the original series' depressing finale as a joke in the first few minutes of its return. Of course, then the comedy itself was killed off last month after just one new season, thanks to star Roseanne Barr's tweeting habits.

Also Read: Roseanne Barr Says She Begged ABC Not to Cancel Roseanne Show

Tasha Yar, "Star Trek the Next Generation" -- This was a case of an actor wanting out, then back in, and a show obliging by way of death.Denise Crosby didn't like the direction "TNG" was going in, so they killed off Tasha. But then, they had to find a way to bring her back for a few episodes, so when Crosby was on board with returning, the writers created a new timeline where she didn't die. But she was only alive in that timeline. Problem solved.

Also Read: All 39 Star Trek Main Characters Ranked, From Spock to Wesley (Photos)

Sherlock Holmes, "Sherlock" -- Fans had to wait two long years to find out how Benedict Cumberbatch's character could have possibly survived leaping from a hospital roof to his death. In the end, "Sherlock" decided to tease you for eternity by suggesting a few possibilities, but ultimately never revealing what happened.

Sydney Andrews, "Melrose Place" --In 1997, viewers of this primetime Fox soap were crushed when a car struck and killed Sydney Andrews on her wedding day in the original series. But in the pilot of the short-lived remake, Sydney is alive -- for about 10 minutes. She's soon found floating in the apartment complex's pool. Sorry, Syd.

Jon Snows case is really just the tip of the undoing-on-screen-demises iceberg

Dead is dead is dead. Unless you're on TV. Whether it was planned out carefully over several seasons by writers or thrown in without a solid explanation, small-screen deaths don't always stick. It's not uncommon for a TV character to be resurrected after you were sure, so sure, that they were gone for good. Seriously, the trope has been done to death at this point. Click through TheWrap's gallery to see the best examples. And, it really should go without saying, but spoiler alert.

Read more:

Aaron Paul, Ron Cephas Jones Round Out Cast of Apples ...

Everyone is surely aware by now that all of our digital communications are being sent to government databases for storage. If our American ancestors could see it, they wouldnt believe their eyes. We still, however, have the ability to use

Continue reading

Russiagate has jumped the shark. So says Robert Parry, investigative journalist and founder of ConsortiumNews.com, Parry joins todays Liberty Report to discuss the current state of the mainstream media and the ongoing allegations of Russian interference in American political and

Continue reading

President Trump vehemently denied an NBC report that he called for a ten-fold increase in US nuclear weapons at a meeting this summer. Calling it fake news, the president reportedly threatened NBCs broadcast license. Is this really fake news? Or

Continue reading

The CIA has been forced to declassify nearly 300 documents about a secret torture site in Afghanistan where CIA psychologists devised some of the most cruel and inhuman ways of torturing. Some were killed. The psychologists made millions of dollars.

Continue reading

The White House has rolled out the Presidents 70 point plan to reform the immigration system. Will building a wall, hiring more officers and prosecutors, mandating E-Verify, and other enforcement measures help solve the problem? Or is there a better

Continue reading

Original post:

Ron Paul .com

Barnds brothers lawn and garden, Overland park, Kansas, landscaping services

A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY THEN and NOW

Ron and Paul Barnds started their lawn and garden business over thirty years ago grom their parents' residence in Overland Park, Kansas. As they grew, so did the number of satisfied customers. During the college years they decided to develop their ever-expanding business into a full service corporation.

As part of their expansion, they developed the Homes Association Management division to manage the administrative affairs of the Homes Associations that they serviced. Soon they realized it would be beneficial to their clients to offer a full array of services for the home as well as the lawn and garden areas.

Ron, Paul and associates take great pride in their work and the relationships they develop with their clients. They make a extra effort to be available to their customers and listen to their needs. Their long term employees provide the clients with quality work and assistance. They have many employees and satisfied customers who have been with them for over twenty-five years.

The BARNDS BROTHERS are dedicated to customer service and quality work.

See the rest here:

Barnds brothers lawn and garden, Overland park, Kansas ...

The release of the House Intelligence Committees memo on the FBIs abuse of the FISA process set off a partisan firestorm. The Democrats warned us beforehand that declassifying the memo would be the end the world as we know it. It was reckless to allow Americans to see this classified material, they said. Agents in the field could be harmed, sources and methods would be compromised, they claimed.

Republicans who had seen the memo claimed that it was far worse than Watergate. They said that mass firings would begin immediately after it became public. They said that the criminality of US government agencies exposed by the memo would shock Americans.

Then it was released and the world did not end. FBI agents have thus far not been fired. Seeing classified material did not terrify us, but rather it demonstrated clearly that information is kept from us by claiming it is classified.

In the end, both sides got it wrong. Heres what the memo really shows us:

First, the memo demonstrates that there is a deep state that does not want things like elections to threaten its existence. Candidate Trumps repeated promises to get along with Russia and to re-assess NATO so many years after the end of the Cold War were threatening to a Washington that depends on creating enemies to sustain the fear needed to justify a trillion dollar yearly military budget.

Imagine if candidate Trump had kept his campaign promises when he became President. Without the Russia threat and without the China threat and without the need to dump billions into NATO, we might actually have reaped a peace dividend more than a quarter century after the end of the Cold War. That would have starved the war-promoting military-industrial complex and its network of pro-war think tanks that populate the Washington Beltway area.

Second, the memo shows us that neither Republicans nor Democrats really care that much about surveillance abuse when average Americans are the victims. It is clear that the FISA abuse detailed in the memo was well known to Republicans like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes before the memo was actually released. It was likely also well known by Democrats in the House. But both parties suppressed this evidence of FBI abuse of the FISA process until after the FISA Amendments Act could be re-authorized. They didnt want Americans to know how corrupt the surveillance system really is and how the US has become far too much like East Germany. That might cause more Americans to call up their Representatives and demand that the FISA mass surveillance amendment be allowed to sunset.

Ironically, Chairman Nunes was the biggest cheerleader for the extension of the FISA Amendments even as he knew how terribly the FISA process had been abused!

Finally, hawks on both sides of the aisle in Congress used Russia-gate as an excuse to build animosity toward Russia among average Americans. They knew from the classified information that there was no basis for their claims that the Trump Administration was put into office with Moscows assistance, but they played along because it served their real goal of keeping the US on war footing and keeping the gravy train rolling.

But dont worry: the neocons in both parties will soon find another excuse to keep us terrified and ready to flush away a trillion dollars a year on military spending and continue our arguments and new Cold War with Russia.

In the meantime, be skeptical of both parties. With few exceptions they are not protecting liberty but promoting its opposite.

Follow this link:

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : What the ...

With the 2018 Libertarian Party National Convention rapidly approaching, the Libertarian Party Mises Caucus thought that it would be wise to invite Ron Paul, the father of the liberty movement, to the convention. To the shock of any principled libertarian, the leadership of the Libertarian Party rejected Ron Paul, who was their presidential nominee 30 years ago.

Interestingly enough, the Libertarian Party would not have had to pay a dime to host Ron Paul. The Libertarian Party Mises Caucus was willing to pay the speaking fees for Ron Paul, incurring no costs to the LNC. In addition to Paul, the Mises Caucus also sought to bring Judge Andrew Napolitano to the convention. The Libertarian Party rejected these heroes. If one rejects someone like Ron Paul, it is safe to assume that they are not libertarians by any stretch of the imagination.

Here we see Daniel Hayes, the Convention Coordinator for the Libertarian Party, explicitlyreject Ron Paul, claiming the former congressman has no idea what the party stands for. Hayes is also a Member-At-Large for the LNC. He is supposed to represent the entirety of the LPs membership. This is not where libertarians stand, but perhaps the Libertarian Party hates Ron Paul and true libertarianism now.

In the article that Hayes is triggered over enough to reject Ron Paul, Paul outlines the failings of the Libertarian Party in 2016. Unfortunately the Libertarian Party has failed to live up to what should have been its role as an ideological alternative to Washingtons one-party system. As was quite obvious in the 2016 presidential election, the Libertarians yielded to prevailing attitudes on war, welfare, the Federal Reserve, and more. In believing that winning was more important than standing for something, they ended up achieving neither.

Nothing Ron Paul said was false. The Libertarian Party sold out when they nominated people like Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. If Hayes thinks he is above criticism, he ought not to hold a public position in any political party. In the Libertarian Party Mises Caucuss official statement regarding the Libertarian Partys rejection of Ron Paul, Michael Heise, founder of the Libertarian Party Mises Caucus said You would think that Ron would be a valued source of advice and that his followers and audience at the Ron Paul Liberty Report would be a prime recruiting ground for the Libertarian Party.

But it seems that the Libertarian Party is more interested in getting cozy with Mike Shipley, founder of the Socialist Caucus of the Libertarian Party. Is anyone really surprised that the people rejecting Ron Paul are openly associating with communists who reject private property? Here we have Nicholas Sarwark, chairman of the Libertarian Party, showing his affection for the communists who have hijacked libertarianism.

This isnt the first time the LP attacked true libertarians. Think about the time they equated Ron and Rand Paul with the Bushes and the Clintons.

What about the time Chairman Sarwark attacked Rand Paul for not doing enough for liberty (implying the Libertarian Party has done ANYTHING for liberty). In addition, the same chairman attacked the Ludwig von Mises Institute, calling it a Nazi organization. The Mises Institute is the most principled libertarian organization that has dedicated itself to spreading the teachings of Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises. The Mises Institute also served as inspiration for Ron Paul. Sarwark also thinks that Bernie Sanders is Ron Paul. In other words, the Libertarian Party leadership is a bunch of morons who hold their positions as a trophy. Liberty is not their objective.

In light of this event, Liberty Hangout informed the Republican Liberty Caucus of this incident. Citing Matt Nye, the Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus, The RLC released the following official response:

If you didnt think the Libertarian Party had gone off the rails after the full monte display at the last National convention and the Johnson-Weld presidential fiasco, you might be justified in thinking so now, RLC Chairman Matt Nye said. Ive just been informed that the Libertarian Party (LP) National Committee has declined Dr. Ron Paul as a guest speaker at their National Convention in New Orleans.

Last year at FreedomFest in Las Vegas, LP Chairman Nicholas Sarwark took credit on stage for Ron Paul being one of the few prominent libertarian-leaning politicians ever elected while answering a question I posed from the audience, Nye said. Apparently things have changed; now Ron Paul who almost single-handedly created an entire movement of libertarian leaning young people working to change the world of politics is no longer welcome at the LP.

Ive not heard the explanation or rationale for this, and there may be more to the story, but one thing I can say for sure is that Ron Paul will always be welcome at the Republican Liberty Caucus, Nye said. No other individual in recent memory has done more to advance the cause of liberty than Dr. Paul, and I can personally cite him as one of the primary catalysts for my own activism.

So long as the Libertarian Party rejects Ron Paul, the LP is dead. As mentioned before, the LP leadership sees their positions as trophies, not as tools to promote liberty. They are complacent as government grows and tyranny expands. It is for this reason that the Libertarian Party Mises Caucus must take over the Libertarian Party in 2018. Things have gotten so bad under Nick Sarwark and Arvin Vohra that Ron Paul is shunned by the Libertarian Party.

Ron Paul wouldnt want us to get mad, nevertheless, he would want us to fight for freedom. And in this spirit, It is the goal of Liberty Hangout to host a Ron Paul rally in partnership with the Libertarian Party Mises Caucus and the Republican Liberty Caucus should they choose to accept this invitation. Details will follow. If the Libertarian Party will not defend the figure who dedicated his life to freedom, we will.

View original post here:

The Libertarian Party Won't Let Ron Paul Speak at Their ...

WASHINGTON, D.C. Yesterday, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the Government Shutdown Prevention Act to incentivize Congress to properly consider and debate spending legislation.

Instead of government shutting down operations over stalled funding in the future, the bill would institute a one percent cut to then-current funding levels for any agency, program, and activity that Congress failed to fund by the start of the fiscal year (October 1). Every 90 days thereafter, funding would be reduced by another one percent if an agreement is still not enacted.

It is time for Congress to take its job seriously and get its act together on spending. This legislation will stabilize our operations while imposing real restraints to push government toward fiscal responsibility, said Dr. Paul.

Currently, Congress does not face any consequences for failing to pass appropriations bills on time. Without such motivation, Congress has demonstrated it will pursue procrastination over prudence and risk shutdowns due to impasses.

In addition to ensuring government honors its obligations, the legislation will give agencies the certainty of knowing that, in a worst-case scenario, they will always be able to operate with a full year of funding at no less than 96 percent of their current levels.

https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/dr-...prevention-act

You can read Dr. Pauls Government Shutdown Prevention Act HERE. https://www.paul.senate.gov/governme...ntion-act-2018

Go here to read the rest:

Ron Paul Forums / Rand Paul Forums - Grassroots Central Updates