Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for March, 2021

Biden Wars Against Biological Sex And Due Process With Two New Executive Orders


MARCH 9, 2021 By 

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/biden-wars-against-biological-sex-and-due-process-with-two-new-executive-orders-2650991940.html/

Days after corporate media outlets said Joe Biden is “rolling back the culture war,” the president continued his war on biological sex and due process on Monday with the introduction of two executive orders that seek to dismantle Trump-era protections in the name of “advancing gender equity and equality” and promoting it as “a matter of human rights, justice, and fairness.”

Biden’s first order mandates the creation of a gender policy council, disguising issues such as promoting access to abortions and pushing gender- and race-driven agendas as a way to “advance gender equity and equality, with sensitivity to the experiences of those who suffer discrimination based on multiple factors, including membership in an underserved community.”

“We are very inclusive in our definition of gender,” council co-chair Jennifer Klein said in a White House briefing Monday. “We intend to address all sorts of discrimination and fight for equal rights for people, whether that’s LGBTQ+ people, women, girls, men.”

In addition to a commitment to fight “systemic bias and discrimination, including sexual harassment,” the council also plans to address women in the workforce, economic disparities including wage gaps, and “the caregiving needs of American families,” specifically examining “policies to advance equity for Black, indigenous and Latina women and girls of color.”

“It is, therefore, the policy of my Administration to establish and pursue a comprehensive approach to ensure that the Federal Government is working to advance equal rights and opportunities, regardless of gender or gender identity, in advancing domestic and foreign policy — including by promoting workplace diversity, fairness, and inclusion across the Federal workforce and military,” the order states.

In his second order, Biden instructs the Department of Education to review the Trump administration and former education secretary Betsy DeVos’s due process expansions on college campuses, which gave students accused of sexual misconduct a chance to receive a fair trial, investigation, and evaluation. The president hopes to reinstate at least some Obama-era policies that overhaul Title IX and potentially withhold or cut funding from schools that don’t comply with broader sexual harassment definitions and lowered evidence standards for victims, as he previously promised on the campaign trail.

“It is the policy of my Administration that all students should be guaranteed an educational environment free from discrimination on the basis of sex, including discrimination in the form of sexual harassment, which encompasses sexual violence, and including discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity,” the order states.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Jordan Davidson is a staff writer at The Federalist. She graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism.

Michigan prosecutor says Gov. Whitmer could face criminal prosecution over nursing home policies


Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) is facing increased scrutiny over a policy that may have contributed to increased nursing home deaths related to the coronavirus pandemic. Now, a Michigan prosecutor says that Whitmer could face criminal charges.

Whitmer issued an executive order last year that prohibited nursing homes and other long-term care facilities from turning away “residents who tested positive for COVID-19 regardless of whether they were contagious,” WJRT-TV reported.

The problem, of course, is that such facilities typically house society’s most medically vulnerable people.

The exact number of long-term facility residents who died of COVID-19 in Michigan is not known, and state Republican lawmakers say Whitmer’s administration is not disclosing critical data. As of the end of February, state data indicated that more than 5,500 Michiganders had perished from COVID-19 in long-term facilities, WDIV-TV reported, or about one-third of all COVID-19 deaths in Michigan.

Macomb County prosecutor Peter Lucido (R), who was recently elected to the position, said Monday that he is open to prosecuting Whitmer if crimes regarding her pandemic response are uncovered.

“If we find there’s been willful neglect of office, if we find there’s been reckless endangerment of a person’s life by bringing them in, then we would move forward with charges against the Governor. Of course, we would. Nobody’s above the law in this state,” Lucido told WXYZ-TV.

In fact, Lucido is instructing Michigan residents “who lost loved ones to COVID as residents or staff inside nursing homes should go back to get the vital information about the circumstances of their death and take that to local police and make a complaint as a wrongful death,” WXYZ reported.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) is reportedly looking into Whitmer’s COVID-related long-term facility policies, but suggested she believes an investigation into Whitmer is unnecessary.

“If you can give us some evidence that there’s been violations of the law, and you can give us some evidence that there was not just conduct that, again, is bad policy, but conduct that violates state or federal statutes, let us know about it for certain. But if not, I get weary of the constant calls for our department to investigate things that are not crimes,” Nessel said recently.

Meanwhile, state Republicans are urging the Department of Justice to investigate. Eight Michigan Republicans wrote to the Justice Department last week asking federal authorities to determine whether Whitmer’s policies were congruent with federal law.

“The governor employed a misguided policy that placed positive patients in the same facility as healthy residents, increasing the spread of the virus and ultimately having fatal consequences,” state Rep. Phil Green (R) said. “The people deserve to know the reasoning behind the governor’s decisions that put Michigan seniors needlessly at risk.”

The Democratic governor called Lucido’s remarks “shameful political attacks based in neither fact nor reality” and defended her actions.

The full statement says, according to WXYZ:

Our top priority from the start has been protecting Michiganders, especially seniors and our most vulnerable. The administration’s policies carefully tracked CDC guidance on nursing homes, and we prioritized testing of nursing home residents and staff to save lives. Early in the pandemic, the state acted swiftly to create a network of regional hubs with isolation units and adequate PPE to prevent the spread of COVID-19 within a facility. In addition, we have offered 100 percent of nursing home resident priority access to the vaccine. Both the former head of AARP, as well as an independent U-M study, praised our work to save lives in nursing homes.

Mr. Lucido’s comments are shameful political attacks based in neither fact nor reality. Even his former colleague, Republican Sen. Ed McBroom, has said they “have not seen any evidence or testimony that says that a nursing home was forced to take someone against their will.” And there’s a reason why Mr. Lucido’s colleagues have publicly rebuked this politically-motivated waste of taxpayer dollars. Michiganders are tired of these petty partisan games, and we won’t be distracted by them either.

Here’s more from BlazeTV host Steven Crowder:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Name That Tune

China, Iran, and other U.S. adversaries playing Biden like a fiddle while America burns.

Playing Biden Like a FiddlePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

Morality and Atheism: Who Makes The Rules?


This content is sponsored by BY RICHARD E. SIMMONS III 

“There is truth, and there is falsehood. There is good, and there is evil. There is happiness, and there is misery. There is that which ennobles, and there is that which demeans. There is that which puts you in harmony with yourself, with others, with the universe, and with God, and there is that which alienates you from yourself, and from the world, and from God…The greatest error in modern times is the confusion between these orders.” – Charles Malik, Former Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, President of the United Nations General Assembly | Unsplash Siyuan @jsycra

We live in a time where people are truly perplexed over what has gone wrong with our world. There seems to be so much instability in people’s lives. When you look into what’s happening within our culture and world, there seems to be so much moral confusion. How does a modern person determine what is right or wrong?

Max Hocutt, professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama says:

“The fundamental question of ethics is, who makes the rules? God or men? The theistic answer is that God makes them. The humanistic answer is that men make them. This distinction between theism and humanism is the fundamental division in moral theory.”

Hocutt is correct. The problem then becomes if morals and ethics are determined by men, who makes these decisions? Who determines how we ought to live? How should we conduct our lives?

To personalize it, how do we determine what is moral if there is no God who reveals to us what is right or wrong? Is it determined by our feelings, by our ability to reason?

If there is no God, who or what is a guiding force in our lives? We must conclude what Richard Dawkins rationally describes in his book River Out of Eden:

“In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason to it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, and no good. Nothing but blind pitiless indifference, DNA neither knows or cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.”

Think about what he said. If God does not exist, then what are we as human beings? We are purposeless products of biological evolution, which means all morality is subjective. It is based on your opinion.

This has such an impact on a culture when there is no moral compass. You just follow your DNA, wherever it leads you. Richard Dawkins admitted this in a radio interview with radio host Justin Brierley, as Dawkins makes it clear that human morality is nothing more than the outcome of the evolutionary process:

Brierley: “When you make a value judgment, don’t you immediately step yourself outside of this evolutionary process and say that the reason this is good is that it’s good? And you don’t have any way to stand on that statement.”

Dawkins: “My value judgement itself could come from my evolutionary past.”

Brierley: “So therefore it’s just as random in a sense as any product of evolution.”

Dawkins: “You could say that…Nothing about it makes it more probable that there is anything supernatural.”

Brierley: “Ultimately, your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six.”

Dawkins: “You could say that, yeah.”

This is astonishing that the world’s most prominent atheist could not emphatically say that rape is immoral. Though he may not believe this is true within his heart, he seeks to be a consistent Darwinian atheist.

However, Dawkins does believe that it is not good for a society always to follow Darwinian morality because it is “ruthless.” He says,

“I have always said that I am a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to the way we should organize our lives and morality. We want to avoid basing our society on Darwinian principles.”

Dawkins, on the one hand, says that we live our lives based on our DNA, but then introduces a moral code by telling us not to follow our DNA. The more I read of Richard Dawkins, the more I recognize how inconsistent he can be.

The individual who has had the most to say about atheism and morality is the great German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. He clearly stated that there is no absolute right or wrong. For this reason, he had much contempt for Christianity, because it elevated such beliefs as love, morality, and humility. You can’t build a civilization of power on these beliefs.4

Nietzsche predicted that the English-speaking world would seek to abandon a belief in God, but would attempt to hold on to Christian values. However, he predicted correctly that when societies reject God, Christian morality itself will eventually disappear. The reason is because it will be more difficult to motivate people to be moral, for they will naturally follow their selfish instincts and desires.5

Dr. Arthur Leff, now deceased, was a brilliant professor at Yale Law School. Back in 1979, he published an article in the Duke Law Journal titled “Unspeakable Ethics, Unnatural Law.” Today, it’s considered a very important and prominent essay. It is uncertain what Leff believed about God, but what troubled him was that if there is no God, then there’s no way that one can make any kind of case for human morality, particularly human rights. Here is a paraphrased summary of what he said:

You can say it is wrong for a majority to take advantage of any minority by force, but that is an opinion and not an argument. You can assert all sorts of things, but what you cannot do is say one point of view is morally right and all others are not. If someone says it is all right to enslave a minority, and you say no, it is wrong, who is to say your view of morality is right and theirs is wrong? Maybe it helps to frame it this way: if there is no God, who among us gets to impose their will on everyone else? Who gets to establish the moral laws that people are to follow? These questions are so intellectually troubling that you would think there would be more legal and ethical thinkers trying to come to grips with this.

Leff’s words suggest that if there is a God, then He would make the law for us to follow. We’d base our law on Him. And this, by the way, is how Western civilization was built, with biblical truth as its foundation. We require a moral foundation on which to build a culture. As T.S. Eliot penned many years ago:

“It is in Christianity that our arts have developed; it is in Christianity that the laws of Europe… have been rooted.”

Returning to Leff’s argument, his words also suggest that if there is no God, then moral law has to be grounded in human opinion. So, we must ask, who gets to establish their human opinion as law so that everyone has to obey it? Why should your view of morality have privilege over my view? Ultimately, what you end up with is that those in power will make sure their moral values prevail. Of course, that’s what happened in Nazi Germany.

I close with this quote from Charles Malik, Former Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, President of the United Nations General Assembly:

“There is truth, and there is falsehood. There is good, and there is evil. There is happiness, and there is misery. There is that which ennobles, and there is that which demeans. There is that which puts you in harmony with yourself, with others, with the universe, and with God, and there is that which alienates you from yourself, and from the world, and from God…The greatest error in modern times is the confusion between these orders.”

Get your copy of Richard’s newest book Reflections on the Existence of God on Amazon or at reflectionsontheexistenceofgod.com. Preview Chapter 1 for free here!

Richard E. Simmons III is a Christian author, speaker, and the Executive Director of The
Center for Executive Leadership, a non-profit, faith-based ministry in Birmingham, Alabama.
His best-selling titles include The True Measure of a Man, The Power of a Humble Life,
Wisdom: Life’s Great Treasure, and his newest book, Reflections on the Existence of God.
Follow Richard on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn @thecenterbham. Tune in to
Richard’s Reliable Truth Podcast on your favorite podcast app.

NEW YORK SENATOR PUSHES FOR RADICAL LEFT-WING OVERHAUL TO SEX ED


A senator in New York state is looking to push through a bill to reform the health curriculum to include new topics such as “gender identity” to children as young as 5 years old.

First-term Senator Samra Brouk, a Democrat, is looking to sponsor and push a new bill into the Senate that would force state educators to adopt health and sex education standards created by a left-wing activist group the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS).

The SIECUS standards would require teaching on “gender identity” for 5-year-olds and on the use of hormone blockers for transgender people to 8-year-olds. By the ripe old age of 11, the children would be learning about “vaginal, oral, and anal sex” while expanding their study of gender identity to include topics such as “two-spirit” and “pansexual”, according to a report from The New York Post.

“I am greatly concerned about the unacceptably high incidence of relationship violence, sexual harassment and assault, and online bullying in our society today. We must equip the next generation with the skills and education they will need to thrive,” state Sen. Samra G. Brouk, who is backing the legislation, told the Post.

Republican lawmakers have spoken out with concerns about the new bill leading to the “outsourcing” the state’s health curriculum to the SIECUS.

“We would be outsourcing our curriculum to this outside organization,” Republican Assemblyman Michael Reilly, a member of the education committee, told the Post. “That’s a concern.”

The SIECUS standards promote several “guiding principles and values” that go against traditional views of family and sexuality while seemingly pushing “social, racial, and reproductive justice and equity.”

“Sex education should avoid cisnormative, heteronormative approaches, aim to strengthen young people’s capacity to challenge harmful stereotypes, and be inclusive of a wide range of viewpoints and populations without stigmatizing any group,” the standards outline.

The newest addendum to these standards, which have been in place since 2012, included sections on discrimination including “conscious and unconscious bias” and “internalized racism.”

“The updated NSES calls attention to overt and covert discrimination, which may be based on biases, including institutional, structural, interpersonal, and internalized racism,” the document says. “The Standards also reflect a focus on conscious and unconscious bias to avoid possibly perpetuating stereotypes. Social determinants of health are also addressed with a focus on how characteristics such as to race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, and gender identity and expression are related to inequitable health outcomes.”

The standards set by SIECUS also push for “confidential support and sexual health services” for teenagers.

“All adolescents have a right to comprehensive, developmentally and culturally appropriate, confidential support and sexual health services. And, if pregnant, young people have the right to comprehensive pregnancy options counseling and all related services,” the standards say. “The updated NSES have thoughtfully taken into consideration that young people — including young people who are pregnant or parenting — should have decision-making power in their reproductive health and their decision to determine if, when, and under what circumstances they do or do not want to parent.”

Some Thoughts to Think About


15 Insane Things In Democrats’ H.R. 1 Bill To Corrupt Elections Forever


On Wednesday, House Democrats passed an 800-page bill that would mandate insecure voting processes and subject voting tallies to partisan manipulation. It’s a slap in the face to the half of Americans, including many Democrats, who believe the 2020 election was riddled with fraud and errors, largely due to the rapid expansion of mail-in balloting and other suspensions of state election laws.

“It is difficult to imagine a legislative proposal more threatening to election integrity and voter confidence,” write 20 Republican attorneys general in a Thursday letter about the ridiculously named For The People Act of 2021, or H.R. 1. Democrats have made the bill their top priority this Congress to permanently cement their current unified control of the federal government.

The bill “would (among other things) implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election; go even further in eroding and eliminating basic security protocols that states have in place; and interfere with the ability of states and their citizens to determine the qualifications and eligibility of voters, ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls, secure the fairness and integrity of elections, and participate and speak freely in the political process,” says a Heritage Foundation analysis.

H.R. 1 broadcasts Democrats’ goals for unending electoral dominance through openly rigged voting processes. It would engineer an unconstitutional federal takeover of state elections for national office. No surprise, then, that Joe Biden says he will sign this legislation if it reaches his desk.

Here are just some of the unconstitutional, absurd, nakedly partisan, and crime-assisting provisions in this bill that 220 House Democrats voted for and every House Republican voted against.

1. Openly Breaks the Constitution

As the attorneys general note, “Under both the Elections Clause of Article I of the Constitution and the Electors Clause of Article II, States have principal—and with presidential elections, exclusive—responsibility to safeguard the manner of holding elections.” This bill would instead unconstitutionally give Congress primacy over state elections, in numerous ways.

Yet the Constitution expressly affords the states, not Congress, the power to determine how presidential electors are selected. Mandating mail-in voting, requiring states to accept late ballots, overriding state voter ID laws, and mandating that states conduct redistricting through unelected commissions all violate states’ constitutional authority in conducting elections.

2. Set Up Star Chambers to Intimidate Judges

The bill would establish a “Commission to Protect Democratic Institutions” that would have the power to force judges to testify before a panel of unelected federal bureaucrats. According to the bill on page 389, the commission, or any member or subcommittee of the commission, may “hold hearings and sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths as the Commission considers advisable.”

This commission, the Heritage analysis finds, “would be given the authority to compel judges to testify and justify their legal decisions, threatening their independent judgment and subjecting them to political pressure and harassment.”

3. Mandate Mail-in Ballots, 10-Day Delay in Results

Rather than reject the 2020 electoral chaos caused by bureaucrats suspending state election laws to further unreliable mail-in voting and suspend legal deadlines for mailed ballots, H.R. 1 would mandate this electoral chaos forever.

The bill mandates universal mail-in balloting and requires states to wait ten days after election day for any outstanding tranches of ballots to be suddenly discovered in Democrat-run strongholds — oops, I mean, allow all ballots to arrive. The Heritage report notes that “no-fault absentee ballots” “are the tool of choice for vote thieves.”

Besides a recipe for chaos and partisan election manipulation, this is unconstitutional. The attorneys general note that “The exclusivity of state power to ‘define the method’ of choosing presidential electors means that Congress may not force states to permit presidential voting by mail or curbside voting.”

4. Eliminate Voter ID Election Security

“Perhaps most egregious is the Act’s limitations on voter ID laws,” write the attorneys general. “Fairly considered, requiring government-issued photo identification at the polls represents nothing more than a best practice for election administration.”

After a brief overview of this history of bipartisan support for voter ID laws, the letter continues: “Voter ID laws remain popular, with thirty-five states requiring some form of documentary personal identification at the polls. Yet the Act would dismantle meaningful voter ID laws by allowing a statement, as a substitute for prior-issued, document-backed identification, to ‘attest[] to the individual’s identity and . . . that the individual is eligible to vote in the election.’ This does little to ensure that voters are who they say they are. Worse, it vitiates the capacity of voter ID requirements to protect against improper interference with voting rights.”

5. Register Millions Of Criminally Present Foreign Citizens to Vote

By forcing states to automatically and duplicatively register all people to vote through government outposts such as motor vehicles, state universities, and welfare agencies, H.R. 1 would register millions of illegal migrants to vote in the United States. According to their own reports on surveys, millions of illegally present foreign citizens vote in the United States, and overwhelmingly for Democrats. Democrats including President Barack Obama have worked to prevent states from enforcing laws against foreign citizens voting in U.S. elections.

This bill would essentially create de facto voting rights for the tens of millions of non-citizens inside the United States. Under this bill, states must automatically register every adult and are legally prohibited from inspecting or checking whether anyone who votes is legally eligible to do so.

The bill also bans courts from enforcing any legal penalties on any foreign citizens who illegally vote in the United States (Section 1015). This bill’s provisions would thus allow anyone inside the United States to vote in its elections with no consequences, even if they are not citizens and have demonstrated contempt for our nation by breaking our laws to take advantage of our freedoms (for as long as they last).

6. Explode Opportunities for Election Cheating

“Adding to the threat of increased voter fraud, the Act would mandate nationwide automatic voter registration and Election Day voter registration,” write the attorneys general. “Such systems would provide too many opportunities for non-citizens and others ineligible to vote to register and cast fraudulent ballots before officials can take preventive action.”

Allowing people to register the same day they vote in 2020 contributed to suspiciously high — near or even above 100 percent — percentages of registered voters reportedly casting ballots in many precincts, often in key locations.

The bill would also “Prevent election officials from checking the eligibility and qualifications of voters and removing ineligible voters,” notes the Heritage analysis. It would require every ballot to be considered legitimate from the get-go, effectively banning provisional ballots.

Those are currently used, for example, when a voter shows up at the polls and records say he already voted or he is registered using incorrect information such as the wrong address. Under this bill, he could still vote without the error being cleared up, and with a regular, not provisional, ballot.

The bill would also eliminate any requirements that a witness sign an absentee ballot, and send absentee ballots for life to everyone who has ever used one. It would also effectively ban matching signatures on absentee ballots to government records of the voter’s signature, such as from a driver’s license record (Section 307).

Therefore, the bill eliminates almost every safeguard meant to protect against fraud and give voters confidence in election results.

7. Prevent Cleaning Up Voter Rolls

If the bill passes into law, “States could not use a combination of voter inactivity and unresponsiveness to maintain voter lists but may instead remove illegitimate voter registrations only where officials obtain some other unspecified ‘objective and reliable evidence that the registrant is ineligible to vote,’” write the 20 state attorneys general. “This attack on reliable methods that states have been using to maintain voters lists without specifying any reasonable permissible alternatives belies any actual interest in preventing voter fraud. The objective, rather, seems to be to prevent meaningful voter list maintenance altogether.”

Moreover, the bill threatens anyone, such as a local election official or poll watcher, who might undertake any questioning of any voter or attempts to establish his or her eligibility to vote. Section 1071 says: “It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.” The maximum penalty for this would be up to five years in prison.

8. Unleash Mobs on Political Donors

If passed, the bill would require that political speakers and nonprofit organizations publish the identities of their donors. This would create blacklists for leftist activists to target to prevent their political opponents from the opportunity to speak in public, note the attorneys general.

In addition, the bill would require massive compliance costs for “candidates, citizens, civic groups, unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations,” says the Heritage Foundation. “Many of these provisions violate the First Amendment, protect incumbents, and reduce the accountability of politicians to the public; its onerous disclosure requirements for nonprofit organizations would subject their members and donors to intimidation and harassment.”

Even the leftist American Civil Liberties Union expressed concern about these provisions in a letter to top House Democrats. These sections of H.R. 1 “could harm political advocacy and expose non-profit donors to harassment and threats of violence should their support for organizations be subject to forced disclosure,” the ACLU wrote.

9. Gerrymander Districts to Favor Democrats

The bill would establish a commission of unelected national bureaucrats to decide where the political boundaries for various districts will be, rather than state elected officials.

“At least when legislatures draw boundary lines voters may punish egregious behavior at the next election; not so with government-by-commission, which trades accountability for mythical expertise and disinterest,” complain the Republican attorneys general about this provision. “The republican form of government inherently rejects the idea that elites have some unique capacity to discern and implement the best policies. The American tradition instead embraces political accountability as the best way to advance the public interest. With respect to political redistricting, no ideal, perfectly balanced congressional boundaries exist, so we should let the people decide, through their elected officials, where to place them.”

10. Make Vote Hacking Easier

The bill’s mass forced voter registration of every person with a record in various state databases comprises “a recipe for massive voter registration fraud by hackers and cyber criminals,” the Heritage analysis finds. Government databases are notorious for breaches of private information by cybercriminals and foreign countries. This would also create numerous duplicate voter registrations that the bill bans state and local officials from cleaning up, potentially assisting individuals in voting multiple times.

11. Let Former Felons Vote Before They’ve Completed Their Sentences

The Heritage analysis says this bill would also “Require states to restore the ability of felons to vote the moment they are out of prison regardless of uncompleted parole, probation, or restitution requirements. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives states the constitutional authority to decide when felons who committed crimes against their fellow citizens may vote again. Congress cannot override a constitutional amendment with a statute.”

12. Help 16- and 17-Year-Olds Vote Illegally

H.R. 1 “would also require states to allow 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds to register; when combined with a ban on voter ID and restrictions on the ability to challenge the eligibility of a voter, this would effectively ensure that underage individuals could vote with impunity,” says the Heritage analysis.

In Section 1091, the bill establishes a federal pilot program in public schools to register 12th graders to vote. This is a blatant attempt to push elections Democrat, as polls have shown for decades the younger people are, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

13. Bans Keeping the Records Necessary for an Election Audit or Recount

In Section 1502, the bill would ban state and local officials from preserving the record of paper ballots that make trustworthy post-election recounts and audits possible. It states: ‘‘The voting system shall not preserve the voter-verified paper ballots in any manner that makes it possible, at any time after the ballot has been cast, to associate a voter with the record of the voter’s vote without the voter’s consent.”

14. Mandates Ballot Drop Boxes

In Section 1907, H.R. 1 would mandate that, beginning 45 days before an election, “In each county in the State, each State shall provide in-person, secured, and clearly labeled drop boxes at which individuals may, at any time during the period described in subsection (b), drop off voted absentee ballots in an election for Federal office.” This allows for the anonymous submission of absentee ballots outside of mail.

It is also a recipe for massive fraud, given that in 2020, when mail-in balloting was massively expanded, more than 26 million ballots were requested and never returned. Since this bill also requires all votes to be presumed valid, anyone could gather up any number of ballots that this law also requires to be mailed to all people listed in every government database, fill them out, and dump them in.

Tens of millions would be available for ventures like these. This bill would also legalize “ballot harvesting,” or authorizing one individual to collect such ballots and turn them in by the barrel.

Even if not one partisan in the entire United States is unscrupulous enough to take advantage of this big cheating opportunity, the mere existence of this possibility would seriously erode public confidence in elections. That should be reason enough for any honest person to oppose it.

15. Giving U.S. Territories Extra Democrat Seats in Congress and the Electoral College

H.R. 1 would form a commission to consider granting five U.S. territories voting rights, but not statehood. This is an open attempt to rig Congress and the presidency in favor of Democrats.

If these territories are granted House, Senate, and Electoral College seats, they could add as many as 10 senators and 18 new Electoral College votes, all almost assuredly filled with Democrats. Notice that at the current construction of the Senate, when a 60-vote majority is needed to pass most items of importance, this plan would give Democrats that insurmountable 60-vote majority to do whatever they want with no obstacles.

Since these remote islands are all welfare states that have chosen to remain dependent on U.S. taxpayer largess rather than developing self-government, they would be poor partners for the existing states, to say the least. Like usual, Democrats don’t even want to challenge them to self-governance. They just want to use them as dependents to expand their political power.

There’s a lot more in this bill, such as that its only limits on voting appear to be regarding absentee ballots for U.S. soldiers. This massive list is not a comprehensive examination.

It should suffice, however, to reveal how insane today’s Democrat Party is that every single House Democrat, save one, voted for this bill. This is a voting bill that only totalitarians seeking a uniparty nation could love.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next book, “How To Control The Internet So It Doesn’t Control You.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” A Hillsdale College honors graduate, @JoyPullmann is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books.

Confirmed: FBI Hired Known Drug Addict Stefan Halper to Set Up and Bring Down the President of the United States and Anyone Connected to Him


Reported by By Joe Hoft | Published March 8, 2021 at 1:59pm

It’s now confirmed that the FBI used a known drug addict in an effort to set up and bring down the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, and anyone connected to him. This is today’s FBI – set up innocent individuals with crimes while ignoring real obvious crimes like those involved in the 2020 election.

In late February documents were released surrounding one of the FBI’s spies hired to set up and discredit members of the Trump team in 2016.  The Conservative Treehouse noted:

The FBI documents outline how Stefan Halper was enlisted by the FBI for their operation to target the campaign of Donald Trump in 2016. Halper agreed to become a confidential human source (CHS) or spy for the FBI, and record contacts with several members of the Trump campaign in order to frame the Russian collusion narrative.
Despite secret recordings showing Carter Page clearly had no idea about any Russian connections to the campaign, or people within it; and despite Page clearly rebuking any effort to draw those inferences; the FBI still went forward with a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against Page and never informed the court of the exculpatory recordings.

The documents were released by John Solomon at Just the News:

The memos show that the FBI instructed Halper in August 2016 not to focus on Papadopoulos first, but rather on Page, whom the FBI described as an “opportune target.” Papadopoulos was given the code name Crossfire Typhoon (CT), while Page was given the codename Crossfire Dragon (CD) in the memos.
“The main goal of the operation is to have CD admit that he has direct knowledge of and is either helping coordinate or assisting the RF [Russian Federation] conduct an active measure campaign with the ‘Trump Team,’” stated an Aug. 24, 2016 report detailing the FBI’s interactions with Halper that week.
If the Page operation failed, the FBI “team would then change its posture and move forward with an operation against CROSSFIRE TYPHOON,” the memos stated. (read more)

It was all a setup – there was no crime but the FBI wanted to create one.

The problem with the FBI is that they used a drug addict to do their dirty work:

Our Justice Department is broken.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

New medication to treat COVID-19 could quickly turn pandemic on its head: ‘It may be the holy grail’


Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marc Siegel said over the weekend that experimental drug molnupiravir could “be the future” of coronavirus treatment, according to a Monday report from Fox News. Siegel predicted the at-home therapeutic, which could hit the U.S. market in four to five months, could be enough to turn the pandemic on its head and prove to be the “holy grail” of COVID-19 treatment.

On Sunday’s “Fox & Friends Weekend,” Siegel said, “It may be the holy grail on this because it was just studied in phase two trials and it literally stopped the virus in its tracks. And there wasn’t any virus found in the patients that were studied.”

First-stage testing on the drug, which is from Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, showed “promising signs of effectiveness in reducing the virus in patients,” the outlet noted. The drug, according to Fox, would be used at home as a five-day treatment, not unlike how Tamiflu is prescribed to combat the effects of influenza.

“This might be the future once the vaccine really gets control over the pandemic and we just start seeing isolated cases,” he said. “By then, this drug might be ready and this might be the drug for over the next several months.”

Siegel has also predicted that the United States will be “free of the coronavirus pandemic by the summer.”

“This is the very first pill that we have that’s something that we might be able to use in our armamentarium against COVID as a therapeutic,” he added.

On Saturday, Mint reported that the antiviral drug causes quick reduction in the virus.

In a statement from the companies, William Fischer, associate professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, said, “The secondary objective findings in this study, of a quicker decrease in infectious virus among individuals with early COVID-19 treated with molnupiravir, are promising and if supported by additional studies, could have important public health implications.”

“At a time where there is unmet need for antiviral treatments against SARS-CoV-2, we are encouraged by these preliminary data,” Wendy Painter, chief medical officer of Ridgeback, added in the statement.

Today’s NINE Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Science for the Lambs

Rachel Levine refuses to answer Rand Paul’s question on Hormone therapy for minors as young as 3years old.

Rachel Levine Gender TherapyPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fearless Leaders

Rather than work on solutions, the Minneapolis city council finds it easier to give themselves a raise.

Minneapolis City CouncilPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Blind Trust

There’s no end in sight for lockdowns and mask way into the future according to Dr. Fausi.

Fauci Lockdown PredictionsPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Ouch Potato

Cancel Culture attacks Mr. Potato Head but at the last minute, Hasbro has decided to keep him.

Mr. Potato Head Canceled Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Custody Battle

Biden immigration policies would not help protect children from human trafficking at the border.

Biden Border Kids Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Love Gov

The Media seems much less interested in Cuomo scandals than Republicans, bias much?

Cuomo WomanPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Red Handed

Biden’s Immigration policies are spreading human trafficking, COVID, Death, and violent crimes.

Biden Blood on His Hands Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Vive la révolution

The Democrats and the left will never stop with their woke cancel culture attacks on America.

Woke Cancel Culture Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Enemy Within

The Wall around the Capital building in D.C. is only there as a political prop to use against conservatives.

Capitol WallPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Road Trip

Honor the Earth Minnesota purchased a gas-guzzling van to spread their “Save the Earth” Message.

Stop line 3Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Superspreader

Biden Calls red state governors Neanderthals for opening their state while he opens the border.

Biden Neanderthal Comment Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.
 

A Word From Me


My Dad is 94 years old, in “end of days” transition. Severe dementia, with constant hallucinations’. He is in an assisted care facility, and on hospice. Why am I telling you that, to explain why I will be away from this blog for an unknown period of time. 

Because of the hallucinations’, Dad keeps trying to get out of bed, and then falls. The occasional time he can get to his walker, he is found roaming all around the facility (three floors. He lives on the 3rd floor). Each time he justifies himself with some kind of scenario he’s playing out in his mind. 

The facility does nor have the personnel to set with him, and California law forbids restraints of any kind. In order for the State of California coming down on me for all his falling, hurting himself and all the worse possibilities, someone has to sit with him every night. That’s me. Moving him to memory care is too expensive. 

I only had one sibling and she was murdered in 1973. So the duty is on me alone. The assisted care facility has offered to take him to memory care right after breakfast, and spend the day there, and then go back to his room at around 8:00 p.m.. That’s when I need to be there.

Last night I had to wrestle with him for three hours (keeping him from getting out of bed) before he finally went to sleep. The hospice case worker is working with dad’s doctor adjusting his medication so he will be less active.

My mom went home to the Lord two years ago. Her last 90 days was typical mom, calm, sweet and memorable. Dad??????????? 

So for an unknown period of time I won’t be at this desk communicating with your about the stories and reports important for all of us. There is talk that hospice might be able to spell me from time to time, and that will make it possible for me to publish.

Right now I am going to bed for a few hours. It’s 1:00 p.m.. Good night.

Tag Cloud