The annual Sofia LGBTQ Pride parade in Sofia, Bulgaria—seen here June 12, 2021—is being subsidized in part this year by the Biden State Department. (Photo: Georgi Paleykov/NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Robert Schmad is a reporter at the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The State Department is funding an array of LGBT pride events across the globe ahead of June, some of which include events focused on children, federal grant records show.
President Joe Biden’s State Department is bankrolling a gay film festival, an LGBT community conference, and other pride events in Australia, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria in the lead-up to June, according to grant records.
Some observe June as “Pride Month” to commemorate the Stonewall riots, a series of clashes between LGBT people and the police after law enforcement raided a gay bar in 1969.
“The Department of State’s Pride theme for 2024 is ‘Pride and Protection: Human Rights for LGBTQI+ Persons around the World,’” a spokesperson for the department told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The theme is a stark reminder not only of the constant danger faced by LGBTQI+ persons for living their lives authentically, but also of the importance of our continued efforts at the Department internationally.”
“Even as we continue to be heartened by indications of progress toward LGBTQI+ equality, we are also alarmed by anti-LGBTQI+ and anti-democratic sentiments that seek to disenfranchise LGBTQI+ persons,” it continued.
American taxpayers are footing the bill for LBGT pride week in the Czech city of Brno, records show. Events at the taxpayer-funded pride week included reading“queer children’s literature” to young children, a “picnic for queer youth,” and an LGBT-affirming worship service performed by a female priest of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church, according to the event’s website.
The pride week spanned from May 18 to May 25 and received about $5,500 worth of public funding, records show.
American taxpayers are also paying for Sofia Pride, an LGBT pride event in Bulgaria’s capital, according to grant records. The State Department has allocated roughly $15,000 for the event, which will take place on June 22.
Sofia Pride claims to be the “largest human rights event in Bulgaria” and says it is “key to LGBTQI+ visibility,”according to its website. In 2023, Sofia Pride focused on families and children. This year, Sofia Pride will cap off with an 18+ dance party, according to the event’s website.
In addition to Sofia Pride, the State Department is also paying Deystvie, a pro-LGBT nongovernmental organization, roughly $7,500 to hold a film festival in Bulgaria “to promote inclusion and acceptance of the LGBTQI+ community,”per federal records.
A 2022 LGBT film festival the State Department funded in Portugal included films depicting incest and pedophilia.
June marks #PrideMonth! We recognize the perseverance of those who continue to stand and push for the equal rights of all LGBTQI+ persons globally. LGBTQI+ rights are human rights. pic.twitter.com/m8aY6n8QwP
Moving outside of Europe, the State Department also allocated $5,250 to Better Together, a “LGBTQI+ community conference” in Australia that will take place June 13 to 15, records show. The conference will include events on how LGBT activists can more effectively engage with government to achieve policy changes, according to its website. One such event focuses on the “trans culture wars” and will cover” strategies to win the battle for public and legislative opinion” in the realm of transgender and nonbinary rights.
Funding pro-LGBT events and organizations abroad has become commonplace in Biden’s State Department.
Under Biden, the department has paid to support queer Muslim writers in India, funded ballroom dancing to “uplift” transgender youth in Peru, shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars on programs for LGBT refugees in Latin America, and spent taxpayer dollars on theatrical productions in an attempt to teach Africans about LGBT rights.
The Biden administration allocates $900 million to buy “green” school buses in 47 states as the nation’s students struggle academically. Pictured: A banner suggesting school buses don’t need gasoline or other fossil fuels stretches across West 53rd Street as climate activists march Sept. 17 in New York City. (Photo: John B Senter III/UCG/Universal Images Group/ Getty Images)
The Biden administration will hand out $900 million to pay for “green” school buses, as the nation’s public-school students continue to perform poorly in the aggregate.
The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday announced the recipients of the funding for school buses designed to fight climate change, with schools in 47 states receiving money for the vehicles
The spending comes as American public-school students continue to struggle to make up for learning disruptions caused by COVID-19 lockdown policies. A 2022 review by the National Assessment of Educational Progress found that only 31% of eighth grade students met or exceeded grade-level proficiency in reading, a decrease from 2019.
“President Biden believes every child deserves the opportunity to lead a healthy life and breathe clean air, and his Investing in America agenda is designed to deliver just that,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said of the funding for climate-friendly buses. “With today’s latest round of funding, we are transforming the nation’s school bus fleet to better protect our most precious cargo—our kids—saving school districts money, improving air quality, and bolstering American manufacturing all at the same time.”
Kamala Harris on her favorite parts of the Inflation Reduction Act:
"I have a particular fondness, I must tell you, for electric school buses. I love electric school buses." pic.twitter.com/1Ta71U1qnP
The push for green school buses is part of the Biden administration’s broader, $1 trillion-plus climate agenda, which seeks to slash emissions in nearly every facet of American life. Educational outcomes for American students have generally tanked since the pandemic, when some Democrats and teachers unions pushed for prolonged school closures and remote learning. Some of the nation’s struggling school districts were among the awardees announced Wednesday by the EPA.
Just outside the nation’s capital in Maryland, Prince George’s County Public Schools received over $5 million to acquire over 15 green buses, according to the EPA. Only 21% of third graders in the Prince George’s County school system were proficient in math in 2023; less than 10% of sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students were proficient in math last year, according to The Washington Post.
In Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia City School District is set to receive more than $8.5 million to buy green school buses, according to the EPA. Philadelphia’s public-school students are also struggling academically, with only 15% of middle school students and 43% of high school students scoring as proficient in math while 24% of middle schoolers and 41% of high school students scoring as proficient in reading, according to U.S. News & World Report.
The Environmental Protection Agency also awarded over $8.5 million to the public school system in Bridgeport, Connecticut, to purchase at least 25 green buses for students. At Bridgeport’s schools, less than 16% of students met the state’s standards in reading and less than 7% in math during the 2022-2023 school year, according to CTPost.
The EPA and the White House did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
This morning, many of us are emerging from the late coverage last night after the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felonies. I was in the courtroom for the verdict, which hit like a thunderclap (particularly after a strange snafu with the judge). The question that everyone is asking: what happens next?
The scene in the court was a madhouse. Judge Juan Merchan told the court that the jury had not reached a verdict and would be dismissed for the day. Many reporters in the overflow courtroom were leaving when Merchan suddenly said that there was a verdict. People came running back into the courtroom. That was followed by 34 guilty verdicts.
I am obviously saddened by the verdict, but not surprised. Until the very end, I was hopeful that there would be a hung jury, a result that could restore some integrity to the New York criminal justice system. However, I previously noted that the jury instructions made conviction much more likely. I referred to the deliberations as a legal “canned hunt” due to instructions that made conviction a near certainty.
You could feel the weight of history in the courtroom, though we still have to see what history was made. For some, it was the conviction of the first president of a felony. For others, it was the key moment where the weaponization of the criminal system became clear and inescapable. It was both, obviously. Yet, the trial fulfilled narratives on both sides.
I ran outside to join the coverage. (One humorous moment was an officer screaming at reporters piling out of the courtroom to “walk not run.” It did not work.) It looked like the final judgment with everyone panicking to find an exit.
The scene outside the courtroom was surreal. The Trump supporters were outraged. The anti-Trump protesters were ecstatic, dancing and celebrating in the street.
While I have written a book about what I have called “the age of rage,” I am always shocked by such scenes. There is a dehumanizing element of these moments as people celebrate not just the first conviction of a president but a person. Rage is addictive and contagious. That was vividly evident outside the courtroom.
So, what happens next?
Obviously, appeals will be taken. As I said last night, we must keep the faith. Indeed, moments like this require us to take a leap of faith in a nation that remains committed to the rule of law. Manhattan is neither the entirety of the country nor the legal system. I believe that these convictions will be overturned, but it will take time. Judge Merchan committed, in my view, layers of reversible error. Eventually, this case may reach the United States Supreme Court.
It has been suggested that an appeal could be taken directly to the Supreme Court. I find that doubtful after the Supreme Court rejected an expedited process for Special Counsel Jack Smith in his federal prosecutions. It will work first through the New York appellate system.
As for the criminal process, Trump will have to meet with a probation officer for an interview. That officer will make recommendations to the court.
There is a possibility of a jail sentence for felonies that come with up to four years for each offense. Any jail sentences would almost certainly run concurrently. However, any jail sentence would be ridiculous in Manhattan for an elderly first-offender in a non-violent offense.
Consistent with his past commentary, MSNBC legal analyst and former Mueller aide Andrew Weissmann predicted that Merchan will give Trump jail time. He is not alone as legal analysts seemed to get caught up in a thrill-kill conviction.
It is much more likely that Merchan will impose a sentence without a jail sentence, though with fines. The most appropriate, in my view, would be a conditional discharge that requires Trump not to commit a new crime or face potential imprisonment.
Merchan could also tailor a sentence to require home confinement or even weekend jailing. Those options would raise serious conflicts with his campaigning and obviously, if elected, serving as president. Even the probation process will be awkward since a convicted defendant ordinarily has to get approval for any travel outside of the state from his probation officer.
Sentences can also include community service, counseling and other requirements.
After his ruling in this trial, it is impossible to rule anything out. However, any jail sentence would add even more outrage to an abuse of the criminal law system.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Judge Merchan has managed to slaughter the rule of law and the Justice system all in one highly politicized lawfare campaign against Trump. Everyone knows it’s a sham and will only help Trump’s poll numbers.
Republican Lawmakers Release Statement Following Verdict in President Trump’s Manhattan Sham Trial
By Jim Hoft – May 30, 2024
The political temperature in America has reached a boiling point following the controversial guilty verdict in the sham trial of President Donald Trump.
President Trump has been found guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection to a hush-money payment made to adult porn star Stormy Daniels. This verdict makes Trump the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a crime. The jury reached their decision after a five-week trial and two days of deliberation. Donald Trump denounced the trial as a “disgrace” and “rigged,” claiming that a “conflicted” and “corrupt” judge presided over the proceedings. He has consistently maintained his innocence, declaring himself a “very innocent man,” and has announced plans to appeal the verdict. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…
Top Stories • Abortion Pills are Releasing Dangerous Chemicals, Remains of Aborted Babies in Our Water • Catholic Bishops Sue to Stop Joe Biden’s Radical Abortion Agenda • Joe Biden is the Least Popular President in 70 Years, Time for Him to Go • Pro-Life Republicans Must Defend Republican Party’s Pro-Life Platform
More Pro-Life News • Thank You Harrison Butker for Defending Pro-Life, Pro-Family Values • This Democrat State Bought 15,000 Abortion Pills, Fortunately Most of Them Have Never Been Used • Woman Whose Husband Forced Her to Have Two Abortions Has Profound Regret Now • Disabled Babies Should Not be Killed in Abortions, Perinatal Hospice is a Better Option • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – I can almost envision Fake News Jake Tapper asking Judge Merchan for advice on ways to silence Trump from exposing the truth when he hosts the 2024 Biden-Trump debates since they’re so politically aligned.
BREAKING: Stalinist Judge Merchan Directs Jury to Choose Among These Three Crimes to Convict Trump – Jurors Don’t Have to Unanimously Agree!
By Cristina Laila – May 29, 2024
President Trump was back in court on Wednesday morning in Alvin Bragg’s ‘hush money’ show trial in New York City. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicted Trump in April 2023 on 34 felony counts related to ‘hush payments’ he made to Stormy Daniels. Trump was accused of paying porn star Stormy Daniels, AKA, Stephanie Clifford, ‘hush payments’ through his then-attorney Michael Cohen in a scheme to silence her and stop the story about their alleged affair from being published in the National Enquirer.
The jury deliberations began on Wednesday after Judge Merchan instructed them to choose among the three predicate crimes Trump supposedly committed. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…
Top Stories • Trump Will Get Rid of WHO Pandemic Agreement That Promotes Abortion • Hillary Clinton Freaks Out: “We May Never Have Another Election” if Trump Wins in November • Justice Sonia Sotomayor Cried Over Rulings Like Dobbs That Saved Babies From Abortions • Abortion Lost Big in Georgia and More People Need to Talk About It
More Pro-Life News • Democrats Bracing Themselves for Potential Biden Loss in November • Louisiana Governor Signs Law Blocking WHO and UN From Having Jurisdiction There • Planned Parenthood Loses Bid to Silence Pro-Life Protestors • Planned Parenthood Wants Indiana Judge to Water Down Abortion Ban so It Can Kill Babies • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
Donald Trump was just found guilty of 34 counts in the socialist hush money lynching.
Is America over?
Is he Clift we just fell over too deep to recover?
Has the Socialist Left successfully taken over our country?
Remember, what they just did to Trump, they can do to anyone. Communist/Socialist countries do this every day, especially with their political opponents. All political office holders need to be very afraid. Anyone one of them could be next.
If you haven’t been praying for America, please start today.
President Trump is on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records because the bookkeepers in his organization recorded certain legal expenses — specifically, a legal settlement — as “legal expenses.” According to Democrat prosecutors, the bookkeepers should have recorded these payments as campaign contributions and expenditures because, they say, the payments were “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election “unlawfully” by concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.
Convoluted and bizarre enough for you yet? It should be. Because there is absolutely nothing “unlawful” about concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.
There is, nevertheless, a good deal of crooked record-keeping going on these days. But Democrats are the ones doing it.
False Characterization of Record-Keeping Requirements
Federal campaign finance law actually prohibits candidates from characterizing the payments at issue in the Trump case as campaign contributions and expenditures.
Brad Smith, a leading expert on campaign finance law and former member of the Federal Election Commission, was set to testify to that very thing in open court in the Trump case. Except Juan Merchan, the partisan Democrat Biden-donor judge presiding over the case, barred him from doing so.
To accept the prosecution’s case, one must conclude that New York law requires candidates to make business records that violate federal law. The supremacy clause of the Constitution does not allow that. So, it is Democrat prosecutors, not the Trump organization, that conspired to falsely characterize the record-keeping issues in the case.
Judge Merchan’s Manipulation of the Trial Record
Judge Merchan’s rationale for excluding Smith’s testimony is that judges traditionally instruct the jury on the law. The problem is that Merchan already allowed prosecution witnesses, and prosecutors themselves, to opine on their understanding of campaign finance laws. Once he allowed that, Merchan was constitutionally required to allow Trump to mount a defense on the same point.
Merchan also overlooked the fact that how people align their behavior with the law is based as much on the policies of the administrators who enforce the law as on the words of the statute itself. Smith, a former member of the regulatory body that enforces federal campaign law, was prepared to testify that the agency’s policy precludes candidates from treating payments like these as campaign contributions and expenditures.
This leads to the obvious conclusion that the Trump organization booked the payments in the manner that they did, not to “unlawfully” influence the 2016 election, but because they were (or at least thought they were) required to do so in that manner by federal law, completely negating the factual element of unlawful intent.
In fact, had Trump “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election by covering up the Stormy Daniels’ NDA payments, the easiest way to do so would have been to characterize the late October 2016 payments as campaign contributions and expenditures. This is because, under federal campaign finance law, contributions and expenditures made in late October of an election year do not need to be reported until after the election.
Unfortunately (and unjustly), the jurors in the New York case will not hear any of this exculpatory information because the partisan Democrat judge has excluded it from the record. Like I said, it’s the Democrats who have the record-keeping problem.
Talk About Falsifying Business Records to Influence an Election
Joe Biden is old. As Bill Maher puts it, Joe Biden is “cadaver-like” old. Polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe Biden does not possess the mental fitness to serve another term as president. Do you think that might incentivize the White House to alter records to mitigate the political effects of Biden’s mental deterioration?
The White House is doing just that. It recently released the official transcript of Biden’s May 19 speech to the NAACP in Detroit. It was official. Except it wasn’t a transcript. It was a politicalcircular designed to clean up the incoherent mess left by a mentally diminished man selfishly trying to hold onto the most difficult, demanding, and consequential job in the world.
The so-called “transcript” substantively corrected numerous significant instances of mental lapses or gibberish uttered by Biden, including the claim that he was vice president during the Covid “pandemic,” and that President Obama told him to go to Detroit and “fix it.”
Records? We Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinking Records!
There’s no need to falsify records if you improperly refuse to let the public see them at all. That’s what the White House did last week by claiming “executive privilege” over the audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with the special counsel investigating Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.
That’s the case where Biden took highly classified documents from the government while he was a senator and vice president, “willfully” retained them openly in dilapidated boxes in his garage, and then “willfully” disclosed the classified information to his ghostwriter as part of a lucrative $8 million book deal. Biden’s Justice Department declined to prosecute Biden, concluding that he would present himself to a jury like he did in his interviews — “as a sympathetic elderly man with a poor memory” — making it difficult to prove a felony “that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
In an effort to control the damage from the special counsel’s report, the White House and its allies released redacted transcripts of Biden’s interviews with investigators, apparently hoping that presenting the cold, written version of Biden’s testimony might minimize public fears about his declining mental state. It did not. Yet, it did open the door for Congress to subpoena the audio tapes of the interviews.
Last week, the White House barred the Justice Department from releasing those audio tapes to Congress on the grounds of “executive privilege.” However, the White House has already voluntarily released the transcripts of the interviews, so any privilege that may have existed has been waived. It is a basic principle of law that a party waives confidentiality privileges once the party voluntarily discloses any significant portion of the information. In fact, in these circumstances, the White House’s claim of executive privilege is not merely wrong, it is ludicrous.
The White House’s assertion of “executive privilege” is not really a legal one — it knows it has no chance of prevailing in court. Rather, the assertion of privilege is purely political. The White House believes it can conceal the audio tapes until after the election while the issue is litigated.
The audio tapes must be really, really bad for Biden. How do we know this? Because not releasing the tapes is really bad for Biden. The special counsel essentially reported that Biden appeared mentally diminished in his interviews. By refusing to release the audio tapes, Biden just confirms that perception.
There were no good options for the White House on the audio tape issue. Because the White House chose a bad option (withholding the tapes), one can only assume that the other option (releasing the tapes) was substantially worse.
Why Withhold Records if You Can Just Hide or Destroy Them Instead?
That, apparently, was the credo of one of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s top advisers — and possibly Fauci as well — during the Covid panic in relation to their dealings with EcoHealth Alliance and the now-admitted use of federal funding to perform gain-of-function research at the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology.
This month, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released shocking emails sent from the private Gmail account of David Morens, an adviser to Fauci, detailing an apparent effort by administrators to evade public open records laws — commonly referred to as “FOIA” — by improperly performing government work through private Gmail accounts or by deleting records altogether.
In one such email, Morens tells Peter Daszak, president of EchoHealth Alliance, that “there is no worry about FOIAs. I can either send stuff to Tony on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or at his home. He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”
In another email, Morens confesses, “I learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after I am foia’d, but before the search starts, so i think we’re all safe. Plus, i deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail.”
Wow, that’s bad. But you have to understand, to Democrats, booking legal expenses as “legal expenses” is the real threat to democracy.
Joseph LoBue is a retired Naval officer and attorney.
Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law professor emeritus, told Newsmax Wednesday that the prosecutors in former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan misled the jury in closing arguments.
Trump is charged with falsifying business records on a $130,000 payment to Michael Cohen. Trump’s former attorney to reimburse him for paying adult film star Stormy Daniels to stop saying she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied all charges and said the encounter never occurred.
The prosecutors told the jury they could find all the elements of a crime committed without believing Michael Cohen, their star witness.
“That’s just not true,” Dershowitz told “The National Report.” “The only evidence that Donald Trump knew of this at all comes from an uncorroborated conversation with Michael Cohen that could have been corroborated by Alan Weisselberg.”
But prosecutors never called Weisselberg, Dershowitz said.
“There is a lack of corroboration for a crucial conversation that might criminalize what was otherwise innocent behavior,” Dershowitz said.
Dershowitz also attacked a New York State law that allows the prosecution to go last when presenting closing arguments, calling it unconstitutional.
“How does a defense go first when it doesn’t even know what the crimes are that turned a misdemeanor into a felony?” Dershowitz said. “They had to wait until they heard it from the prosecutor’s closing argument and then had no chance to rebut.”
Dershowitz said if he was on the defense team, he would’ve said he had nothing to say and that he would wait for the prosecutors to present their case and then respond to it.
“You can’t make me respond to a case I haven’t heard yet,” Dershowitz said. “The defense was forced to go first, which imposed a burden on them which the jury will take into the room.”
In closing arguments, Dershowitz said the defense should’ve focused on prosecutors not calling Weisselberg as a witness.
“I would’ve put up a life-size blown-up picture of Allen Weisselberg on the witness stand,” Dershowitz said. “What did the prosecution hide from you?”
About NEWSMAX TV:
NEWSMAX is the fastest-growing cable news channel in America!
Find Newsmax channel in your home via cable and satellite systems – More Info Here
Watch Newsmax+ on your home TV app or smartphone and watch it anywhere! Try it for FREE — See More Here: NewsmaxPlus.com
“Democracy is on the ballot.” That mantra of President Joe Biden and other Democrats has suggested that “this may be our last election” if the Republicans win in 2024. A few of us have noted that the Democrats seem keener on claiming the mantle of the defenders of democracy than actually practicing it. Democrats have sought to disqualify Donald Trump and dozens of Republicans from ballots; block third party candidates, censor and blacklist of those with opposing views; and weaponize the legal system against their opponents. Most recently, in California, democracy is truly on the ballot and the Democrats are on the wrong side.
California has always prided itself on the ability of citizens to vote on changes in the law directly through referenda and ballot measures. That is precisely what citizens are attempting to do with a measure that would require voter approval of any tax increase, including a two-thirds vote for some local taxes. It is called the Taxpayer Protection Act and it is a duly qualified statewide ballot measure slated for the November 2024 ballot.
The state Democrats are apoplectic over the prospect of citizen control over revenue and taxes. What was a quaint element of democratic empowerment is now challenging a core vehicle of Democratic power. So, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders have taken the issue to the state Supreme Court to demand that citizens be denied the right to decide the issue.
In oral arguments, the attorney supporting the challenge explained to the justices that citizens are simply not equipped to deal with the complexities of taxation and should not be allowed to render such a decision.
In a prior decision, Associate Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar wrote that “Whether the context involves taxation or not, all of these cases underscore how courts preserve and liberally construe the public’s statewide and local initiative power. Indeed, we resolve doubts about the scope of the initiative power in its favor whenever possible and we narrowly construe provisions that would burden or limit the exercise of that power.”
Half of the Court seemed to be inclined to deny the public the right to decide the question.
The Court, however, may wait until after the election to render a decision on the limits of democracy in California.
In the movie A Bronx Tale, the character played by Robert De Niro tells his son that “the saddest thing in life is wasted talent.” Yesterday, the actor appeared to have forgotten his own cinematic advice in a bizarre press conference organized by the Biden campaign in front of the Manhattan courthouse during the trial of former President Donald Trump. In a raving, disconnected press conference, De Niro predicted the end of democracy and then the world if Trump is not stopped in New York. De Niro offered a rambling monologue and exposed the danger of an actor speaking without a script:
It’s a good time to reflect on how Americans fought and died so that we may enjoy the freedoms guaranteed to us by a democratic government, a government that as President Lincoln said of the people by the people for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Under Trump this kind of government will perish from the earth.
I don’t mean to scare you.
No, no, wait, maybe I do mean to scare you.
If Trump returns to the White House, you can kiss these freedoms goodbye that we all take for granted.
And elections, forget about it.
That’s over. That’s done if he gets in, I can tell you right now, he will never leave, he will never leave. You know that he will never leave.
De Niro has gone full Travis Bickle. However, now 80, it came across as De Niro screaming at the courthouse for Trump to get off his lawn.
The diatribe is consistent with the messaging of Democrats, including President Biden, that “democracy is on the ballot” and that this may be our last election. De Niro was not satisfied with that alarmist message and decided to take it to an apocalyptic level in predicting a global meltdown.
As I have previously written, it is a narrative that ignores our history and our values. To suggest that this may be our last democratic election is to suggest that both branches (and the population at large) would stand idly by as a president assumed tyrannical powers. That did not occur, even when this country was united by wars and national emergencies. With the nation now divided right down the middle, it is even less likely.
That is why the “democracy is on the ballot” claims border on defamation against our Constitution. We have the most successful and stable democratic system in history. The success of that system is not measured by those who would riot or challenge our values. It is measured by how the system responds. Our system works because it was not only written for times of relative unity and calm, it also was written for times like these.
What was particularly weird is that the Biden campaign succeeded in reinforcing the view of this case as lawfare, an effort to stop Trump at any cost. That message was also reaffirmed by President Biden stating that he will hold a press conference on the verdict. After the third highest ranking official in the Biden Justice Department joined the prosecution to bring the case, the announcement only magnified the view of a case that is being used for political purposes.
De Niro walked away pursued by hecklers and proceeded to exchange profanities.
The question for the Biden campaign lingered as to what was achieved by the chaotic scene outside of the courthouse. I am a great fan of De Niro’s artistic work, a legacy of great movies that are now an indelible part of our culture. That is precisely why, as I watched from the Fox camera location near his presser, I was more sad than surprised by the spectacle. As another De Niro character said in the movie Stardust, “reputations, you know, a lifetime to build, seconds to destroy.”
A.F. Branco Cartoon—It appears it’s Deja vu all over again for the 2024 election, with some Lawfare thrown in for good measure. Biden will be well protected in his basement with bubble wrap.
Trump Says What We are All Thinking About Joe Biden’s 2024 Campaign Strategy
By Cristina Laila – Aug 19, 2023
President Trump on Saturday said what we are all thinking about Joe Biden’s 2024 campaign strategy.
“Just think of it! They (Crooked Joe Biden and his Thugs!) Indict me, and their whole campaign is that “Trump is Indicted.” Does that sound fair to anyone? Am I allowed to do such a horrible and unconstitutional thing if, and when, I win the Presidency? We are entering really dangerous territory!!!” Trump said Saturday afternoon. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…
Top Stories • Harrison Butker Defends His Pro-Life, Pro-Family Commencement Speech: “I Do Not Regret At All” • Tennessee Governor Signs Bill to Stop Trafficking Teens to Other States for Secret Abortions • Melinda Gates Spending $1 Billion to Push Abortion Worldwide • Catholic Cardinal Condemns “Killing Unborn Children” in Abortions: “History Will Judge Us”
More Pro-Life News • Louisiana Governor Signs Bill to Stop Predators From Forcing Women to Have Abortions • Pro-Life Group Sues Joe Biden for Targeting Pro-Life Advocate Mark Houck • Hillary Clinton is Still Mad About Dobbs Saving Babies From Abortion • Letitia James Loses First Legal Battle After She Tries to Shut Down Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
Once again, our Illinois politicians believe they have the magic that will cure the crime that riddles our city of Chicago. I recently learned that our state’s Democratic lawmakers plan to introduce House Bill 4409 to amend the Illinois Crime Reduction Act of 2009 in order to rename “offenders” as “justice-impacted individuals.” That is right — with the magic of rewording, we will no longer have “offenders” or “criminals.” Instead, we will have “justice-impacted individuals” and the implication could not be clearer: rather than being seen as criminals who victimized society they will be seen as victims of the system.
I wish it were that simple.
If it were, I could stop my work as a pastor who has tried to reform criminals in the Woodlawn neighborhood on the South Side for the last 20 years. I could stop construction on my massive Project H.O.O.D. community center designed to take back the neighborhood from criminals. But you and I know that this latest move by our state politicians is just more leftist foolishness.
It makes me tired. I’m of watching how these liberals have sprinkled this magic dust in my neighborhood over and over — for the last seven decades. In the beginning, long before I arrived on the South Side to begin my ministry, they introduced welfare policies that took the father out of the home in exchange for government dependency.
Year after year, they failed to provide us with sufficient schools and teachers — today, the nearby elementary school produces kids who can barely read or do math. And only several months ago, less than a year ago, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced that he would magically achieve equity by shuttering some of the city’s best public high schools because it wouldn’t be fair to the Black kids in poor performing schools.
I wish I could laugh at this foolishness, but I can’t. I’m so tired of politicians claiming to care about us and then running away from the failures that their policies have caused. Instead, they prefer to sprinkle the magic dust of empty words, hoping to distract us. Sadly, it works too often.
Every single offender that I have encountered on the streets or in my church broke the law. They knew what the law was, and they crossed the line anyway. They hurt people, even killed people. You can’t erase these consequences with a turn of a phrase.
But what bothers me profoundly about the left is their consistent refusal to see people in my neighborhood as fully human. That is why calling criminals in my neighborhood “justice-impacted individuals” is just more of not seeing them as fully human.
By contrast, I see these fallen men and women for who they are: criminals. We have to focus on the reality of that. It may not be fair that many of them were born into great poverty and burdened with disadvantages, but that is no excuse to embark on the criminal path.
Every single offender that I have encountered on the streets or in my church broke the law. They knew what the law was, and they crossed the line anyway. They hurt people, even killed people. You can’t erase these consequences with a turn of a phrase.
But what I believe in my heart is that you can reform a criminal into a law-abiding citizen. The first step begins with finding the individual hiding under that criminal armor. When you do that, you reconnect that individual to all the good things in life, especially to who they are as a person.
Then you begin to show that individual the possible new pathways in life. I tell them over and over that it is possible for them to change their lives for the better — to become good employees, to become good parents, and to become good citizens.
This work is not easy or for the faint of heart. Not everyone succeeds, but I have seen many who have. It is a beautiful thing to witness them spread their wings.
No amount of liberal magic can ever replace the true and human work that desperately needs to be done in my community.
Follow along as Fox News checks in with Pastor Corey Brooks with a new Rooftop Revelation.
Pastor Corey Brooks, known as the “Rooftop Pastor,” is the founder and Senior Pastor of New Beginnings Church of Chicago and the CEO of Project H.O.O.D. (Helping Others Obtain Destiny), the church’s local mission. He gained national attention for his 94-day and 343-day rooftop vigils to transform the notorious “O-Block,” once known as Chicago’s most dangerous block, into #OpportunityBlock. Learn more at ProjectHOOD.org.
President Joe Biden will be formally nominated as the Democratic presidential nominee through a virtual roll call ahead of the party’s official convention in Chicago in August — a maneuver that will allow Biden to appear on the November ballot in Ohio and also reduce opportunities for disruptions from protesters. The Democratic National Convention, where the president would otherwise be formally nominated, comes after Ohio’s ballot deadline of Aug. 7. The party’s convention is scheduled for Aug. 19-22.
Ohio lawmakers have moved the deadline in the past for candidates of both parties, although they had not done so yet for Biden this year and were called to a rare special session by Gov. Mike DeWine to address the issue. The virtual proceedings will allow Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to get the party’s formal nod and will be very similar to the process used in 2020, when the convention went virtual because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The move also reduces the chances for an unscripted moment during the party’s highly produced Chicago convention that could embarrass Biden — who has faced discontent from some activist members of his party over his support for Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza — on live television.
The Democratic National Committee on Tuesday did not say when the virtual roll call will take place, but it is expected in the weeks after the committee’s rules and bylaws committee votes to propose changes to the roll call process. That committee vote is scheduled for June 4.
“Joe Biden will be on the ballot in Ohio and all 50 states, and Ohio Republicans agree. But when the time has come for action, they have failed to act every time, so Democrats will land this plane on our own,” Jaime Harrison, the Democratic National Committee chairman, said in a statement. “Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence, or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice.”
Ohio lawmakers, meanwhile, were gathering Tuesday for the special session.
Negotiations between the House and Senate on a solution to Biden’s ballot conundrum began Friday. State Rep. Bill Seitz told reporters during a conference call that he and state Sen. Rob McColley, both Republicans, are leading the talks, with no resolution announced as of Tuesday.
Since Ohio changed its certification deadline from 60 to 90 days ahead of its general election, state lawmakers have had to adjust the requirement twice, in 2012 and 2020, to accommodate candidates of both leading parties. Each change was only temporary.
And the ability of voters to speak directly through the ballot initiative process on questions such as abortion has made reaching a solution more difficult in both chambers, where the GOP has lopsided majorities.
The Senate sent its version of the ballot fix to the House after attaching a prohibition on foreign nationals donating to Ohio ballot campaigns, stopping it in its tracks.
DeWine urged legislators to pass the combination measure during the special session, but Democrats have balked, saying the proposal goes beyond the foreign nationals ban to add requirements intended to make it more difficult to mount future ballot campaigns in the state.
That’s after Ohio voters overwhelmingly approved three ballot measures last year, including a constitutional amendment protecting access to abortions that Republicans opposed and an initiated statute legalizing adult-use marijuana.
A “clean” House bill containing only the adjustment to Ohio’s ballot deadline may also be considered.
Due to differing interpretations of the proclamation DeWine issued Thursday, the Ohio Senate scheduled a single day of activity for Tuesday, while the Ohio House plans to begin with two days of committee hearings before taking its vote Thursday.
A Senate spokesman has said it’s possible the upper chamber can convene Tuesday and then recess to wait for the House.
Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
A Missouri high school asks students in a health class whether they understand that “gender” is different than “sex assigned at birth.” (Photo illustration: Fat Camera/Getty Images)
A Missouri high school instructed students in a health class to complete a survey asking if they understood “the difference between sex assigned at birth and gender.”
Webster Groves High School hosted a workshop in late April called “Understanding Gender and Relationships” presented by a speaker with a program run by the St. Louis-based domestic abuse treatment center Safe Connections. Before and after the guest speaker’s lecture, the health teacher instructed students to take the survey.
Webster Groves High School is part of Webster Groves School District, which enrolls 4,407 students across 10 schools. The survey asked students in the high school health class to respond with “yes,” “not sure,” or “no” to four statements, including “I can explain the difference between sex assigned at birth and gender.”
Two other statements on the survey are “I can create relationships in which others can express themselves and I can be myself” and “I understand how some gender stereotypes contribute to violence and abuse.”
The guest speaker for the health class represented Project HART, which its website describes as a “relationship violence prevention program offered at St. Louis-area schools, community centers and other places teens gather.” (HART is an acronym for Healthy Alternatives for Relationships Among Teens.)
In a fourth statement, the survey asks students whether they “can show people respect regardless of gender and how it is expressed.”
The high school gave the survey to students after Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a Republican, ordered the Webster Groves School District to “cease and desist” teaching students about human sexuality, including gender ideology, without parental consent ahead of time, The Daily Signal reported in February.
Missouri state law requires every public school district and public charter school to notify each student’s parent or guardian before providing any human sexuality materials or instruction to students. When asked if the survey taken by students in the health class violated this mandate, Webster Groves School District’s communications director, Derek Duncan, told The Daily Signal that the school system notifies families before lessons about human growth and development.
“Families are given the choice to opt out of such lessons,” Duncan said.
Duncan did not respond directly to The Daily Signal’s question asking whether parents of the involved students got the opportunity to opt their children out of the health class lesson on gender ideology.
The Missouri Attorney General’s Office told The Daily Signal it would look into the matter.
The session on “Understanding Gender and Relationships” allows students to “explore harmful gender stereotypes and to understand the differences between biological sex, gender identity, gender expression, and attraction/sexual orientation,” Cynthia Danley, chief executive officer for Safe Connections, told The Daily Signal in an email.
“Key learning objectives include helping youth recognize that everyone deserves respect regardless of their gender and expression, understanding the negative impact of failing to respect gender-expansive individuals, and equipping youth with the tools to build relationships where peers can safely express themselves and be authentic,” Danley said.
Webster Groves School District, in the suburbs of St. Louis, approved a memorandum of understanding with Safe Connections at an April 11 school board meeting. On Feb. 20, Webster Groves issued a $220 check to the organization, according to the website BoardDocs.
While so much of American culture gears up to celebrate LGBTQ “Pride” during June, The Ruth Institute is dedicating the first Sunday in June to those who rejected a homosexual lifestyle. “Ex-Gay Visibility Day” is unlikely to receive President Joe Biden’s endorsement, but arguably it’s more necessary than the Transgender Day of Visibility, which the White House commemorated on Easter. (Photo illustration: Getty Images)
Next month, companies will add rainbow flags to their icons and logos, the White House will hold events celebrating LGBTQ individuals, and Target and other stores will likely promote rainbow-themed merchandise. Amid all this “Pride,” the men and women who rejected a homosexual lifestyle will be forgotten.
Why should “Pride” have the entire month of June? That’s a question Jennifer Roback Morse, president of the Ruth Institute, asked herself. She came to the conclusion that if so, much of America’s culture is going to celebrate people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, she might as well highlight the Americans who rejected those identities.
Morse has christened the first Sunday in June (which is June 2 this year) “Ex-Gay Visibility Day,” in a fitting response to the White House’s commemoration of “Transgender Day of Visibility.”
“It’s not politically correct to talk about ex-LGBT people,” Morse says in a press release provided early to The Daily Signal. “To the gay lobby, they don’t exist, or they’re just lying to themselves or were never really gay in the first place. But I have met many people who have journeyed away from an LGBT identity and are living happy, fulfilled lives with opposite-sex partners.”
Morse mentions research from Father Paul Sullins, a Roman Catholic priest, senior research associate at The Ruth Institute, and former sociology professor at Catholic University, who found that sexual orientation is more malleable than LGBTQ activists claim. The “born this way” narrative doesn’t match up with the results of Sullins’ research.
Sullins previously told The Daily Signal that he doesn’t encourage lesbians, gays, or bisexuals to try to change their sexual orientation unless they feel uncomfortable about it. He emphasized that efforts to change sexual orientation don’t always work, but—contrary to the LGBTQ narrative—they do occasionally succeed.
“When people attempt to change sexual orientation, it is fully successful in my studies about 17 to 20% of the time,” Sullins said. “Most persons who undergo it, meaning about 60 to 65%, report that they are less caught up in homosexual attractions and behaviors and activity.”
Sullins noted that about 30% of the 1,500 lesbians, gays, and bisexuals in a 2020 study on sexual orientation said that they have tried to change their sexual orientation and about 10% said they agreed with this statement: “If I could be completely heterosexual, I would want to do that.”
“So there is a minority of the gay population who wants to change, is not happy with living the way that they’re living,” Sullins said.
As Roman Catholics, both Morse and Sullins consider homosexual activity to be a sin, but they’re not supporting Ex-Gay Visibility Day to shame those who identify as LGBTQ. They say they merely intend to highlight the fact that there are options for people who experience same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria (the painful and persistent feeling of identifying with the gender opposite one’s biological sex), even if they are uncomfortable with their feelings.
The White House is so dedicated to the LGBTQ movement that it chose Good Friday (the day Western Christians commemorate Jesus’ Crucifixion) as the day to release a statement commemorating Transgender Day of Visibility, which coincided this year with Easter Sunday, the holiest day on the Western Christian calendar. The White House played off this timing as a coincidence, but it shocked many Americans, especially Roman Catholics. (The Catechism of the Catholic Church condemns the ideology behind the transgender movement.)
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) May 24, 2024
President Joe Biden is unlikely to celebrate Ex-Gay Visibility Day, however, even though it doesn’t coincide with a more popular holiday. Biden touted “transgender leaders” whom he appointed to serve in the federal government, but he is unlikely to mention any ex-gays or detransitioners.
These heretics give the lie to the LGBTQ movement’s claim that it offers the only solution for those who experience same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. They are living proof that it is possible to reject the movement and they’re often dismissed as irrelevant, so a day of visibility arguably makes far more sense for them than it does for transgender individuals, who enjoy a chorus of support from companies, stores, and government bodies.
The Ruth Institute will release videos about ex-gays and detransitioners over the coming month, but especially June 2, to present hope for anyone who wants another answer. Sadly, it seems Biden, Target, and their allies would prefer that these people remain invisible.
Below is my column in the New York Post on the closing arguments scheduled for today in the trial of former President Donald Trump. The column explores the key elements for a closing to bring clarity to the chaos of Judge Juan Merchan’s courtroom.
Here is the column:
With the closing arguments set for Tuesday in the trial of former president Donald Trump, defense counsel is in a rather curious position. There is still debate among legal experts as to the specific crime that District Attorney Alvin Bragg is alleging.
Trump’s lawyers are defending a former president who is charged under a state misdemeanor which died years ago under the statute of limitations. It was then zapped back into life in the form of roughly three dozen felonies by claiming that bookkeeping violations — allegedly hiding payments to Stormy Daniels to ensure her silence about a supposed affair with Trump — were committed to hide another crime. But what is that second crime? Even liberal legal analysts admitted that they could not figure out what was being alleged in Bragg’s indictment. Now, after weeks of trial, the situation has changed little.
Originally, Bragg referenced four possible crimes, though he is now claiming three: a tax violation or either a state or federal campaign financing violation. The last crime is particularly controversial because Bragg has no authority to enforce federal law and the Justice Department declined any criminal charge. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) did not even find grounds for a civil fine.
Judge Merchan has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what that crime is. The jury could split into three groups of four on which of the three crimes were being concealed and Merchan will still treat it as a unanimous verdict.
The jury has been given little substantive information on these crimes, and Merchan has denied a legal expert who could have shown that there was no federal election violation.
This case should have been dismissed for lack of evidence or a cognizable crime. The jury will be reminded that the burden is on the government, not the defense. However, the presumption of innocence is often hard to discern in criminal cases. Most jurors believe that clients are sitting behind the defense table for a reason. That is why many prosecution offices have conviction rates in the 80%-90% range. That presumption is even more difficult to discern when the defendant is named Trump, and the jury sits in Manhattan.
Three-legged Stool
A classic closing pitch by lawyers is to use a physical object like a three-legged stool. If any leg is missing, the stool collapses.
In this case, the government needs to show that there was a falsification of business records, that the records were falsified to conceal another crime and that Donald Trump had the specific intent to use such “unlawful means” to influence the election.
Even a cursory review of the evidence shows this case does not have a leg to stand on.
The First Leg: Falsification of Records
The dead misdemeanor that is the foundation for this entire prosecution requires the falsification of business records. It is not clear that there was such falsification or that Trump has any knowledge or role in any falsification.
Witnesses testified that Trump would sign checks prepared by others and that the specific checks in this case were signed while Trump was serving as president. Some of these checks, labeled “legal expenses,” were allegedly for attorney Michael Cohen to pay off Stormy Daniels.
Most importantly, Jeffrey McConney, the Trump Organization’s retired controller and senior vice-president, testified that it was not Trump who designated these payments as “legal expenses.” Rather, the corporation used an “antiquated” drop-down menu where any payments to lawyers were designated “legal expenses.” There is a plausible reason why payments to an attorney were listed as legal expenses.
The government also cites the designation of payments to Cohen as part of his “retainer,” which included reimbursement for the payment of the Daniels non-disclosure agreement. However, that designation was the result of discussions between Cohen and former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, who is sitting in a jail cell in New York City. The government could have called Weisselberg, but did not.
The government has made a big deal over the fact that retainer agreements are supposed to have written contracts. However, that was the failure of Cohen, who was later disbarred as an attorney.
For a businessman like Weisselberg, monthly payments to an attorney could have seemed perfectly logical. Once again, there was no evidence that Trump knew of how the payments were denoted.
The Second Leg: The Secondary Crime
The government must also show that any falsification was done to further or conceal another crime. This is where the defense needs to bring greater clarity to its own narrative. Trump’s team needs to drive home that a non-disclosure agreement is common in political, business and entertainment circles. The payment of money to quash a story before an election is neither unlawful nor unusual.
Indeed, Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniels’ attorney, described the NDA as routine and said that it was not hush money but a simple contractual transaction: “It wasn’t a payoff. It wasn’t hush money. It was consideration.”
This is where the testimony of David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Inquirer, was particularly damaging to the government.
Pecker detailed how killing such stories was a common practice at the National Inquirer and that he had done so for Trump for over a decade before he ran for president. He also killed stories for an impressive list of other celebrities, including Tiger Woods, Mark Wahlberg, Rahm Emanuel and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Merchan has allowed the jury to repeatedly hear of “election violations,” while blocking a legal expert to explain that there is no federal election law violation. The payment of hush money is not a campaign contribution and, again, the federal government not only declined to bring any criminal charge but found no basis for even a civil fine.
Had he been allowed to testify, Bradley Smith, the former Federal Election Commission (FEC) chairman, would have explained that, even if it were a campaign contribution, it would not have been needed to be filed until after the election — demolishing the notion that this was an effort to influence an election that would have run before any filing had to be made.
The defense has to hammer away on the fact that no one has testified that it was a federal campaign violation.
Various witnesses, including former Trump aide Hope Hicks, testified that Trump was motivated to protect his family from embarrassment. She recounted how Trump even “wanted me to make sure the newspapers weren’t delivered to their residence that morning.”
Pecker testified that he previously killed stories about Trump going back over a decade. That included stories that were demonstrably untrue, such as a claim of a doorman that he fathered a child out of wedlock.
In addition to being a married man, Trump was the host of a major television program subject to a scandal clause. He was also an international businessman. Given all of those interests, it is impossible to claim absolutely that the campaign was the reason for the NDA, which was chump change for a billionaire.
The Third Leg: Criminal intent
The government spent considerable time proving facts not in dispute. There is no dispute that there was a NDA or that Trump signed checks on these payments. It is like repeatedly telling a court that a driver drove 55 miles an hour down a highway and elected to change lanes with a signal. The intent is to convince the jury that somehow proving that an NDA was paid and that an affair occurred is proof of an offense. It is not.
The supervisor in charge of processing payments said that permission to cut Cohen’s checks came not from Trump, but from Weisselberg and McConney. Trump’s White House secretary, Madeleine Westerhout, testified that it was common for Trump to sign checks in the White House without reviewing them.
The entire basis for the alleged criminal intent is Michael Cohen, a disbarred lawyer and serial perjurer. Yet even Cohen did not offer a clear basis for showing a criminal intent to use unlawful means to influence the election. Everything Cohen described could be true and only show a desire to kill an embarrassing story before an election — again, not a crime.
Cohen described the mechanics on the payments, but the only person who discussed these payments in detail with Cohen was Weisselberg.
Even liberal experts on CNN admitted that Cohen was trashed on the stand. The only crime that was clearly established in this trial was the grand larceny that Cohen admitted to under oath (after the statute of limitations had run out). Cohen said that he stole tens of thousands from the Trump corporation, a crime far more serious than the dead misdemeanor or even the felonies alleged against Trump.
However, the most significant testimony by Cohen may be his latest alleged perjury in front of the jury.
Many of us guffawed when Cohen claimed that he secretly taped Trump to protect him and keep Pecker honest. No one can explain how that could possibly be true. If it were, he would have told Trump. There is nothing in the call that would have any impact on Pecker, and Cohen admitted to regularly taping others without telling them.
Another alleged perjury came with the key telephone call in which Cohen claimed Trump was informed that the Daniels deal was concluded. The defense showed that that 96-second-long call was to Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller, in late October 2016. It was preceded and followed by text messages that clearly shows that the conversation was about a teenager harassing Cohen, not the NDA.
Other witnesses trashed Cohen as unprofessional, prone to exaggeration, bitter against Trump, at times suicidal over being denied positions like attorney general and simply “a jerk.” Hope Hicks, a former aide to Trump, said that Cohen “used to like to call himself Mister Fix It, but it was only because he first broke it.”
Those were the government’s witnesses.
Cohen’s lack of credibility and his admitted financial interest in attacking Trump only highlight again the absence of Weisselberg, whom Cohen references repeatedly as the key person making decisions on how these payments were made and described.
If what Cohen said was true, corroboration was sitting a car ride away in Rikers Island. Traffic may be bad but it is not that bad. The only reason not to call Weisselberg was that he would contradict Cohen.
The prosecution preferred to use a serial perjurer who roughly half of the country views as dishonest as almost the entirety of their case. Even beyond Weisselberg, there is no corroboration for Cohen’s vague allegations on the record.
In the end, this three-legged stool is the very thing that all of us must stand on when accused. Who on the jury would want to stand on this stool with their own liberty at stake?
In the end, the defense needs to be honest with these jurors. The question is whether hatred for this man is enough to ignore the obvious injustice in this case. They may have come to this case with little doubt about Donald Trump, but the question is whether there is not any reasonable doubt about the crimes alleged against him.
In the end, we are all standing on that wobbly stool when the government seeks to convict people without evidence or even a clear crime. If we allow a conviction, it is more than a stool that will collapse in this Manhattan courtroom.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
UCLA Professor Hannah Appel has accused the school of human rights violations amounting to “torture” in the treatment of pro-Palestinian protesters. The reason is the denial of water and food from being brought into a building being unlawfully occupied by protesters, even though the students were free to leave at any time.
Appel teaches in the anthropology department in the areas of “transnational capitalism and finance,” “the economic imagination,” and “anti-capitalist and abolitionist social movements.”
She is also a member of Faculty for Justice in Palestine at UCLA. The Daily Bruin reports that a brief sit-in protest was held at the campus’s Dodd Hall. The students were soon cleared from the building. In the interim, Appel made her accusation of torture tactics. In a video posted on X, Appel is seen declaring “even if this is unlawful which, of course, I don’t think it is […] you cannot deny people to send in water in an effort to get them to do something against their will.” While the students were free to leave at any time, Appel objected that “you cannot use a mechanism of torture” to force people to leave. In another video Appel objects that she and other faculty were not allowed to bring food and water to the encampment demonstrators. Notably, Appel repeats a threat from faculty at various schools that they may withhold their grades in protest to pressure schools to drop any charges or allegations against protesters: “When the university sees that folks are withholding grades, they get scared. They’re scared because we’re flexing our collective power, and optimally, that fear drives them to the bargaining table, and then we win.”
Such threats have already worked as universities have caved to demands at schools like Northwestern or dropped charges against students. Yet, these professors are using the grades of students to coerce universities. It is grossly unfair to students who were not involved in the protests or may oppose these protests. They have right to their grades and these professors have a contractual obligation to supply them. They should not be a tool for faculty protests.
Professors were free to join these students in occupying university buildings so long as they were willing to bear the consequences for their actions. To withhold grades to achieve political ends should be treated as a serious violation of faculty rules of conduct.
As for the torture allegation, Appel is dead wrong. There was no denial of food or water. The students had access to both, outside of the building. Unlawful occupation of a building does not create an obligation on the part of the university to support the occupiers. To call this a human rights violation is to belittle the deprivations of true victims of torture and other abuses.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – No one, as of yet, really knows the full implications of A.I. and how it will affect millions around the globe. Millions of jobs in all areas could evaporate. Clerical, creative, service, engineering, and data processing, to name a few, could shrink the middle class to catastrophic economic levels.
‘Godfather of A.I.’ Reverses Course, Quits Google to Warn About “Dangers” of Artificial Intelligence
By Brian Lupo – May 1, 2024
Proclaimed the “Godfather of Artificial Intelligence”, 75-year old Turing prize winner Geoffrey Hinton joins several other tech pioneers and notables in warning of the impacts of artificial intelligence. Hinton was partially responsible for the development of the AI technology that is used by the biggest companies in the tech industry according to the New York Times.
On Monday, Hinton, a decade-long Google employee, tweeted “In the NYT today, Cade Metz implies I left Google so that I could criticize Google. Actually, I left so that I could talk about the dangers of AI without considering how this impacts Google. Google has acted very responsibly.” READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco Cartoon—This is a memorial for those we lost in uniform, who gave their lives so that we, as a country, could remain free. We as a country have to do our part to keep it free from those who seek to destroy our freedom by making sure we vote against the domestic enemies who promote the very ideals our fallen heroes fought and died to prevent, such as Communism, fascism, and an all-powerful decentralized big intrusive Government that fights against the will of the people. Courtesy of Americans for Limited Government.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Many forget what this 3-day weekend of BBQs, friends, and family cost. Veterans who laid down their lives so we could enjoy the freedom and prosperity this could have to offer. It’s not a day of celebration but a day of remembrance for our fallen vets.
Feds Ban Memorial Day Event to Honor Fallen Heroes From National Cemetery, Call it a ‘Demonstration’
By Margaret Flavin – May 22, 2024
Since the 1960s, the Knights of Columbus have held a Memorial Day event at the Poplar Grove National Cemetery in Petersburg, VA. For the last two years, however, The National Park Service (NPS) has refused permission for the event due to a new policy prohibiting “religious services” and calling the ceremony to honor this nation’s fallen heroes a “demonstration.” The park service has instead said the event must take place in a nearby “free speech zone.”
The Knights and their attorneys say the decision by park officials violates the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco Cartoon—Once again, Biden bends the knee to people who hate America and do not respect the constitutional foundations that protect our individual rights and freedoms. Some say he’s trying to work both sides of the fence for purely political reasons.
Dem Strategists Agree Biden is TOAST in November if He Loses in Michigan
By Mike LaChance – May 8, 2024
Some top Democrat strategists are sweating Joe Biden’s chances in Michigan in November, a state they agree is a must-win for Democrats. Trump won Michigan in 2016 and he can certainly win there again. A recent poll has Trump ahead of Biden in the state by a whopping 15 points. Biden has multiple problems in Michigan, including people who are angry about his (weak) support for Israel and union workers who are rightly, very concerned about the economy. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump. READ MORE…
I’ve been telling you all for years what Islam teaches, and adheres to, and we get very little feedback. Here are two X I found this morning that confirms everything we’ve said, fromt the mouths of two Palestinian mothers.
Watch: Wife of Hamas leader, Umm Osama, explains how Palestinian mothers sacrifice their children's souls for Allah (God of Islam), by raising them as suicide bombers to kill Jews and die as martyrs. During this interview on TV, she challenges Palestinian mothers to hate the Jews… pic.twitter.com/WXuov0pJ2H
pic.twitter.com/Zo6kxlENT9 Watch: Palestinian mother from Gaza brought her baby to an Israeli hospital and let Jewish doctors to save his life by treating his rare congenital heart defect. While her son was recovering from the surgery, she told a journalist about her hope to…
Top Stories • Woman Goes Viral With Video Claiming “My Fetus Dancing Right Before It Was Aborted” • Biden Forced to Back Down After Lawsuit, Allows Catholic Group to Hold Mass at National Cemetery • Pro-Life Activist Biden Put in Prison is Mistreated, Denied Medical Care • Huge Kansas Abortion Biz Stops Killing Babies After 10 of 16 Abortionists Resign
More Pro-Life News • After Putting Pro-Life Advocate Lauren Handy in Prison for Protesting Abortion, Biden’s Targeting Her Again • Support for Harrison Butker’s Pro-Life, Pro-Family Message Has Been Amazing • Pro-Life Group Sues Joe Biden for Trying to Put Pro-Life Hero Mark Houck in Prison • Gavin Newsom Signs Bill Allowing Arizona Abortionists to Kill Babies in California • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
As the House voted Thursday to bar foreign nationals from voting in local Washington, D.C. elections, Democrats and their public-relations team in the corporate media have rolled out the big guns in attacking such election integrity efforts. They’re painting the legislation that ensures noncitizens cannot vote in elections as the next so-called “Big Lie,” sticking to their well-worn narrative that noncitizens already are prohibited from voting in U.S. elections and that such violations “don’t exist.”
But one of the fiercest opponents of the election integrity legislation has said the quiet part out loud, as Democrats are wont to do.
‘Alien Suffrage’
As Fox News reported, U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., wrote a full-throated defense of “Alien Suffrage” in a 1993 paper for the American University Washington College of Law, where he serves as Professor of Law Emeritus. Raskin is ranking member of the House’s Oversight Committee, which, among other things, has constitutional oversight of the District of Columbia.
“In this Article, I will argue that the current blanket exclusion of noncitizens from the ballot is neither constitutionally required nor historically normal,” Raskin wrote. “Moreover, the disenfranchisement of aliens at the local level is vulnerable to deep theoretical objections since resident aliens — who are governed, taxed, and often drafted just like citizens — have a strong democratic claim to being considered members, indeed citizens, of their local communities.”
A top Democrat leader unveils liberal plans to give illegal immigrants right to vote in local, state, and federal elections.
Writes that illegals “have a strong democratic claim to being considered members, indeed citizens”. https://t.co/k3u4bVlyb9
Not surprisingly, Raskin was among 143 Democrats voting against the Republican-led bill blocking illegal immigrants and other foreign nationals from voting in elections in the district, over which Congress has ultimate authority. Interestingly, 52 Democrats joined Republicans in passing the measure — because the vast majority of Americans believe only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in local and U.S. elections. Taking the opposing view is not a smart reelection strategy for politically vulnerable liberals.
Several cities in Raskin’s home state have allowed foreign nationals to vote in local elections for years. Takoma Park, Maryland in November celebrated its 30th anniversary “of the first non-US. Residents” voting in the Washington, D.C. suburb.
“Even if it’s only a handful voting in elections—and it’s more than that—it’s a huge step forward for democracy,” said Seth Grimes, a leftist community organizer, in an official city press release. “Non-citizens have a stake in civic affairs, and everyone should have a voice in who governs them.”
Polling shows an overwhelming number of Americans don’t share Grimes’ point of view, or the one expressed in Raskin’s law school report. A national poll conducted last year for Americans for Citizen Voting by RMG Research, Inc., found 75 percent of respondents were opposed to allowing foreign nationals to vote in their local elections.
In his 1993 paper, Raskin argued that the “emergence of a global market and the corresponding dilution of national boundaries, would invite us to treat local governments as ‘polities of presence’ in which all community inhabitants, not just those who are citizens of the superordinate nation-state, form the electorate.”
“Alien suffrage would thus become part of a basic human right to democracy,” the now-congressman wrote.
Does Raskin still feel that way? His office did not return The Federalist’s request for comment.
Media: Alien Voting Doesn’t Happen and It’s Fine When It Does
After Thursday’s vote, it’s not a leap to suspect many of Raskin’s fellow Democrats support foreign nationals voting in local elections. If they were against it, they would have voted for the D.C. election integrity measure.
Corporate media, of course, have been running interference for Democrats in the weeks since former President Donald Trump, the GOP’s presumed presidential nominee, and Speaker Mike Johnson announced the rollout of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. The SAVE Act is aimed at shoring up glaring holes in the 30-year-old National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) passed during a simpler time, when politicians believed in borders. The bill would amend the 1993 “Motor Voter” law to require individuals to provide proof of citizenship before they are automatically registered to vote at state departments of motor vehicles and other agencies. It also requires states to remove foreign nationals from their voting rolls, something too many state election officials have been loath to do. The NVRA does not require direct proof of citizenship for voter registration.
Republicans say the legislation is crucial in the wake of the millions of illegal immigrants that have poured through the U.S. southwest border since Joe Biden took the presidential oath of office in January 2021.
“There is currently an unprecedented and a clear and present danger to the integrity of our election system, and that is the threat of noncitizens and illegal aliens voting in our elections,” Johnson said at a Capitol press conference earlier this month announcing the bill.
But the accomplice media, while conceding foreign nationals have been caught voting in federal elections, assert the act is extremely rare. Besides, the left’s messengers contend, what illegal alien in his right mind would risk committing a felony just to vote in a federal election? The New York Times accused Republicans of “Sowing [a] False Narrative.” The Associated Press asserts“Noncitizen voting isn’t an issue in federal elections,” while it acknowledges that it does happen.
“To be clear, there have been cases of noncitizens casting ballots, but they are extremely rare. Those who have looked into these cases say they often involve legal immigrants who mistakenly believe they have the right to vote,”AP admits.
So much for the idea that any illegal vote dilutes the validity of an election. Again, the corporate media like to put qualifiers on fraud, forced by the facts to acknowledge its existence but insisting it isn’t “widespread.”
“They’ve used ‘widespread’ for years as a way of downplaying any concern about it,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission and Senior Legal Fellow in the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. “We don’t have ‘widespread’ bank robberies but we have enough of them that we take very detailed security precautions to prevent them. Election fraud is exactly the same.”
Hans Von Spakovsky points out: “We don’t have ‘widespread’ bank robberies, but we have enough of them that we take very detailed security precautions to prevent them. Election fraud is exactly the same.”https://t.co/xKMn3uRBxFpic.twitter.com/erB4hxK2cQ
Raskin isn’t the only Democrat who has defended foreign nationals voting in elections. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn Democrat, has been very vocal in his support for aliens voting in New York local elections. His New York congressional colleague, leftist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has suggested the Republican-controlled House’s bill to bar foreign nationals from voting in D.C. is reminiscent of the days of slavery.
“They’re singling out the residents of the District of Columbia and expanding in the history of disenfranchisement that goes all the way back to the legacy of slavery,”she said last year.
James Comer, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, said the bill aims to rectify the D.C. City Council’s decision to “recklessly allowed non-citizens to participate in elections in our nation’s capital.”
“This move by the Council was irresponsible and subverts the voices of American citizens,” Comer said in a statement. “Today, Congress took action and I applaud the passage of legislation that will now prohibit non-citizens from voting in District of Columbia elections.”
The House bill pertaining to D.C. elections and the SAVE Act aren’t going anywhere this year with a Democrat-controlled Senate and a president who appears to be running a Democrat Party future recruitment drive. But Americans, many of whom don’t support illegal aliens and other foreign nationals voting in U.S. elections, know where the party stands heading into the November election.
“Rep. Raskin is okay with the ‘dilution of national boundaries.’ I am not. And neither are the majority of United States citizens,” said Jack Tomczak, national field director for Americans for Citizen Voting, which is leading a growing national effort to amend state constitutions to include citizen-only voting language.
Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.
Former President Donald Trump managed to pull off a campaign miracle with a wildly successful rally in South Bronx on Thursday night.
The Bronx is the poorest borough in New York City, and South Bronx is the poorest area. Most residents are black or brown, and they vote overwhelmingly Democrat. No Republican presidential candidate has gone anywhere near the area in decades.
On Thursday morning, heavy rains flooded the park where the rally was to be held. Bronx-based Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted “God is good” upon seeing the weather, believing it would keep Trump crowds away. She also taunted Trump for being the victim of Democrat lawfare, saying he had to rally in the Bronx because he was in the “legal version of an ankle bracelet.”
God is good regardless of political outcomes, of course. In this case, He dried Crotona Park in the Bronx before a raucous crowd of thousands poured in to hear one of Trump’s best campaign speeches yet.
“Certainly, a bigger crowd than I think Democrats would like to see, particularly given this is one of the bluest counties in the entire country,”one CNN reporter conceded upon seeing the crowds.
Trump barely mentioned the NYC show trial he’s being subjected to and mixed campaign staples with a declaration of love for New York City and the country at large. He seemed truly happy and at home.
“I was thrilled to be back in the city I grew up in, the city I spent my life in, the city I HELPED BUILD, and the city WE ALL LOVE — THANK YOU!” Trump said on Truth Social. Trump grew up in Queens but officially moved to Florida in 2019. His effusive praise for New York shows a remarkably positive attitude from the former president, given that the city and state are currently part of a Democrat campaign plot to bankrupt and imprison him.
Trump reflected on lessons from his success in New York City real estate, doling out career advice along the way, during his hour-and-a-half speech. A parade of local politicians and activists announced endorsements and support of Trump. When he discussed his economic and immigration policy proposals for getting the country back on track, he argued that his policies would help everyone in the country. It’s part of a concerted effort by the Trump campaign to drive up votes from black and Hispanic voters who traditionally vote Democrat.
“It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or brown or white or whatever the hell color you are — it doesn’t matter. We are all Americans, and we are going to pull together as Americans!” Trump said.
The contrast with President Joe Biden couldn’t be starker. In three decidedly non-raucous speeches within the last week or so, Biden leaned into racial grievance politics. At a speech at the National Museum of African American History and Culture last Friday, Biden claimed America was beset by “forces trying to deny freedom of opportunity for all Americans.” He claimed there was an “insidious” resistance and an “extreme movement” led by his political opponent to hurt black people. In another disaster of a speech to the NAACP, the White House later had to make 10 corrections to it.
The same day as the NAACP speech, Biden gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, a historically black men’s school in Georgia. In a self-centered speech riddled with some of his familiar falsehoods about his life and family, Biden painted a picture of a racist and evil country. He said the country was under the “poison of white supremacy” and falsely claimed Americans were trying to put forth a national book ban to harm black people.
It’s “natural to wonder if democracy” actually works, he said. “What is democracy if black men are being killed in the street? What is democracy if a trail of broken promises still leave black — black communities behind? What is democracy if you have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot?”
Biden also falsely claimed Georgia doesn’t allow anyone to drink water in voting lines and that black election workers are being constantly attacked.Biden’s message is that the country is evil, racist, and full of hatred and that he will fix it by emptying the Treasury to buy votes.
Trump, who has the benefit of having already had one very successful term as president, acknowledges the very real economic, social, and foreign policies the country faces. But unlike Biden, his optimistic campaign speeches show a man who seems to love the country, love its cities, love its people, and want the country to return to health.
Whether Biden’s race-baiting rhetoric or Trump’s unbridled multi-ethnic optimism will win the day remains to be seen. The speech in South Bronx showed how successful the latter can be.
Aid access to the Gaza Strip is extremely limited with less than 1,000 truckloads of humanitarian assistance entering the enclave since May 7, after Israel began a military operation in southern Gaza’s Rafah area, the United Nations said on Friday. The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said that between May 7 and May 23, only 906 truckloads entered the enclave of 2.3 million people, where a famine looms amid the war between Israel and Palestinian militants Hamas. U.N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said about 800 of those truckloads were food supplies.
OCHA said 143 truckloads passed through the Israel-controlled Kerem Shalom crossing in Gaza’s south, while in Gaza’s north 62 passed through the Erez crossing and 604 via Erez West. It said 97 truckloads have come through a U.S.-built floating pier in central Gaza that began operating a week ago.
The Rafah crossing from Egypt into Gaza has been closed since Israel began stepping up its military operation in the area, creating a backlog of aid in Egypt where some of the food supplies have begun to rot.
Israel and the United States had called on Egypt, which is also concerned about the risk of Palestinians being displaced from Gaza, to reopen the border. Egypt had said it was closed due to the threat posed to aid work by Israel’s military operation.
On Friday, Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi agreed with U.S. President Joe Biden by phone to temporarily send humanitarian aid and fuel to the U.N. via the Kerem Shalom crossing, the Egyptian presidency said. Aid shipments could begin as soon as Friday evening, said Egyptian security sources, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The United Nations welcomes the move, Dujarric said. On Thursday he said: “There are a lot of doorways into Gaza. … Whether by land or by sea, we don’t control those doorways, but we want them all to be open.”
OCHA said on Friday its figures do not include commercial trucks because the U.N. has been unable to observe private-sector deliveries through Kerem Shalom crossing due to insecurity.
“Additionally, just over 1 million liters of fuel have entered the Gaza Strip since the beginning of the military operation in Rafah,” OCHA said in an update posted online.
“This represents an average of 29% of fuel allocations that would have been received under arrangements in place prior to 6 May, further affecting the functioning of bakeries, hospitals, water wells, and other critical infrastructure,” it said.
The U.N. says at least 500 trucks a day of aid and commercial goods need to enter Gaza. In April, an average of 189 trucks entered a day – the highest since the war started in October.
Israel is retaliating against Hamas, which rules Gaza, over an Oct. 7 attack by the Palestinian militants in which more than 1,200 people were killed and over 250 taken hostage, according to Israeli tallies. Nearly 130 hostages are believed to remain captive in Gaza.
Israel launched an air, ground and sea assault on the blockaded Palestinian territory, killing more than 35,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities. (Reporting by Michelle Nichols; editing by Jonathan Oatis)
Recently, it became public that Kevin Morris, the entertainment lawyer who has subsidized the expenses and bought the art of Hunter Biden, had stopped his funding of Biden. Morris has paid off Hunter’s IRS debts and reportedly lent him a total of $4.9 million for housing, car payments, legal fees, and other possible costs.
The so-called “sugar bro” is “tapped out” according to media reports. (For full disclosure, Morris previously threatened me with a defamation lawsuit over my writing about his representation of Hunter). Now the House has confirmed prior stories that whistleblower records indicate that the CIA prevented the Justice Department from questioning Kevin Morris as a witness in its probe of Hunter Biden.
Morris has maintained that he lent Hunter millions for “no ulterior motive” and continued to support him out of friendship. Yet, when investigators started to look into the payments and the relationship, they were told that Morris had some relationship with the CIA in August 2021. According to previously unreleased information, IRS special agent and current whistleblower Gary Shapley documented the bizarre intervention of the spy agency.
During a recurring prosecution team conference call, in or around late August 2021, Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Lesley Wolf told the team that she and DOJ Tax Attorney Jack Morgan had recently returned from the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they had been summoned to discuss Kevin Morris.
AUSA Wolf stated that they were provided a classified briefing in relation to Mr. Morris and as a result we could no longer pursue him as a witness. Investigators probed AUSA Wolf, but since her briefing was classified and she was apparently sanitizing it to an unclassified form to share over an open phone line, she did not elaborate with more information. She reiterated more than once that they were summoned to the CIA in Langley concerning Mr. Morris, and that because of the information provided there, he could not be a witness for the investigation. AUSA Wolf proudly referenced a CIA mug and stated that she purchased some CIA “swag” at the gift shop while she was there.
It is unclear how the CIA became aware that Mr. Morris was a potential witness in the Hunter Biden investigation and why agents were not told about the meeting in advance or invited to participate. It is a deviation of normal investigative processes for prosecutors to exclude investigators from substantive meetings such as this.
It is a testament to the level of bias in the mainstream media that this story is not the sole focus of every media outlet in America. Imagine if the CIA intervened to stop an investigation into a donor maintaining one of the Trump children and supporting his effort to blunt any investigation into corruption. MSNBC would make it ongoing special programming with its own time slot.
This is an agency that is supposed to avoid domestic interventions into politics as well as other areas. It is accused of pulling in a prosecutor to tell her to close part of a criminal investigation involving the financial supporter of the president’s son. Even if Morris was an asset, the question is why shut down the inquiry into his payments to Hunter Biden. The work of Morris with the CIA could be protected or redacted. Instead, the line of inquiry was shut off and Wolf reportedly left Langley with CIA swag and an empty bag of evidence.
Below is my column on Fox.com on the closure of the government and defense cases in the Trump trial. It is clear that the government is going to achieve its objective in avoiding a direct verdict and giving this matter to the jury, which it hopes that the paucity of direct evidence of a crime will be overcome with an abundance of hostility to Donald Trump. As I previously have written, I am still hopeful that these jurors will vindicate the New York legal system with at least a hung jury. In the end, we will see if a Manhattan jury will exercise blind justice or willful blindness.
Here is the column:
With closing arguments scheduled for Tuesday, May 28, the prosecution of former President Donald Trump will finally head to a jury. Judge Juan Merchan has refused every opportunity to bring an end to this politically manufactured prosecution. Now it will be up to 12 New Yorkers to do what neither the court nor the prosecutors were willing to do: adhere to the rule of law regardless of the identity of the defendant.
Merchan has allowed the government to bring back into life a dead misdemeanor and convert it into 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. To accomplish this legal regeneration, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has vaguely referenced a variety of crimes that Trump allegedly was trying to conceal through the business record violations.
The problem is that he has left the secondary crime mired in uncertainty to the point that experts on various networks are still debating what the underlying theory is in the case.
Indeed, Bragg is expected to finally state with clarity what he is alleging… at the closing arguments of the case.
In the meantime, the prosecution is pushing to make it easier for the jury to convict. First, they have vaguely referenced a variety of possible offenses from tax to election violations. Bragg initially laid out four possible predicate crimes. It is down to three – a tax crime and violations of state or federal election law.
Merchan has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what crimes were being covered up so the jury could literally have three different views of what happened in the case and still convict Trump.
Prosecutors are also seeking to effectively shorten the playing field by allowing the jurors to convict on a lower standard of proof for the key term in using “unlawful means.” The defense wants the jury instructed that it must find that such use of “unlawful means” was done with willful intent.
The prosecutors do not want to use that higher standard. For the defense, it is effectively reducing the field to the end zone to make it easier for the prosecution to score.
In the last few days, the Bragg strategy has come into sharper focus in one respect. Bragg is not counting on the evidence or the law. He is counting on the jury. Call it the Lawrence O’Donnell factor.
After Michael Cohen imploded on the stand in the trial, even experts and hosts on MSNBC and CNN stated that his admissions and contradictions were devastating. Cohen is not only accused of committing perjury in his testimony, but he matter-of-factly detailed how he stole tens of thousands of dollars from the Trump organization.
After being disbarred and convicted as a serial perjurer, Cohen waited for the statute of limitations to run on larceny to admit that he stole as much as $50,000 by pocketing money intended for a contractor.
Liberal commentators acknowledged the fact that Cohen had committed a far more serious offense than the converted misdemeanor against Trump (but was never charged). Yet, one figure stepped forward to assure the public that all was well.
MSNBC host O’Donnell said that he watched the testimony, and that Cohen did wonderfully. Keep in mind that Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche asked Cohen point blank: “So you stole from the Trump organization, right?” Cohen answered unequivocally: “Yes, sir.”
O’Donnell, however, rushed outside to declare that Cohen was merely acquiring a bonus that he thought that he deserved as a type of “self-help”:
“Cohen [was trying] to rebalance the bonus he thought he deserved. And it still came out as less than the bonus he thought he deserved and the bonus he had gotten the year before.”
In other words, he first determined that his employer should pay him more and then elected to lie to his employer and steal the money. It is akin to New Jersey Democrat Sen. Bob Menendez claiming, in his nearby trial, that the gold bars and cash found in his home were just his effort to secure a well-deserved bonus for his public service.
O’Donnell was widely mocked for his galactic spin. However, he reflects the greatest danger for the Trump team. O’Donnell was showing a type of willful blindness; a refusal to acknowledge even the most shocking disclosures in the trial.
Some of the jurors admitted that MSNBC is one on their news sources and they exhibit the same all-consuming O’Donnell obsession with Trump. If so, they could listen to contradiction to contradiction and simply not recognize them like the MSNBC host. For some, Cohen could burst into flames on the stand, but their eyes will not move from the person behind the defense table.
Many viewers have been raised in an echo chamber of news coverage where they avoid opposing facts on both the left and the right. They actively tailor their news to fulfill a narrative or viewpoint. A jury of O’Donnell’s peers would convict Trump even if the Angel Gabriel appeared at trial as a defense character witness.
It is the ultimate jury instruction not from the court but from the community. With jurors “back in the world” for six days and going to holiday cookouts and events, they will likely hear much of that social judgment and the need to “rebalance” the political ledger through this case.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and a practicing criminal defense attorney. He is a Fox News contributor.
Top Stories • Pro-Life Group Sues Joe Biden for Trying to Put Pro-Life Hero Mark Houck in Prison • Days After Putting Pro-Life Americans in Prison, Biden is Targeting More Pro-Life Advocates • Joe Biden Packing the Courts is Another Reason to Vote for Trump • Republican Party Must Never Abandon the Pro-Life Cause
More Pro-Life News • Americans Give Biden Worse Marks as He Pushes Abortion Instead of Helping America • Record High 252,122 Babies Killed in Abortions in UK • Pope Francis Condemns Euthanasia: Killing People is a “Failure to Love” • Joe Biden Shuts Down Catholic Mass at National Park • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
Joe Biden has been criticized for his policies and statements throughout the course of his long political career, but these criticisms have never been expressed as loudly or with such angst as they were yesterday in Lake Tahoe.
It appears that many people who attended the event were not impressed by what Biden had to say (not to mention how he has been flying the nation into a blackhole since day one) and felt it necessary to voice their displeasure with him publicly.
This isn’t the first time that Biden has faced criticism from ‘We, The People’. He was harshly criticized for supporting certain trade agreements during his time as Vice President under Barack Obama’s administration and for backing certain foreign policy initiatives in Iraq and Afghanistan while he was in office. But yesterday’s boos seemed louder than any other criticism that he has received before.
It is possible that some of the attendees were members of President Trump’s base or supporters of Donald Trump Jr., both of whom have made no secret of their dislike for Joe Biden. However, I believe there may have been more to it than just political differences between Biden and some members of the crowd.
After all, there is no denying that Joe Biden has made some controversial decisions during his tenure in government over the past several decades. The average American is living with the consequences of Joe’s terrible policies every day we roll out of bed. Quite frankly, we are PISSED!
Hey Joe, if you don’t want to be booed stop trying to end the United States as we know it. Get inflation under control, stop letting people secularize children, respect science … you get the idea.
It sure looks like America is now WIDE awake to the train wreck that is our 46th president. If Joe runs again and the media tries to tell us that he got more legal votes than Obama did during his two elections for POTUS or Trump did … remember these clips, factor in how many people you have met who support Biden and you’ll realize something does not compute …
Political commentator and elections analyst Nate Silver suggested President Joe Biden consider “stepping aside” for November’s White House election if he’s still “struggling” by August. In a “Risky Business” podcast, Silver said Biden’s pulling out of the Commission on Presidential Debates and agreeing separately to two debates with former President Donald Trump —one in June and one in September — signals trouble for the president’s campaign.
“Basically, Biden traded three debates after Labor Day for one debate after Labor Day and then one on CNN, the cable network, that will happen in the middle of June that probably everyone will forget about by the time the conventions happen in July and August,” Silver said.
He also pointed out Biden’s team knows “their candidate is too old” and remarked it may trigger Democrats to “fold for a better hand.”
Silver also weighed in with a post on X, formerly Twitter, doubling down down on a recommendation that Biden step aside before the Democratic Party’s convention if he’s still “struggling” in polls.
A recent New York Times/Siena College survey and a Bloomberg/Morning Consult found Trump leading Biden in most swing states. Biden also faced a protest movement within his own party over his support of Israel in its pursuit to wipe out the terror group Hamas. In some swing states, activists voted “uncommitted” in primary elections to protest Biden’s Israel policy.
Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon who was a member of former President Donald Trump’s Cabinet, told Newsmax in April that Biden’s mental and physical condition “puts the entire country at risk.”
“If Biden is still struggling in August he needs to consider stepping aside,” Silver wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “It’s not a great situation for Ds either way, but you have to do due diligence on the question. It’s an important election, obviously. It shouldn’t be taboo to talk about.
“They know their candidate is too old,” Silver said on the podcast. “You have to fold for a better hand.”
Members of the New York State Senate in Albany, New York, vote on June 17, 2019, on a so-called Green Light bill to allow illegal immigrants to apply for driver’s licenses. Opponents of licensing illegal aliens say that makes it much easier for the noncitizens to also register to vote illegally. (Photo: Lori Van Buren/Albany Times Union/Getty Images)
A new study has revealed that roughly 10% to 27% of noncitizens living in the U.S. are illicitly registered to vote, which could result in up to 2.7 million illegal votes being cast in the November elections. Experts say the significant amount of potential illegal votes could be enough to alter election results.
The study, released last week by the research institute Just Facts, notes that the 2022 U.S. census recorded approximately 19 million adult noncitizens living in the country. “Given their voter registration rates, this means that about 2 million to 5 million of them are illegally registered to vote,” the report observes. “These figures are potentially high enough to overturn the will of the American people in major elections, including congressional seats and the presidency.”
On Tuesday, James Agresti, president of Just Facts, joined “Washington Watch” to discuss the scope of noncitizens casting ballots and the implications of the study’s findings.
“[T]here are very broad openings for noncitizens to vote,” he explained, adding:
In no state in the nation are they required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote. Now, a couple of states like Arizona tried to enact that requirement, but they were blocked by a court ruling supported by the Obama administration.
And if you look at the federal voter-registration form, it says you can submit all different forms of ID to register. That could be a Social Security number; it could be a driver’s license number; or it could just be a utility bill. I mean, these are things that anyone can get by living here. They do not prove you’re a U.S. citizen.
And more than that, a lot of noncitizens have faked Social Security numbers, especially illegal immigrants. That’s what they do to work. A recent estimate by the Social Security Administration tallied 2.5 million noncitizens who had Social Security numbers gained by using fake birth certificates or stealing those numbers from somebody else.
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation and board member of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, concurred. (Heritage founded The Daily Signal in 2014.)
“[T]he problem is, states aren’t doing very much to verify citizenship, so it’s extremely easy for someone who’s not a citizen to register to vote and to vote in elections,” he remarked during Monday’s edition of “Washington Watch.”
“And when that is discovered, oftentimes nothing is done about it.”
Agresti went on to point out the effect that lax enforcement of citizen verification could have in November. “[B]ased on the latest available data, approximately 1 million to 2.7 million noncitizens are going to vote in the upcoming presidential election unless something changes. And that is more than enough to tip the results of congressional races, Senate races, and yes, the U.S. presidency.”
Von Spakovsky echoed Agresti’s concerns. “[I]t doesn’t matter whether they’re black or white, Asian or Hispanic. It doesn’t matter which political party they support. Every time an alien illegally votes, that alien is voiding, negating the vote of a citizen, no matter which political party they support,” he contended. “And the Democrats just don’t seem to want to understand that or to basically ignore it.”
Agresti further reflected on the motivations behind the Democrats’ opposition to efforts to improve election integrity.
“[I]t’s always hard to read people’s minds, but I can tell you this: The vast bulk of these noncitizens are voting for Democrats. According to the best data we have, about 80% of them will vote for Democrats when they vote illegally. And Democrats are fighting tooth and nail to prevent any kind of checking of people’s citizenship. It does benefit them. Is that their reasoning? It’s an obvious incentive, but I can’t read their minds.”
Earlier this month, House Republicans attempted to address the issue by introducing a bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and would remove noncitizens from existing voter rolls. But Agresti expressed doubt about the bill’s chances of passage. “My guess is it will move in the House and die in the Senate, but that’s just an educated guess. And again, even if somehow it got through the Senate, there’s no way [President] Joe Biden’s signing that bill.”
“However,” he added, “I do think in the aftermath of the election, and we hate to have a repeat of 2020, that there should be some accountability, some lawsuits that demand proof that people are who they say they are in tight races. None of that was secured in the last round of election lawsuits, and it needs to be there.”
Agresti concluded by urging candidates involved in tight elections to demand verification that only citizens voted. “A candidate has to make a plea and say, ‘Hey, I want this data to prove that these people who are registered and voted actually are citizens.’”
Looters steal Gaza aid delivered via a U.S.-built floating pier, raising concerns about aid to Palestinians and regional security. Pictured: This handout image shows U.S. soldiers and sailors working with Israeli troops May 16 to erect the temporary pier on the Gaza coast. (Photo: U.S. Central Command/ Getty Images)
Joshua Arnold is a staff writer at The Washington Stand, contributing both news and commentary from a biblical worldview.
It took far longer for Americans to build a floating pier on the Gazan coast to deliver aid for civilians caught in the Israel-Hamas war than for the aid to be looted.
President Joe Biden announced the pier project during his State of the Union address March 7. After delays, the pier was in place by May 7. However, due to “high winds and high sea swells,” as deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh described it, no aid could be delivered immediately.
The first 10 truckloads of food aid were landed on the floating pier last Friday and were subsequently delivered to a warehouse for the U.N. World Food Programme 8 miles away. On Saturday, 16 more trucks landed with aid. However, “11 of those trucks never made it to the warehouse,”said Stéphane Dujarric, spokesman for the U.N. secretary-general. “Crowds had stopped the trucks at various points along the way.” The Associated Press reported gunfire erupting at the scene, leaving at least one man dead.
“There was, you know, what I think I would refer to as ‘self-distribution,’” Dujarric said.
In response to the looting, the U.S. military halted further aid deliveries Sunday.
Due to a lack of specific reporting, it’s not clear who was responsible for plundering the aid caravan.
U.N. officials planted the suggestion that the aid was looted by Palestinian civilians, brought to the brink of starvation by Israel’s blockade in its war with Hamas, the terrorist organization that governs the Gaza Strip and massacred some 1,200 civilians Oct. 7 in Israel. Following this lead, most media reports have attributed the “self-distribution” simply to “crowds.”
However, it would be strange if civilian crowds in Gaza had enough firearms to cause a shootout over aid. This is Gaza, not Chicago.
Since its bloody coup in 2007, Hamas has governed the territory with an iron fist, brutally eliminating any perceived threat to its control. It’s hard to believe that any Palestinian in the Gaza Strip has firearms besides Hamas and its allied terrorist groups.
Perhaps the U.S. military drew the same conclusion. Perhaps it suspected the supplies plundered from aid trucks eventually wound up in the hands of terrorists—even if the terrorists happily used crowds of hungry civilians to stop the caravan initially. Perhaps that’s why the U.S. military halted further aid deliveries.
Meanwhile, of the food aid that made it through to the U.N. warehouse, U.S. officials say they believe none has been distributed to those in need. When asked Tuesday whether aid had reached Gaza residents, Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder responded: “I do not believe so.”
That makes two problems with the American military’s Gaza food delivery mission.
First, international and nongovernmental aid organizations on the ground aren’t effective at distributing aid to those in need. Second, once aid enters Gaza, it’s hard to prevent it from falling into the hands of nefarious actors.
🚨 Breaking: Assisted by @UNRWA, Hamas terrorists again take control of aid trucks today before they reach civilians 👇
Civilians in Gaza are starving despite hundreds of aid trucks entering every day. Meanwhile most Hamas terrorists are obese. pic.twitter.com/YKUcCWFxuY
Any U.S. aid delivery strategy that fails to account for these two problems is doomed to misfire. Biden promised no U.S. military “boots on the ground” in Gaza (are boots on a floating pier anchored to the ground much different?). This means the U.S. must, at some point, hand off the aid to groups already handling it so ineffectively and insecurely. When asked Tuesday “who was responsible for security” of the looted aid trucks, the U.N.’s Dujarric admitted, “There is no—we don’t have any armed security.”
The current U.S. plan to get the pier’s terminal up and running again is for the aid convoys to travel to the World Food Programme warehouse by “new routes.” This, obviously, solves none of the problems.
This new plan is likely to last only as long as it takes for the same “crowds” to ambush a convoy on its new route. If the crowd still has guns and the men in the trucks don’t, it’s hard to imagine any other outcome but more looting.
Neither problem should have surprised the Biden administration, if officials were willing to listen to America’s close friend and ally, Israel. Israel has known all along that Hamas commandeers confiscate aid shipments and that Gazan aid organizations are ineffective. As of Tuesday, Israeli border guards had outworked international aid agencies to the point that “650 truckloads [were] waiting for collection and distribution … on the Gazan side of the crossings,” according to an Israeli agency, Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories.
“Crossings” is plural because Israel worked to open a second border crossing to aid trucks May 1, after Hamas damaged the crossing in its Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in southern Israel. Meanwhile, Hamas stole the first convoy of aid to enter the Gaza Strip through the newly restored crossing under the coordination of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.
In February, a U.S. diplomat denied that Hamas seized any aid shipments into Gaza, but he also acknowledged that Hamas could “shape where and to whom assistance goes.” America’s difficulties delivering aid to the Gaza Strip underscore who is the villain and who is the hero in this story.
Reporting from international and mainstream media outlets would convince you that Israel is out to maximize the suffering of people in Gaza, including by starving them to death. The International Criminal Court recently issued “preposterous” indictments against Israeli leaders, “saying that Israel has starved Gazans to death,” as Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for Middle East and International Law at George Mason University’s Scalia Law School, said on “Washington Watch.”
“It’s not clear that anyone has starved in Gaza,” Kontorovich said. But, he added, “to the extent there’s a problem with food supplies there, it is well known that Hamas steals and plunders all the civilian, all the humanitarian supplies that are coming in. So, it’s not clear why it’s Israel rather than Hamas that is being accused of this.”
The International Criminal Court has no official jurisdiction, so it “can’t really do anything directly against Israel,” Kontorovich said. The charges nevertheless are “blood libel against the Jews,” he said, a classic example of antisemitism that will be used “in a further diplomatic campaign to delegitimize Israel.”
But the claim that Israel is trying to starve Palestinian civilians by not allowing aid into Gaza is simply false. Since the beginning of the war, Israel has allowed 19,981 truckloads of food, 1,752 truckloads of water, 4,213 truckloads of shelter equipment, 2,002 truckloads of medical supplies, and 1,784 truckloads of mixed supplies into Gaza, as well as 297 tanks of fuel and 541 tanks of cooking gas. That adds up to 572,300 tons of humanitarian aid on 29,746 trucks. (Meanwhile, Gaza’s other neighbor, Egypt, has closed its border crossing and is allowing no aid into the strip.)
Israel has done this, even though it knows much of the aid will end up in its enemy’s hands, to alleviate the suffering of Gazan civilians. The Israelis have delivered thousands of leaflets, broadcast their targets in advance, and otherwise sacrificed operational efficiency in countless ways to spare Palestinian lives. Israel has done all this, and then the international community blames it when Hamas, a terrorist organization, steals humanitarian aid from civilians and uses those civilians as human shields.
No country in the world is doing more to help the people of Gaza than the nation of Israel. Yet Biden’s decision to build a floating pier on the Gaza coast was essentially a rebuke to our ally, a declaration that Israel isn’t doing enough. It took only two days of real-world interactions for the Biden administration to discover that Gaza aid delivered through an American port of entry faces all the same barriers as aid delivered through an Israeli port of entry—none of which are Israel’s fault.
Biden’s floating pier is an inefficient, costly alternative to Israeli border crossings. U.S. officials claimed the pier initially could handle 90 trucks per day, possibly up to 150 trucks. Yet only a couple dozen trucks have left the pier since its completion two weeks ago. For comparison, 403 aid-bearing trucks entered Gaza on Monday alone, nearly all through Israel.
The floating pier involved the labor of 1,000 U.S. servicemembers and a price tag of $320 million, Reuters reported.
“The administration got what it wanted” out of the pier, speculated National Review’s senior political correspondent, Jim Geraghty, “which was a couple of ‘U.S. military starts delivering aid to Gaza through floating pier’ headlines this past weekend.”
But for the civilians of Gaza, the Biden administration has delivered next to nothing.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has long maintained that he is a completely apolitical figure who only follows the law. Critics have challenged that claim on key cases, including those related to Hunter Biden. However, Garland may now face one of the clearest tests of his claim in his tenure. The House committees have issued a public report alleging three different instances where Hunter Biden allegedly committed perjury. The question is now what Garland is prepared to do about it.
When Hunter testified, I wrote columns suggesting that he might take the Fifth Amendment to remain silent because the risk was too great that he might lie or mislead investigators in his answers. With months of preparation, he decided to run the gauntlet and now appears to have exposed himself to the possibility of additional criminal charges.
Hunter Biden has still not responded to the specific allegations, but on their face they appear strong. Notably, the Justice Department spent considerable time and money to pursue false statements against figures like Michael Flynn over just one statement describing a meeting with Russian diplomats. These are instances where Hunter was under oath, prepared for months, and had counsel present.
One of the instances concerns the controversial WhatsApp message where Hunter not only threatened a Chinese businessman to send him massive amounts of money but said that his father was sitting next to him at the time. Millions were later sent to the Bidens. The infamous WhatsApp message stated in part:
“I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”
The response of Hunter to questions about the message was curious and evasive. Hunter said that he had only two things to say about that message. He denied that his father was sitting next to him despite saying that he had no memory of sending the message. Second, and most importantly, he stated “the Zhao that this is sent to is not the Zhao connected to CEFC” who “had no understanding or even remotely knew what the hell I was even Goddamn talking about.”
The Committee staff maintains that Biden’s WhatsApp account shows that he only ever communicated with one Zhao – Raymond Zhao – and that he most certainly did not know what he was “talking about.”
Another alleged lie was Hunter’s denial that he ever helped people associated with Burisma secure visas. He told Congress that he was unwilling to provide “any work as it related to visas that they needed” and that he would “never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa.” The Committee has produced an email in which Hunter’s associate Devon Archer references the revoking of Burisma CEO Nikolay Zlochevsky’s visa. It states that “Hunter is checking with Miguel Aleman to see if he can provide cover to Kola on the visa…Please send Hunter an email with all Kola’s passport and visa documents and evidence and copy me. We’ll take it from there.”
Hunter also swore that he had no part in shell companies that received foreign payments. Yet, Archer testified that he and Hunter had an equal stake in Rosemont Seneca Bohai and the Committee has evidence from the IRS whistleblowers showing that Hunter received benefits as owner of the entity’s associated bank account.
The most damning evidence may be a document reading “I, Robert Hunter Biden, hereby certify that I am the duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC.” He used that document as part of his contract with Porsche Financial Services for a sports car.
Those would seem pretty clear and well-founded allegations for a referral to the Justice Department. After fast-tracking false statement claims against Trump officials, the question is whether Garland will even submit the matter to a grand jury. He could also give the matter to the Special Counsel prosecuting Hunter.
Ordinarily, a prosecutor pursuing a defendant in two different felony cases would jump at any alleged illegality. You would not want to stand between him and a grand jury. However, Special Counsel David Weiss has been accused of minimizing charges against the President’s son and attempting to push through a notorious sweetheart deal that collapsed in court.
Now Garland faces an unavoidable choice in treating this referral as he did Trump cases (in sending this to a grand jury) or scuttling alleged perjury made by the son of the President before Congress. It is far less challenging legally than it is politically for Merrick Garland.
If the rule of law still governs at the Justice Department, Hunter Biden could be facing a third front in his ongoing legal struggles.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Big talker Biden Challenged Trump to debate “Any time, any place” but with a load of stipulations that don’t favor Trump. No live audience: Trump’s Mic is Muted while Biden speaks, No RFK, only hosted by Left-wing media and moderated by a Democrat-aligned reporter. But not to worry, Trump likes those odds.
BREAKING: Biden and Trump Accept CNN’s Invitation to Debate on June 27 – Trump Takes the Gloves Off and RIPS “Crooked Joe Biden”
By Cristina Laila – May 15, 2024 Joe Biden and President Trump on Wednesday accepted an invitation from CNN for a debate on June 27. Trump also accepted ABC News’ invitation to debate Biden on September 10. “It is my great honor to accept the CNN Debate against Crooked Joe Biden, the WORST PRESIDENT in the History of the United States and a true Threat to Democracy, on June 27th. Likewise, I accept the ABC News Debate against Crooked Joe on September 10th. Thank you, DJT!” Trump said on Truth Social Wednesday morning. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
Top Stories • Pro-Life Advocate Heather Idoni Thrown in Prison for 24 Months for Protesting Abortion • Kansas City Chiefs Coach Andy Reid Defends Harrison Butker • Kansas City Chiefs QB Patrick Mahomes Defends Harrison Butker: “He’s a Good Person” • Kentucky Reports 0 Abortions as Abortion Ban Saves Babies
More Pro-Life News • NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell Walks Back Criticism of Harrison Butker: “We Treasure Diversity of Opinion” • Georgia Supreme Court Justice Andrew Pinson Defeats Radical Abortion Activist • Liberal Writer Defends Harrison Butker’s Freedom of Speech to Defend Motherhood • Pro-Life Group Condemns Biden for Targeting Pro-Life Americans • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
Last week Rep. Nancy Pelosi made the mistake of engaging in a debate about populism at Oxford Union. Without scripted talking points and a friendly press corps, it was a setting in which Pelosi was likely to tell the world what she really thinks. She didn’t disappoint.
About halfway through the debate, Pelosi uttered the following:
We’ve seen demagogues come down the pike [and] destroy the press. What is it that Republicans say? Fake news. So, they’re diminishing [the press] in the eyes of these poor souls who are looking for some answers. We’ve given them [answers], but they’re blocked by some of their views on guns. They have the three Gs, guns, gays, God. And the cultural issues cloud some of their reception, reception [to] an argument that really is in their interest.
Perhaps realizing how damaging those remarks were, Pelosi claimed, “We don’t accuse people of not knowing what they’re doing. They know what their personal interest is. We respect that.” But if you state that certain people hold views that block them from seeing what is in their best interest, then you are saying that they don’t know what they are doing. And using the “three Gs” the way Pelosi did is not a sign of respect.
Noted economist Thomas Sowell examined at length the attitude displayed by the likes of Pelosi in his book The Vision of the Anointed. That vision is the notion among many in politics, academia, and the media “who believe that third parties can make better decisions than people can make for themselves.” The Anointed exist on a higher moral plane, exemplified by, among other things, their compassion for the poor, support of the oppressed, and concern for the environment. Those who do not share the vision are not just wrong, but they are mean-spirited, and “the ‘real reasons’ behind their arguments and actions must be exposed.” If they continue to prove recalcitrant, then they must be “nullified and superseded by the views of the anointed, imposed via the power of government,” Sowell wrote.
A populist like Donald Trump doesn’t merely have different ideas about what is best for society. He is, Pelosi claimed, a “snake-oil salesman” who sells the vulnerable “a bill of goods.” His real aim was to pass “a tax bill that [gave] 83 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent.” That benefited his “big, dark, rich, billionaire donors who don’t want to pay taxes.”
More of Pelosi’s Accusations
Pelosi also accused populists of cruelty. They want to suppress “the vote in our country,” “take away … health care,” and let the fossil fuel industry “suffocate the airways,” she said.
This is not the first time Pelosi has expressed this attitude. During the fight over Obamacare, she said, “You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill … I don’t know if you have heard that it is a legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America … but we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it. Away from the fog of the controversy.”
Pelosi was, in effect, saying: “The arguments against Obamacare are just a distraction. And for those that oppose Obamacare, you can trust us to do what’s best for you because we are smarter and more moral.”
Biden Administration as Anointed
Most politicians, whatever their stripe, possess the Vision of the Anointed to some degree. But some are more possessed than others. From student loans to health insurance subsidies to massive spending bills, the Biden administration has shown no compunction about substituting its judgment for those of ordinary Americans. The problem is that the Anointed like Biden and Pelosi do not suffer the direct consequences of their decisions. Those tend to fall on the people for whom the decisions are being made.
Biden’s Green New Deal is perhaps the harshest example of that. Part of Biden’s green agenda included shutting down new oil drilling on federal land. Taxpayers have picked up the tab for the higher gasoline prices and heating costs required to keep the presidential limousine moving and the White House cozy in the winter. Those same taxpayers will have to fund their higher gas prices and heating bills on their own.
Adults are best suited to make their own decisions. They pay the cost if they are wrong, and that gives them much greater incentive to make good decisions than the Anointed. Come November, it is crucial to remember that many politicians have no respect for that.
President Biden may not appear on the ballot in Ohio come Election Day, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose warned Tuesday. The Ohio Democratic Party has received weeks of warnings from both LaRose’s office and the state legislature saying that Biden is on track to miss the state’s deadline for filing as a candidate. LaRose, a Republican, says the Democratic Party has yet to offer a solution that fits with existing law.
Biden’s problems arise from Ohio’s requirement that parties certify their presidential candidates at least 90 days before Election Day. The Democratic Party won’t certify Biden until its national convention in Wisconsin, which is scheduled for Aug. 19, just 75 days before the election.
“I’ve said from here to Colorado that it’s in the best interest of voters to have a choice in the race for president. I’m also duty-bound to follow the law as Ohio’s chief elections officer,” LaRose said in a statement Tuesday.
President Biden may not appear on the ballot in Ohio come election day, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose warned Tuesday. (AP Newsroom)
“As it stands today, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee will not be on the Ohio ballot. That is not my choice. It’s due to a conflict in the law created by the party, and the party has so far offered no legally acceptable remedy,” he continued.
“The Ohio House speaker said today there won’t be a legislative solution, so I’ve sent a letter to Ohio Democrats’ chair seeking (again) a solution that upholds the law and respects the voters. I trust they’ll act quickly,” he finished.
Biden is on track to miss Ohio’s deadline for filing as an official presidential candidate. (Paul J. Richards/AFP via Getty Images)
Ohio Democrats had previously argued that Ohio could accept a “provisional certification” for Biden’s candidacy, but LaRose says state law makes no such allowances.
LaRose said either the state legislature needs to change the law to allow Biden’s certification, or the Democratic Party needs to change its plans. Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens, also a Republican, says lawmakers won’t bail Biden out.
“There’s just not the will to do that from the legislature,” Stephens told reporters.
Ohio Republicans say Biden must be on the ballot in November, but the Democratic Party must act to make it happen. (Michael M. Santiago/PoolAFP via Getty Images)
His Democratic counterpart, Ohio House Minority Leader Allison Russo, had the same message when speaking to reporters on Tuesday.
“We’ve seen the dysfunction here in this place,” she said. “And I think we’ve seen that folks have not been able to put aside partisanship and hyper-partisanship and infighting.… I think at this point, you’re probably going to see either, you know, some sort of inner party effects or perhaps court action.”
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, another Republican, assured voters that Biden would be on the ballot come November, arguing that if the legislature doesn’t act, then it’s “going to be done by the court.”
Ohio Democrats have yet to respond to LaRose’s Tuesday letter.
Anders Hagstrom is a reporter with Fox News Digital covering national politics and major breaking news events. Send tips to Anders.Hagstrom@Fox.com, or on Twitter: @Hagstrom_Anders.
Senate Republicans have united to block a bipartisan border security deal that many previously supported.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., plans to hold a vote on the bill Thursday but no Republican senators have expressed support, according to The Hill. The bill was endorsed by the National Border Council and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Schumer’s plan was a gimmick and he told President Joe Biden the GOP would not vote for it. McConnell previously called the bill a “huge success,” according to the report.
“I said to him,” McConnell told The Hill, “‘Mr. President, you caused this problem. There’s no legislation that allows the problem to be fixed. Why don’t you just allow what the previous administration was doing.'”
Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., who negotiated the bill and voted for it in February, said the vote was political theater designed to protect vulnerable Senate Democrats up for reelection.
“This is not trying to accomplish something,” Lankford said. “This is about messaging now. This is trying to poke Republicans rather than try to actually solve a problem.”
The legislation would reform the nation’s asylum laws and give the president power to shut down the border if migrant crossings average 4,000 per day.
Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Mitt Romney, R-Utah — who supported the bill in February — told The Hill they were undecided on how they would vote.
Schumer blamed Republicans of caving to former President Donald Trump, who opposed the bill, because Schumer claims Trump wants to make the border an issue going into the presidential election.
“This is the same bipartisan bill Republicans pushed for, then backed away when they got orders from President Trump [and] made an about-face turn and then voted no,” Schumer told The Hill.
Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif. said he would oppose the bill. Padilla also opposed the bill in February, because it did not offer any assistance to migrants.
The Trump Organization, whose logo is displayed here on a smartphone screen, enjoyed a 12.4-point increase in trust from independents in a new Axios/Harris Poll 100 that measured public perceptions of brands’ trust, character, ethics, and vision, among other things. (Photo illustration: Rafael Henrique/SOPA Images/Light Rocket/Getty Images)
Brands that tend to lean conservative experienced significant corporate reputational improvement because of increased trust from independents, as well as from some Democrats, according to a poll published on Wednesday.
Corporate reputations have plunged to their lowest point since before the COVID-19 pandemic, but conservative-leaning companies ranked among the highest, according to the Axios/Harris Poll 100.
Close to two-thirds of the 100 companies had decreased reputation scores, which reflect a brand’s trust, character, ethics, vision, citizenship, growth, and products and services, while three of the 15 companies that rose over half a point were Hobby Lobby, the Trump Organization, and Fox Corp., according to Axios.
“Many independents, and even some Democrats, in this year’s survey are drifting rightward, which accounts for the boost in reputations of many of the more traditional or conservatively-leaning companies,” Harris Poll CEO John Gerzema told Axios. “There seems to be a move to the center on attitudes toward companies and their role in society. I feel this could be an important finding because swing voters are going to determine the outcome of the election, and as of yet are hard to pin down.”
The Trump Organization saw a 12.4-point increase in trust from independents, while Hobby Lobby experienced an eight-point rise in trust among Democrats, according to Axios. A greater number of independents and Democrats believe Fox Corp. and Hobby Lobby align with their values.
🚨🚨Important Exclusive Data – Companies ride a red wave ahead of election – backlash against cultural activism https://t.co/ZHWhv78PY7
Americans of all political backgrounds appear to be significantly skeptical of left-wing corporate agendas, such as diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), according to the poll. Bud Light’s parent company, Anheuser-Busch, which briefly collaborated with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in 2023, experienced a six-point drop, while Target’s reputation declined after backlash to selling an LGBT “Pride” collection.
Many corporations are cutting back on or rebranding their DEI initiatives to evade scrutiny as conservatives have pushed back on these programs with legal efforts. Their concern about legal scrutiny ratcheted up after the Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina in June 2023.
The rankings were based on a survey of 16,500 Americans, which was conducted between March 6 and 18.
The Trump Organization, Hobby Lobby, and Fox Corp. did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Today I will have the pleasure of participating in a debate titled Civil Disagreements: Presidential Self Pardons. I will be debating Professor Brian Kalt, who believes that the presidents do not have the authority to pardon themselves. I will be taking the opposing position. The debate will be held entirely online. The debate is sponsored by Reform for Illinois, the American Bar Association, the Chicago Chapter of the American Constitution Society, and the Chicago Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society
I have long maintained that presidents do have the authority to grant self-pardons. That does not mean that I approve of the practice as a policy matter, but the question, in my view, rests with a president in using the authority granted under Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, which defines the pardon power as allowing a president to “grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”
I value the effort of these two legal groups to foster civil and substantive dialogue on these questions and look forward to the debate with Professor Kalt.
The debate will begin at 1pm (ET) and participants can register here.
In another victory for the mobocracy, Dickinson College canceled the commencement address of CNN host Michael Smerconish after liberal and pro-Palestinian students objected. The school decided to forego any speaker rather than risk the ire of radical students and groups. The greatest loss was not to Smerconish but to the college and the students. These graduates could have heard from one of the brightest legal minds in media and a person who has been a powerful and unflagging champion of free speech.
The decision was an unparalleled act of cowardice by President John Jones, who cited “overwhelming opposition” to Smerconish in a recent statement. Somehow Jones viewed yielding to the mob to be a virtuous act and announced that “with the support of our Board of Trustees, I have decided to rescind the honorary degree and invitation to speak at Commencement.”
That certainly offered clarity to the question and the solution: Jones and the board should resign.
The very touchstone of higher education is a diversity of viewpoints. We have seen a growing orthodoxy on our campuses with little tolerance for dissenting views, particularly when it comes to conservative or libertarian voices. That is most evident in the selection of commencement speakers. It is now routine to invite far left commencement speakers, including at my own university. Speakers like MSNBC host Jen Psaki this year at GW are treated as ideal choices while the selection of more moderate or conservative speakers would trigger protests and cancel campaigns.
Commencements are now an extension of echo chambers on our campuses where faculties have largely purged conservatives from their ranks.
We previously discussed how surveys at universities show a virtual purging of conservative and Republican faculty members. For example, last year, the Harvard Crimson noted that the university had virtually eliminated Republicans from most departments but that the lack of diversity was not a problem. Now, a new survey conducted by the Harvard Crimson shows that more than three-quarters of Harvard Arts and Sciences and School of Engineering and Applied Sciences faculty respondents identify as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 2.5% identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
Likewise, a study by Georgetown University’s Kevin Tobia and MIT’s Eric Martinez found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools. Notably, a 2017 study found 15 percent of faculties were conservative. Another study found that 33 out of 65 departments lacked a single conservative faculty member.
Compare that to a recent Gallup poll stating, “roughly equal proportions of U.S. adults identified as conservative (36%) and moderate (35%) in Gallup polling throughout 2022, while about a quarter identified as liberal (26%).”
Targeting Smerconish is particularly maddening. I have known Michael for many years, and I hold him in the highest respect. He remains one of the most intelligent and principled figures in the media. He is also one of the most consistent and committed figures in the media in his defense of the rule of law and constitutional values.
Critics have focused on excerpts from the journalist’s 2004 book “Flying Blind: How Political Correctness Continues to Compromise Airline Safety Post 9/11.” They charge that the book supports “racial profiling.” The truth is that Smerconish is one of the most outspoken civil libertarians in the country and has routinely defended groups stereotyped or targeted simply for their race or national origin.
In a statement on his website, Smerconish explained how his writings have been “grossly distorted.” He added how he wished Jones would have done “the honorable thing” and called to “explain his inability to control the unjustified campus sentiment.”
He is certainly correct, but such integrity is increasingly rare in higher education where administrators and educators have remained silent as their colleagues are targeted, investigated, and sometimes fired for their views. Most Dickinson College professors have remained silent or voiced support for the cancelation in the wake of this decision.
Jones and the Dickinson board took the path of least resistance when confronted by the academic mob. In doing so, they have abandoned the core values that define higher education. This act of surrender is particularly glaring at a college founded in 1783 by the great Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and champion of individual rights.
It is named for John Dickinson, another founding father who refused to sign the Declaration on Independence in seeking a peaceful resolution with Great Britain. Dickinson was a person of tremendous courage and principle despite his false depiction in the musical 1776.
Dickinson stood up to tremendous pressures in maintaining his position and wrote “My conduct this day, I expect will give the finishing blow to my once too great and, my integrity considered, now too diminished popularity.” Yet, he would enlist with the patriots and fight in the war for independence. He was only one of two Framers to do so. Even his political adversary John Adams praised him for his stalwart commitment to principle and refusal to yield to pressure.
Dickinson is a worthy model for those who believe in free speech and the need to protect a diversity of viewpoints. Indeed, he was an early target of a cancel campaign by those who refused to understand the reason for his opposition to the declaration. Now, the college named for Dickinson has become the very thing that he fought to resist in his life.
Michael Smerconish will remain a voice for tolerance and free speech. He is the very embodiment of the ideals that led to the establishment of Dickinson College.
Top Stories • Biden Admin Files Charges Against More Pro-Life Americans After Putting a Dozen People in Prison • Trump Confirms He Won’t Restrict Contraception, Will “Never Advocate Restrictions on Birth Control” • Biden Admin Undercounted Number of Babies Killed in Abortions on Military Bases • CVS Pharmacy Forced to Settle After Firing Christian Nurse for Being Pro-Life
More Pro-Life News • Pro-Life Women Denied Crucial Medical Care After Biden Puts Them in Prison • Pearl Jam Singer Eddie Vedder Trashes Harrison Butker: “He’s a F—— P—-“ • Florida Abortion Businesses Caught Paying Women to Seek Out-Of-State Abortions • Pro-Life MP Who Faces “Hate Speech” Charges for Quoting Bible Defends Herself in Court • Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories
Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2024 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Republican legislators on the State Emblems Redesign Commission say they will author a minority report criticizing the process for being too short and not including enough public input.
New flag set to fly across Minnesota
Republican legislators on the State Emblems Redesign Commission say they will author a minority report criticizing the process for being too short and not including enough public input.
Thirteen residents of Minnesota appointed to redesign the state’s flag voted to approve a final rendition on Tuesday of what is likely to begin flying across the state in May. But even as they did, two Republican legislators who sit on the committee as non-voting members said they plan to issue a minority report that reflects their opinion that the process was rushed and did not include enough public input.
The State Emblems Redesign Commission made a relatively significant modification to the submission they chose last week from among three finalists. That winning submission was designed by Andrew Prekker, a 24-year-old designer from Luverne, Minn. Prekker is a recent alumnus of Minnesota West Community and Technical College, the same school in Worthington where commission vice chair Anita Gaul (a former DFL candidate for state senate) is an instructor. Prekker’s design was chosen following a winnowing process of more than 2,000 entries submitted to the commission in October. READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
In a growing environment of left-wing activism in schools, especially related to LGBT ideology, parents who have not been able to influence curriculum have had the option of opting their kids out of classes. Not any longer, at least according to a federal appeals court in a Maryland case of three families suing for the right to religious freedom for their elementary school-aged children in public schools.
In August of 2023, three families — one Muslim, one Christian, and one Jewish — brought a case against the Montgomery County Board of Education for a recent policy change removing the opt-out option for curriculum. Previously, parents received advanced notice of materials that would be read to their children and could opt out. The school board announced that parents would no longer receive advanced notice of materials, and they could no longer opt out of readings or lessons.
A year prior, according to the case, “In the spring of 2022, the School Board had determined that the books in its English language arts curriculum were not sufficiently representative because they did not include LGBTQ characters.” Maryland law requires schools to give parents the opportunity “to view instructional materials to be used in the teaching of family life and human sexuality objectives.” The school board also has an opt-out policy for religious exemptions in place.
However, there is a clause that states that “if such requests become too frequent or too burdensome, the school may refuse to accommodate the requests. Schools are not required to alter fundamentally the educational program or create a separate educational program or a separate course to accommodate a student’s religious practice or belief.” Deciding that LGBT inclusion in the curriculum was fundamental to the educational program and the requests were too burdensome, the school board simply declared parents could not opt out of LGBT content any longer.
Judge’s Ruling
Last week, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman dismissed the parents’ concerns and noted that every court that has reviewed similar mandatory public-school curricula has found that “mere exposure in public school to ideas that contradict religious beliefs does not burden the religious exercise of students or parents.”
She insisted, “The parents still may instruct their children on their religious beliefs regarding sexuality, marriage, and gender, and each family may place contrary views in its religious context.”
“No government action prevents the parents from freely discussing the topics raised in the storybooks with their children or teaching their children as they wish,” Boardman wrote in Thursday’s order.
The decision was upheld by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Their reasoning was that the parents could not demonstrate how the LGBT-themed books would be used in the classroom and therefore could not determine if they would infringe on their beliefs.
Contrary to the First Amendment
Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, argued, “That runs contrary to the First Amendment, Maryland law, the School Board’s own policies, and basic human decency.”
“Parents should have the right to receive notice and opt their children out of classroom material that violates their faith,” he added.
In contrast to the Fourth Circuit’s reasoning, reviewing the Montgomery County Public Schools website makes it clear why these books are in the classroom. The website has a dedicated LGBT section stating, “We have welcoming, affirming schools, classrooms, teams, and clubs. We value all of our children, youth, teachers, staff, and parents.” The section provides an extensive list of LGBT content, resources, and “How to” guides for students, staff, and parents.
Students are provided a Coming Out as YOU! guide that instructs them on how to come out, including a “safety plan,” which tells the students to make sure they have a safe place outside their home to stay; someone, seemingly besides their parents, that they can trust; and to “Consider letting a friend know that you’re planning on coming out and if you don’t text them by a certain time you might need help because your safety might be in danger.” The guide tells students they should decide what they identify as daily, which can change day by day.
The school’s Culturally Responsive Supplemental Elementary ELA Collection is the biggest concern point for parents, as it details the content students will be provided. Students grades kindergarten to second grade are provided more than eight separate LGBT titles, half of which are trans-focused. One book, titled Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope, states in its description, “Penelope knows that he’s a boy. (And a ninja.) The problem is getting everyone else to realize it.”
Three books focus on a character named Max, a transgender-identifying elementary school-aged student who dedicates time to educating friends, teachers, and parents about what being transgender means. Several books are focused on same-sex relationships: one about a prince and a knight who fall in love, one about a child’s gay uncle getting married, and a book for 4- to 8-year-olds titled Love, Violet, about an elementary-aged girl who falls in love with another girl.
Not being subtle, another title for this age group is IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All, a book on intersectional feminism that teaches kids how to be activists, and a book titled Let’s Eat Bugs! for fifth graders provides recipes on eating insects. The school also offers an LGBT club for elementary school students.
The Obvious Purpose
The school system’s agenda is pretty obvious.
Is it any wonder that religious parents would be concerned about their children — again, kindergarten to fifth grade — being exposed to extreme LGBT ideology? Critics pretend kids are just being told stories that include LGBT characters and that only bigots would oppose kids learning about different types of people. The first judge dismissed the parents saying they “failed to show that the lack of an opt-out policy would result in the ‘indoctrination of their children’ or ‘coerce their children to violate or change their religious beliefs.’”
However, these are books designed to teach kids about being LGBT themselves, not simply about LGBT experiences, history, or health education. This is an environment where kids are heavily encouraged to explore sexuality and gender ideology, with expansive resources, instruction guides, and clubs. Of course, religious parents would consider this to be an invasive level of activism and indoctrination.
It should be obvious to anyone that forcing parents to accept this instruction for their children violates their religious freedom, and the obnoxious dismissal from a judge that parents can simply undo whatever their kids learn in school further mocks these sacred rights. Left-wing, LGBT activists simply want full control over children’s education and have constructed a system that not only excludes parents but intentionally isolates their children from them in school.
LGBT activists believe they know best for all students, and that all students need to learn about LGBT ideology in an open, proactive, and affirming way, and if parents oppose this instruction, they don’t need to know about it, or worse, have no power to stop it. Unfortunately, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals just strengthened this abuse of power by school systems, degrading parental rights and religious freedom even further.
Chad Felix Greene is a senior contributor to The Federalist. He is the author of “Surviving Gender: My Journey Through Gender Dysphoria,” and is a social writer focusing on truth in media, conservative ideas and goals, and true equality under the law. You can follow him on Twitter @chadfelixg.
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.