Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Democrats’

Democrats Pushing Transgenderism In Schools Are Fully Responsible For Bathroom Sexual Assaults


Reported By Terry Schilling | OCTOBER 19, 2021

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/democrats-pushing-transgenderism-in-schools-are-fully-responsible-for-bathroom-sexual-assaults-2655321695.html/

It’s a phone call every parent dreads receiving. Earlier this year, Virginia father Scott Smith was notified his 15-year-old daughter had been sexually assaulted. While that news was horrific, little did Smith know this would just be the start of a nightmarish series of events in which he would end up being cast as the villain. He can thank Democrats for enabling the whole outrageous affair.

The saga began back on May 28 at Loudoun County’s Stone Bridge High School, the sheriff’s office confirmed, where Smith was summoned by school officials. Smith told The Daily Wire he learned his daughter had allegedly been assaulted in a girls’ restroom by a boy wearing a skirt. (According to some reports, the boy identifies as “gender-fluid.”) Smith said school officials told him they intended to handle the incident in-house, instead of through the police and courts. After Smith became understandably upset at this callous and wholly improper decision not to involve law enforcement, he says school officials calls the police on him.

Fortunately, Smith was not arrested that day, but the story did not end there. A month later, he attended a Loudoun County School Board meeting to protest a proposed policy that would, among other things, allow students to access whatever restroom or locker room corresponds with their self-identified sex.

Concerned parents argued the policy would take privacy and safety from girls. LCPS Superintendent Scott Ziegler responded, “To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms.” Smith couldn’t believe his ears. Later, a conversation between a left-leaning parent and Smith grew heated when the other parent implied Smith was lying about his daughter. This time, police did arrest him and video of the incident went viral. Overnight, Smith became the poster boy of supposedly dangerous parents. The National School Boards Association even specifically pointed to him in the now-infamous letter to the Biden administration, arguing that distraught parents ought to be seen as “domestic terrorists.”

The full truth about what had happened to Smith’s daughter did not become public until this past week: The sexual assault committed against her was no anomaly. Not only that, it was the direct result of policies promoted and advanced by Democrats who are willing to sacrifice the bodies, minds, and souls of innocent children to protect leftist gender ideology from criticism.

The prime culprits of the Smith family’s tragedy are dictates like Virginia’s Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools.” Such dictates — disarmingly labeled “policies” — elevate subjective “gender identity” over sex, allowing male students to participate in girls’ sports, lodge with girls on overnight school trips, and, yes, access girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms.

This is far from a new project. Democrats have been attempting to impose their gender insanity on the rest of the country since at least the Obama administration, when the U.S. Department of Education threatened schools with a loss of federal funding if they did not implement such policies. Unfortunately, weak Republican governors like South Dakota’s Kristi Noem have also been complicit through their refusal to meaningfully resist this agenda.

Concerned parents and others have fought this effort, arguing these changes would put girls in particular at risk to potential predators. Sespite Democrats’ best attempts at gaslighting, this is exactly what’s happened, and not just in Virginia. In November 2017, a five-year-old girl in Georgia was allegedly sexually assaulted in her school bathroom after the school introduced a new transgender policy. Her case, Thomas v. City Schools of Decatur et al, is still making its way through the state’s courts.

Still, Democrats and their left-wing allies refuse to even acknowledge this outcome of their transgender policies. After claiming there had been no assault in a school restroom, the Loudoun County School Board passed its new transgender policy in August. The alleged perpetrator was reportedly transferred to a different high school where, earlier this month, he was reportedly charged with sexually assaulting yet another girl. Still, the corporate media blackout of the story persists, while the Biden administration and Democrat politicians — and their henchmen in Big Tech and the press — continue to vilify ordinary parents like Smith.

Democrats’ true priorities are clear. Despite past “believe all women” rhetoric, their party’s ideology about sex has driven them to summarily toss aside the safety of girls in their campaign to normalize crazed gender ideology. As for the fundamental right of parents to choose how their children are raised, Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe last month spelled out where he and his Democrat comrades stand: “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

To stop the left’s nefarious agenda, parents and pro-family Americans must become politically engaged and toss out bad elected officials. If this doesn’t happen soon, Scott Smith’s nightmare could be endured by many others around the country.

Terry Schilling is the executive director at American Principles Project.

Progressive pro-life group ready to wage battle with Biden, Democrat Party to save lives


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter | Tuesday, October 05, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/progressive-pro-life-group-ready-to-wage-battle-with-biden-to-save-lives.html/

PAAU
Progressive activists rally outside the United States Supreme Court to celebrate the launch of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, Oct. 1, 2021. | Patrick Marsh

WASHINGTON — A pro-life activist has launched a new organization seeking to “reclaim progressivism for life” as the abortion movement continues to hold immense power and influence in the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. 

Terrisa Bukovinac, the former president of Democrats for Life of America who also serves as founder and president of Pro-Life San Francisco, launched the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, also known by its acronym PAAU, on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court Friday night. The event took place the evening before pro-abortion protesters descended on the District of Columbia and cities across the country for the far-Left Women’s March.

Bukovinac addressed a crowd of dozens of pro-life activists, most of whom identified as Democrats and progressives, though conservative pro-lifers were also at the event. She made the case that contrary to what abortion activists claim, the pro-life position aligns with other priorities that progressives hold near and dear to their hearts.

“To be progressive, you must stand with the oppressed, never the oppressor. To be progressive, you must be in solidarity with low-income people and trust that they know their own needs. And to be progressive, you must stick up for the marginalized. But the abortion industrial complex twists all of that on its head,” she said. 

“They’ll tell you that to be progressive, you must advocate for mass acts of violence against children in the womb who are utterly incapable of defending themselves,” Bukovinac added. “They’ll tell you that to be progressive, you must ignore the voices of low-income people who are more anti-abortion than the wealthy by huge margins. If it were up to those who make less than $40,000 a year, Roe v. Wade would be in the ash heap of history.’ 

“In this twisted version of progressivism, it’s the rich who know best,” she continued. “And they’ll tell you that to be progressive, you cannot, under any circumstances, advocate for the most … marginalized among us.” 

Bukovinac also accused corporate America of engaging in pro-abortion activism in an effort to advance their economic self-interests. 

“When I see giant corporations signing onto pro-choice letters, I have to wonder, what are their parental leave policies really like? How much are they counting on abortion to save them a buck and pad their bottom line?” she asked. 

“Abortion is not progress,” she asserted. “Abortion is a regress to the pseudo-morality of might makes right and as progressives, we will not stand for it.”

“We are reclaiming progressivism for life,” Bukovinac declared. 

Terrisa Bukovinac
Terrisa Bukovinac, the founder of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, speaks outside the United States Supreme Court to announce the launch of her new organization, Oct. 1, 2021. | Patrick Marsh

The launch of PAAU followed by the Women’s March on Saturday come as the implementation of a pro-life law in Texas that bans abortions after a baby’s heartbeat can be detected is spurring outrage in progressive circles. The Supreme Court declined the request of abortion providers to block the law, which has now been in effect for over a month. The justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on Dec. 1. In this case, the court will rule on the constitutionality of Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban. A ruling in favor of the state of Mississippi, which is seeking to uphold the ban, would significantly weaken the precedent set by the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade and affirmed by the 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey. A decision is expected sometime next year, most likely by the end of June 2022. In the aforementioned cases, the court determined that states cannot prohibit abortions before the point of viability, where the unborn baby can survive outside the womb. Courts at all levels have frequently used those Supreme Court decisions when justifying the invalidation of states’ pro-life laws regulating abortions or implementing health and safety standards at abortion clinics. 

CP interviewed some of the PAAU launch attendees to ask why they felt called to attend the rally and to share their views on the pro-life movement in the U.S. Michael New, a research associate at the Catholic University of America and a scholar at the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, spoke at a Democrats for Life of America rally earlier this year that Bukovinac also attended. He went to the launch of PAAU to show solidarity with Bukovinac’s efforts.

PAAU group photo
Pro-life activists on both sides of the aisle gather in front of the United States Supreme Court to celebrate the launch of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, Oct. 1, 2021. | Patrick Marsh

“I think what she’s doing is very important. I think the pro-life movement needs to leave no stone unturned. I think that there are a lot of people out there who are politically liberal, who are pro-life, and I think her efforts to amplify and highlight … those voices is a great project and I’m happy to support her.” 

Caroline Smith of Grand Rapids, Michigan, a pro-life Democrat who works with the group Protect Life Michigan, told CP that “it’s important to show the world that being pro-life is not equal to and always just being conservative. I think it’s important to show that there’s a lot of diversity in the pro-life movement and we need to acknowledge that and be able to accept everybody who believes abortion is wrong.” 

Characterizing abortion as “the most important issue of our day,” Smith reflected on the “crucial moment” the pro-life movement finds itself in: “I’m feeling excited but also … nervous because I know that there’s going to be a lot of work to be done. Whatever happens next, we’ve got to keep pushing and fighting for the unborn.” 

Smith briefly spoke at the event, detailing how she “drove over 11 hours” to take advantage of the “opportunity to expand the pro-life movement” and “make some noise for the unborn.”

Fr. Frank Pavone, director of Priests for Life, added: “I have, for a long time, stood side-by-side with people who are of different political persuasions, religious persuasions … and all kinds of philosophical persuasions to stand against the killing of babies because I’m convinced … one criterion alone is needed to be pro-life and that is to be alive.” 

Pavone, who traveled to the nation’s capital from Florida, shared his desire to “support any of the efforts in the pro-life movement to show … how diverse it is.” During his speech, Pavone slammed President Joe Biden as “the most pro-abortion president ever” and “a sign of the problem that PAAU is proudly standing against.” He also accused Democratic leaders of having “abandoned the people that they claim to represent on this issue.” 

Braedon Eckert from Indiana, one of many young activists who spoke before the crowd, told CP it was important for him to attend the event as a self-described pro-life feminist and someone who believes in “the right to life from conception until natural death.” Speaking about the state of the pro-life movement, Eckert contended that “the pro-life movement is … almost like a cup of tea. It’s like brewing right now and we’re ready. … We’re just waiting for that moment when we just know it’s time to take action. We are taking action.” Eckert characterized the national Democratic Party’s overwhelming pro-abortion bent as an example of how members of the party “don’t even stand for their own Democratic views.”  Maintaining that “every party does something to violate the right to life,” he contended that “both the Republican and the Democratic Party violate human beings in some way.” 

“[For] the Republican Party, it’s the dehumanization of immigrants in … some cases. [For] the Democratic Party, it’s abortion.”

Bukovinac also spoke with CP, elaborating on what motivated her to start the new organization and shared her thoughts about the state of the pro-life movement: “Pro-abortion Democrats control the presidency, the Senate and the House, and I felt like it’s the right time that we … have lost every Democratic pro-life member of Congress and that we need real direct action in this movement on the Left to address this extremism.” 

“We’re in a position of strength,” she added, expressing optimism about the pro-life movement. “We’ve known all along that the abortion industry was going to come after us once they felt truly threatened. I think that we’re seeing that happen. But what we’re seeing in the stats is that people are just as anti-abortion now as they were before the Texas law and that they will continue to be anti-abortion.”

“PAAU is coming for the Biden-Harris administration and those that enable that kind of discrimination,” she warned. “This discrimination is lethal for a million human children every year and we recognize that the issue is between the Democratic establishment and the abortion industry, and our intention is to break that relationship.” 

The relationship between the Democratic establishment and the abortion industry, specifically abortion provider Planned Parenthood, was a major focus of Bukovinac’s remarks. She vowed that “Wherever you find fake progressivism bought with blood money, we will be there and we will be loud. It is time for a progressive anti-abortion uprising!”  

“People matter more than profit!” Bukovinac exclaimed. “Human lives matter more than money. That is the heart of progressivism.”

Against the backdrop of the sun disappearing below the horizon, Bukovinac remarked that “the sun is setting on the American abortion industrial complex and the world is watching.” She assured the crowd that “PAAU is taking our message to every blue city in America, every Democratic leader in Congress and to the Biden-Harris administration and ultimately, to the Democratic National Convention.” 

Randall Terry, founder of the pro-life group Operation Rescue, who also spoke at the event, had a few choice words for Planned Parenthood. After telling the crowd to “have a reaction that is equal to the crime,” he insisted that “you must set out to create social tension.”

Pointing to Martin Luther King’s “Letter from the Birmingham Jail” as a source of inspiration, Terry recalled that he, himself, spent time in jail because he “created the social tension that helped give birth to a revitalized pro-life movement that helped bring about political change that helped give birth to crisis pregnancy centers.”

Lamenting that “we still have not prevailed,” he declared: “I do not want a place at the table with Planned Parenthood. I want to take their table and turn it into firewood.”

The firewood reference caused the crowd to erupt into applause. Terry doubled down on his remarks, restating his desire for “total, unequivocal victory.” He stressed that “if abortion really is murder, if it really is the destruction of an innocent human life, if someone was going to be killed standing right next to you, you wouldn’t say ‘Oh wow, can we dialogue about this?’” Terry suggested that rather than engage in dialogue in such a scenario, it would make more sense to “scream bloody murder.”

Another speaker, Catherine Glenn Foster, the president and CEO of Americans United for Life, cited the formation of PAAU as evidence that “we are coming together in solidarity to end legalized abortion.”

“We are coming together to make the Congress and the court stand for life,” she continued. “We are coming together to end a discriminatory, ageist, ableist, racist, sexist regime that tells us that for us to be equal in society, that we have to resort to legalized abortion, to killing our own children.” 

Echoing Foster’s rhetoric about the pro-abortion narrative, Bukovinac emphasized that her organization was “about speaking truth to power, not destroying the powerless” and “about investing in families and children and not telling women and people who can become pregnant that they have to kill their babies to succeed in a cis-man’s world.”

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

Democrats’ $3.5T spending bill creates ‘harmful penalties for marriage,’ Republicans argue


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter | Friday, October 01, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/budget-bill-creates-harmful-penalties-for-marriage-republicans.html/

capitol building
U.S. Capitol | Unsplash/Joshua Sukoff

Republican senators warned this week that the U.S. House of Representatives’ $3.5 trillion budget bill championed by congressional Democrats creates “harmful penalties for marriage” that will make families more dependent on the federal government.

In a Thursday letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, 35 Republican senators, led by Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, expressed their concerns about the package.

“We were disappointed to learn that in some instances the House of Representatives’ reconciliation bill creates harmful penalties for marriage,” they wrote. “Discouraging marriage is not in our country’s best interest and sends the wrong message to our families.”

In August, the House passed a $3.5 trillion budget resolution that expands social safety net programs, including childcare, free community college, paid leave and programs that combat climate change. Meanwhile, the Senate passed a $1.2 trillion infrastructure package. On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., delayed voting on the Senate’s $1.2 trillion even though moderates sought a vote. President Joe Biden signed a continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown and give Congress nine more weeks to negotiate 2022 appropriations bills. 

The Republican senators defined a marriage penalty as “when a household’s overall tax bill increases due to a couple marrying and filing taxes jointly.” They also mentioned that federal programs such as Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Section 8 housing reduce or eliminate benefits when a couple gets married. 

“Federal policy should be designed to foster strong marriages, which are the foundation of strong families and strong communities,” the letter added. “Unfortunately, despite its original rollout as part of the ‘American Families Plan,’ the current draft of the reconciliation bill takes an existing marriage penalty in the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and makes it significantly worse.”

The senators provided an example of how the reconciliation bill penalizes married couples.

“For example, a couple in 2019 with two children where one parent earns $12,000 and the other $30,000 could pay $1,578 more in taxes — or nearly 4% of their yearly earnings,” the senators argued. 

“The reconciliation bill could make the same family significantly worse off. It could nearly double the marriage penalty, costing the same parents $2,713 if they choose to marry.” 

The lawmakers concluded that because “marriage is a vital social good,” it is “misguided and unfair for the government to build bigger barriers for couples to marry.” 

The letter comes as the marriage rate in the United States has hit a new low. According to the Institute for Family Studies, 33 out of every 1,000 unmarried adults in 2019 got married. By contrast, that figure stood at 35 out of 1,000 in 2010 and a much higher 86 per 1,000 in 1970.

Republicans have consistently argued that federal programs have had an impact on the marriage rate. Last year, Republicans on the U.S. Senate Joint Economic Committee published a report titled “The Demise of the Happy Two-Parent Home,” which attributes the decline in marriages to the increased availability and use of federal welfare programs.

“Public ‘anti-poverty’ programs often exacerbated the problem of family instability by making single parenthood a more viable option and by discouraging marriage among those receiving benefits,” the report stated. “A safety net marginally reduces the costs of single parenthood, nonmarital childbearing, and divorce. It also can create a significant tax on marriage because the addition of a spouse with income typically reduces safety net benefits, and if he has only modest earnings or unsteady employment, the trade-off may not be worthwhile.” 

The report argued that through the safety net, “a single mother can achieve about two-thirds of the standard of living she could get from marrying a sole breadwinner at that compensation level.”

“The safety net would put her about one-third higher, with no additional income, than the 10th percentile of male compensation,” the report reads. 

Additionally, the report explained that “children raised by married parents do better on an array of outcomes.” Specifically, they have “stronger relationships with their parents, particularly with their fathers,” are “much less likely to experience physical, emotional, or sexual abuse” or “engage in delinquent behavior,” have “better health … and exhibit less aggression.”

Increased educational attainment and higher wages as adults, and a lower likelihood of living in poverty were also cited as benefits enjoyed by children of married couples.

The report provided empirical evidence attempting to demonstrate that the expansion of the social safety net in the 1960s led to a drop in the number of married people and the number of children born to unwed parents. Data found that the share of married American women dropped from 71% in 1962 to 42% in 2019. The percentage of children born to unmarried mothers rose from 5% in 1960 to 40% in 2019.

While the share of American children living in two-parent households has declined dramatically since the 1960s, one recent study from the Institute for Family Studies showed that the phenomenon of increased illegitimacy may have begun to reverse itself. The study found that in 2020, 70.4% of children under 18 lived with both parents, a slight increase from 69.1% in 2000 and 69.4% in 2010. At the same time, the percentage of American children residing in two-parent households remains far below the 87.7% recorded in 1960.

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

C. Douglas Golden Op-ed: The Truth About Democrats’ Tax Bill Revealed, Middle-Class Americans Are in for a Nasty Surprise


Commentary By C. Douglas Golden | September 29, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/truth-democrats-tax-bill-revealed-middle-class-americans-nasty-surprise/

President Joe Biden, left, meets with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and committee chairs to discuss the coronavirus relief legislation in the Oval Office at the White House on Feb. 5, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Stefani Reynolds – Pool / Getty Images)

President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda is supposed to tax the wealthy to help the middle class. If you don’t believe me, just ask Biden, who’s more than willing to tell you about it on his Twitter account.

To be fair, I’m assuming the messages aren’t written by Biden himself, a man who seems like his relationship with technology involves yelling at his phone, either asking Siri to find his slippers or telling Scotty to beam him up. However, whoever tweets for him stays on message when it comes to the president’s tax-and-spend plan.

“We’re going to pass a historic middle class tax cut — and we’ll do it by making those at the top pay their fair share,” one tweet from Sunday read. “I know the crowd on Park Ave might not like it, but it’s time we give people in towns like Scranton — the folks I grew up with — a break for a change.”

“From health care to child care, my Build Back Better Agenda will lower everyday costs for middle class Americans,” a tweet from this Monday read.

“I’m not looking to punish anyone, I just think it’s only fair that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share once again. Then, we’ll use that money to invest in the middle class,” a tweet from last week reads.

“For me it’s pretty simple: It’s about time working people got the tax breaks in this country,” a tweet from the day before that read. “That’s the Build Back Better Agenda.”

If someone has to repeat themselves this much, it’s usually because they’re lying — and, lo and behold, the Joint Committee on Taxation seems to have confirmed that.

According to a media release from the Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday, the Joint Committee on Taxation — a non-partisan congressional tax scorekeeper — found that almost every income level below the threshold the Biden administration said would be immune would take a hit.

Furthermore, the committee’s analysis found the vast majority of taxpayers would see no benefit from the plan in its current form.

According to the analysis, by the calendar year 2023, nearly 5 percent of those making between $40,000 and $50,000 would see a tax increase. Nine percent of those making between $50,000 and $75,000 would see an increase, 18 percent earning between $75,000 and $100,000 would see their taxes go up and 35 percent of those earning between $100,000 and $200,000 would be subject to a hike.

The media release also noted that the benefit most people see will pretty much be nil.

In 2023, two-thirds of all taxpayers won’t get see any kind of real benefit from the legislation, either seeing their tax bill changed by less than $100 or getting a tax increase.

By 2027, this number would balloon to 85.5 percent, with huge swaths of the middle class seeing a sizable tax increase; these numbers are projected to stay mostly steady until 2031.

Meanwhile, the Joint Committee on Taxation also found that hiking corporate taxes would hit middle-class Americans hard, too.

“Within 10 years of a corporate tax increase from 21 percent to 25 percent, 66.3 percent of the corporate tax burden would be borne by lower- and middle-income taxpayers with income well below $500,000,” an August media release from the Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee read.

“This statistic becomes only more striking in absolute number of taxpayers. Of the more than 172 million taxpayers who would bear the burden of the increased corporate tax rate, 98.4 percent, or about 169 million, have incomes under $500,000.”

Of course, the charge from the left would be that this doesn’t take into account what the spending these tax hikes will pay for is going to buy for the middle class. Beyond the fact these “investments” never bring back the kind of returns that are promised, Biden promised a middle-class tax cut. At least in the plan’s current form, it doesn’t look like it’ll end up delivering — no matter what the president says.

Do you know who did lower taxes on the middle class? Former President Donald Trump.

Joe Biden may have spent much of the campaign whining about Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which slashed taxes across the board. Most of the outrage focused on the fact he didn’t soak the rich: “Tax experts estimate that over the long run, 83% of Trump’s tax giveaway will flow to the top 1% of earners in this country,” Biden’s campaign website read.

And yet, in March of 2020, MarketWatch reported that “Americans paid almost $64 billion less in federal income taxes during the first year under the Republican tax overhaul signed into law in late 2017 by President Donald Trump, with some of the sharpest drops clustered among taxpayers earning between $25,000 and $100,000 a year, even as the overall number of refunds dropped during a turbulent tax season” in 2019.

Biden plans on taking that away. In return, he’s offered nothing of substance — except, as promised, he’s soaking the rich. And the upper-middle class. And some people in the middle class, too. But mainly the rich. See, priorities!

Biden may not be giving people in towns like Scranton — the folks he grew up with — a break the same way Trump did. But at least they can watch as his administration takes (and then squanders) Park Avenue’s money. He’ll be squandering Scranton’s money, too, but at least they get the joy of class-based schadenfreude out of the deal.

C. Douglas Golden, Contributor

C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he’s written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal since 2014.

@CillianZealFacebook

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Do the Vaccines Work or Don’t They? Democrats Need to Decide.


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 22, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/09/22/the-real-antivaxxers—p–n2596335/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Do the Vaccines Work or Don't They? Democrats Need to Decide.

Source: AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes

As with Robert Frost’s two paths diverging in the woods, the COVID pandemic has hit a fork in the road.

Back in 2020, when the virus first presented itself, anything could be forgiven. Trump could shoot hydroxychloroquine up his butt; Fauci could sneer at masks, then a week later demand that we wear 17 masks; governors could order everyone to stay home, while they cavorted at parties, restaurants, hair salons and protests.

The lies, hypocrisies and idiocies were all stuffed in our burlap bag, as we bounced along Coronavirus Road.

Then, in a triumph of Western medicine, A VACCINE APPEARED! That’s when our path in the woods diverged into the sane and insane.

It’s pretty clear now that the vaccines work, with few side effects — although our public health experts would really do us a solid if they’d stop lying about there being no side effects. At a minimum, the vaccines prevent serious illness and death. They’re even more effective than the flu vaccine, and that’s pretty good.

Between widespread natural infection — something else it would be nice if authorities would stop lying about — and mass vaccination, COVID IS NOW OVER. It wasn’t “the flu” in 2020, but it is in 2021.

Liberals sulked as people began getting vaccinated and living their lives again, but then seized on the delta variant to announce: Let’s lock down again!

The very people demanding that everyone get vaccinated are the same ones telling us vaccines don’t work all that well, so maybe we’d better just keep wearing masks, quarantining, working remotely and staying home from school.

Do the vaccines work or don’t they? If they work, we’ll thank you to stop bossing us around now.

Going further into crazy town, liberals decided to pretend that Anthony Fauci was not an escaped mental patient.

Our most visible “public health” authority continues to issue lunatic pronouncements like a third world despot: The vaccinated must wear masks! Children should be vaccinated! Even 2-year-olds need to be masked! Everybody has to get a third vaccine shot! (That last bright idea led a couple of experts from the Food and Drug Administration advisory panel to resign in protest, followed by the panel unanimously voting to recommend booster shots only in certain cases.)

Apart from just coming out and telling us he doesn’t believe the vaccines work, Fauci is telling us he doesn’t believe the vaccines work.

This is the nut, you will recall, who knowingly lied to the public at the outset of the pandemic for what he, Anthony Fauci, in his sole discretion, decided was a higher cause. Without a scintilla of scientific evidence one way or the other, he condescendingly announced that masks don’t work against COVID — simply for the greater good of preventing a mask shortage.

What if he considers it a greater good for Anthony Fauci to keep appearing on TV? Like an aging football star who dreams of being back in high school, Fauci longs to be in the spotlight.

Except we have vaccines now! So thanks, but we’ve heard enough from you, Fauci.

Also, we know things that we didn’t in 2020.

A Bridge Too Far

We now know, for example, that COVID is bad, but it’s not Ebola. Eighty-year-olds have survived it. Trump survived it. The 800-pound Chris Christie survived it. And that was before we had all the therapies we have now. Or, come to think of it, any idea what we were doing at all. (Remember the mad rush for ventilators?)

We know that cases are good; deaths are bad. The media frantically report “cases” only because their panic porn attracts readers, so who cares if it’s irrelevant?

As long as you don’t die, which would be bad, a COVID infection is nature’s vaccination shot! As multiple studies have shown, immunity from prior infection is stronger and more durable than that from vaccination.

Infections are especially good if you’re already vaccinated. Then you’ll have super-immunity. You won’t die of COVID — although you might die with COVID, especially if you’re old or sick or have just taken a massive dose of fentanyl.

Like George Floyd. Remember? He had COVID when he died. But unlike Floyd, the media will broadcast your death as a cautionary tale to again harangue us to wear masks and get vaccinated. How dare you not get a vaccine and put the vaccinated at risk!

But the vaccinated aren’t at risk. You know why? Because the vaccines work.

We also know that COVID poses virtually no risk to young people. We knew this early on, and for some reason ignored it, but by now the evidence is overwhelming.

Since COVID landed on our shores, 95% of dead the U.S. have been 50 or older. Nearly 80% of the dead were 65 or older — and not only are they heavily vaccinated, but they make up only 16% of the population. The 64.5% of the population under age 50 — in its entirety — has a 5% chance of dying from COVID.

Combine the minimal risk of death to young people — less than the flu during a normal flu season — with what we now know about the strong immunity from prior COVID infection, and, throughout 2020, we should have been putting little kids into giant, Japanese-size classrooms and encouraging young people to blow beer foam in one another’s faces, get drunk and make out with strangers. Our entire under-30 population would be immune.

Remember the college kid on spring break when COVID first hit the news in February 2020, who had his life destroyed for nonchalantly telling a TV interviewer, “If I get corona, I get corona”? If only we’d listened to him instead of Fauci!

Biden Promise Broken: Tax Hike on Mostly Middle, Lower Classes Would Fund $3.5T Spending Spree


Reported By Michael Austin  September 17, 2021 at 8:59am

During his campaign for the presidency, President Biden promised to not raise taxes on any Americans making less than $400,000 a year. If House Democrats are successful in passing their new tax proposal, that promise will soon be broken.

According to CNBC, the proposal is meant to pay for a healthy portion of their new $3.5 trillion spending plan, bringing in as much as $96 billion in revenue over the next decade. A plan summary released by Democrats reveals that part of the tax plan would target tobacco and nicotine products, including cigarettes, e-cigarettes, small cigars, smokeless tobacco and roll-your-own tobacco.

Multiple studies have shown that the majority of the users of these products are low-income Americans. For example, research from the Truth Initiative found that 72 percent of tobacco smokers come from low-income communities. Other peer-reviewed studies have found small cigar and roll-your-own tobacco consumers also tend to be disproportionately low-income. Among U.S. adults, even e-cigarettes, despite their relative novelty, were found to be used most often by those classified as either “poor” or “near poor,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Given these studies, it is safe to say that the majority of the $96 billion in revenue Democrats hope to take in will come from lower-income communities, not from those making over $400,000 a year, as Biden promised.

Even without the tobacco tax, however, many critics of the current administration have noted that Biden already subverted his promise by drastically raising the level of inflation, which American economist Milton Friedman famously described as “taxation without representation.” As noted by Andy Puzder of Real Clear Politics on Aug. 12, Biden and the Democrats’ willingness to “pour massive amounts of dollars into the economy” is drastically lowering the value of the American dollar. As the government inflates the economy by printing off more money, the average American’s savings become less and less valuable.

In order to combat this, Republican Reps. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma and Lloyd Smucker of Pennsylvania introduced amendments to the Democrats’ spending plan on Tuesday that would essentially block any new tax increases until inflation and unemployment returned to pre-pandemic levels.

“It’s not hard to understand that this is the wrong time for Democrats to shove one of the largest tax increases in American history on the American people that have not regained their strength from the brutal blow of COVID-19,” Hern said during the Tuesday hearing.

“Inflation is a tax on all Americans and it hurts working-class Americans the most.”

Democrats blocked the bills, meaning middle-class and lower-income Americans may soon be paying even more money to the federal government.

Michael Austin

Michael Austin joined The Western Journal as a staff reporter in 2020. Since then, he has authored hundreds of stories, including several original reports. He also co-hosts the outlet’s video podcast, “WJ Live.”

@mikeswriting

CA Recall Voter Says She and Other Republicans Showed Up at Polling Place, Were Told They Already Voted


Reported By Cameron Arcand | September 13, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/ca-recall-voter-says-republicans-showed-polling-place-told-already-voted/

Bureaucratic ignorance fuels the public’s institutional distrust, particularly when it comes to elections. Polls are open in California for voters to determine whether to recall Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, and residents are eagerly casting their ballots.

But some voters are worried that their votes will not be counted — including two women who went to vote in Woodland Hills, a suburb of Los Angeles. Estelle Bender, who lives in nearby West Hills, told KTLA-TV that she and others at the polling place were informed that they had already voted even though that had not.

Asked how shocked she was, the 88-year-old responded, “Very. I went to El Camino High School to vote, got there at 10:30, gave her this and she scanned it and said, ‘You voted.’ And I said, ‘No I haven’t.’ And she said, ‘This has been happening all morning.’

“The man next to me was arguing the same thing. So as I left, I did the provisional ballot.”

Bender said she “saw two women walking toward me as I left and I said, ‘Don’t be surprised if they tell you how they voted.’ And she said, ‘They’ve already done that.’”

She said she was “really angry” and suspicious that this issue was targeting Republicans.

“I asked the couple, the young women that I talked to and I said, ‘Are you by any chance Republicans?’ She said, ‘Yes,’ and I said, ‘Well so am I.’”

Another voter, Monica Almada, told KNBC-TV that she had the same issue when she tried to cast her ballot at the Disabled American Veterans 73 Vote Center in Woodland Hills.

“My confidence is not the same as it used to be about the voting system,” she told the outlet.

There is no empirical evidence to support that this technical error is targeted toward Republicans, but this incident certainly is raising alarm bells. In response to the KTLA report, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder released a statement.

“The voters who experienced this issue were offered and provided a provisional ballot- the failsafe option to ensure no one is turned away from voting,” it said.

If people are running into issues at their polling places, they should discuss it with the staffers there and then get in touch with their county’s registrar office.

It’s clear that situations like the one in Woodland Hills will only create more distrust in the American electoral process and could result in voters deciding to stay home. But these incidents should not deter anyone from casting their ballots in the California recall election.

Cameron Arcand, Contributor

Cameron Arcand is a political commentator based in Orange County, California. His “Young Not Stupid” column launched at The Western Journal in January 2021, making Cameron one of the youngest columnists for a national news outlet in the United States. He has appeared on One America News, and has been a Young America’s Foundation member since 2019.@cameron_arcand


The Chamberlain moment and Biden’s present leadership crisis

By Wallace B. Henley, Exclusive Columnist| Monday, August 23, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/the-chamberlain-moment-and-the-present-leadership-crisis.html/

Is the United States, in the wake of the Afghanistan crisis, in a “Chamberlain moment”?

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain read Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, and concluded that he had Hitler figured out. As Chamberlain stepped off his plane in Munich in 1938, he was certain he was going to make history by out-talking Hitler.

But it was Hitler who had sized up Neville Chamberlain. The Nazi dictator saw Chamberlain as a naïve man who somehow squeezed everything under his ever-present cozy umbrella. Hitler concluded he could promise Chamberlain anything, then do as he pleased.

So, Der Fuhrer promised not to invade more territory, Chamberlain, back home, conducted an airport press conference wherein he announced that he and Herr Hitler had negotiated “peace in our time.” But Hitler made Chamberlain look like a fool. Even as Chamberlain was proclaiming that he had tamed Hitler, Hitler’s armies were blitzing the Sudetenland.

Rather than a cheering Parliament, Chamberlain faced an angry, jeering House of Commons. Leopold Amery, of Chamberlain’s own party, rose, and, borrowing words from Oliver Cromwell in 1653 with regard to another matter, cried out to Chamberlain: “You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing … In the name of God, go!”

When 40 members of his party voted against Chamberlain, and another 60 abstained, Chamberlain knew he had no choice, and left the ornate chamber where the House of Commons met.

Three days later, King George VI named Winston Churchill as prime minister in that crucial age.

In 2014, I co-wrote a book, God and Churchill, with the late Jonathan Sandys, Sir Winston Churchill’s great-grandson. (Tyndale House, 2015) Watching Jonathan’s determined attitude, biting wit, quick comprehension, capacity for persuasive as well as inspiring speech, I could see characteristics that compelled King George to ask Sir Winston to lead the country through the war.

On that day in 1940, Churchill said to Walter Thompson, his bodyguard, “You know why I’ve been to Buckingham Palace.” Thompson nodded and told Churchill he knew the task ahead would be immense. “God alone knows how great it is,” replied Churchill.

Jonathan Sandys was not a professing Christian when he began research on his great-grandfather’s spirituality. But as Jonathan studied with an open mind be concluded that God had brought Sir Winston to the leadership of Great Britain and its allies to stop Hitler’s mad romp through civilization. Later, Jonathan was so energized by this new awareness of God’s hand in history through his great-grandfather that he asked for believer’s baptism, and I had the privilege of conducting that service in Houston.

Back in England, Jonathan visited Churchill’s official biographer, Sir Martin Gilbert. Gilbert encouraged Jonathan and told him there was much material that had never been explored. The more we worked on God and Churchill, the more Jonathan and I were in awe of the Lord of history.

In some ways, the task of national leadership is even greater now than Churchill’s era. The present hour demands the strongest and sharpest of leaders. The volatile enmities across the planet are much hotter even than that of Chamberlain’s and Churchill’s day. The weaponry available now are truly doomsday devices.

There is also a principle at stake here. Paul writes in 2 Thessalonians about an evil ruler — the antichrist — who will seek to bring global chaos so he can present himself as the only hope and acknowledged as the world’s leader. A key strategy in sparking and spreading the chaos is “lawlessness.” The only reason this madness has not already consumed the world is that there is a “restrainer” who holds it back (2 Thessalonians 2: 7).

Among other things, this illustrates the principle of hegemony in foreign relations. A “hegemon” is a group or geopolitical entity that has the strength to dominate others. One type of hegemonic nation is like that which Adolf Hitler sought to establish through his Third Reich: dominance for the sake of exploitation and destruction. The second type of hegemonic state is that which has the strength to restrain potential rogue nations.

I was a junior aide in the Nixon White House in the late Cold War period. The United States had been involved in Vietnam for a long time, and Nixon sought an end to that conflict. In 1972 Nixon was re-elected by a huge majority, sparking hope that he would have even greater strength to resolve the Vietnam problem. But then came the Watergate debacle and Nixon’s decision in 1974 to resign the presidency. There were many reasons why he felt it necessary to resign. However, Nixon revealed a compelling purpose in his resignation speech:

“In all the decisions I have made in my public life, I have always tried to do what was best for the Nation … In the past few days, however, it has become evident to me that I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that effort. As long as there was such a base, I felt strongly that it was necessary to see the constitutional process through to its conclusion, that to do otherwise would be unfaithful to the spirit of that deliberately difficult process and a dangerously destabilizing precedent for the future.”

Now, in 2021, the question is this: Has Joe Biden’s image been damaged so severely through the events that have occurred in Afghanistan that he has the credibility and ability to lead a powerful nation midst the chaos of our times?

As Parliament had to grapple with the Chamberlain leadership issue, so must Congress now confront the Biden leadership issue. The fate of the United States and perhaps even global security in a nuclear age may be at stake.

Wallace B. Henley’s fifty-year career has spanned newspaper journalism, government in both White House and Congress, the church, and academia. He is author or co-author of more than 20 books. He is a teaching pastor at Grace Church, the Woodlands, Texas. For media inquiries, contact:  ChristianPost@pinkston.co


Watch: Harris’ Face During Biden’s Afghanistan Presser Tells Us Everything We Need to Know About State of USA

 By Isa Cox  August 20, 2021 at 4:40pm

Earlier this week, as President Joe Biden’s administration scrambled to spin its disastrously botched withdrawal from Afghanistan following the fall of Kabul to Taliban forces, Vice President Kamala Harris was suspiciously absent from the public eye. Suddenly, the “Harris” part of “Biden-Harris” was nowhere to be found and poor old Joe was forced to face the nation alone.

They apparently managed to briefly get Harris out of hiding on Friday, however, and she appeared loyally by Biden’s side as he addressed the nation for a second time on the crisis in Afghanistan and vowed to evacuate the untold number of Americans who are still stranded in the now-fallen nation. As it turns out, the administration may have done better to just let Harris remain in hiding.

Twitter users were quick to notice that while they may have convinced her to show her face in public with the president to demonstrate unity, it was her face that said it all.

“[L]et me be clear,” Biden said at the White House on Friday, flanked by his clearly uncomfortable vice president. “Any American [who] wants to come home, we will get you home.”

Biden said his administration has been in “constant contact with the Taliban, working to ensure civilians have safe passage to the airport” amid reports the insurgent forces are beating Americans who try to enter the Kabul airport.

“[W]e’ve made clear to the Taliban that any attack — any attack on our forces or disruption of our operations at the airport will be met with a swift and forceful response,” Biden said, according to a White House transcript.

“We have no indication that they haven’t been able to get — in Kabul — through the airport,” he added. “We’ve made an agreement with the — with the Taliban. Thus far, they’ve allowed them to go through. It’s in their interest for them to go through.’

“So, we know of no circumstance where American citizens are — carrying an American passport — are trying to get through to the airport. But we will do whatever needs to be done to see to it they get to the airport.”

Harris, who was wearing a face mask, probably should have worn sunglasses — because her eyes alone spoke louder than any words could have.

Before a clutch of journalists and Biden’s own defense secretary later refuted his lies about the situation at the Kabul airport, Harris’ face betrayed the falsehood outright.

After Biden’s address, Harris promptly departed the country on a pre-planned trip to Asia to visit Singapore and Vietnam (the latter visit couldn’t have been more poorly nor ironically timed considering the parallels between the fall of Kabul on Sunday and the 1975 fall of Saigon).

Amazingly, she’s just about the only person who isn’t calling out Biden’s lies, and by the look on her face on Friday, it appears even that was a struggle for her.

Biden’s claim that the administration knows of “no circumstance ” in which Americans are having a difficult time getting to the airport in Kabul was hotly contested by establishment media reporters.

Meanwhile, Politico reported Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told House lawmakers during a call on Friday that indeed, multiple Americans had been beaten by Taliban fighters as they tried to reach the airport.

“We’re also aware that some people including Americans have been harassed; even beaten by the Taliban,” Austin said, according to multiple sources on the call. “This is unacceptable and [we] made it clear to the designated Taliban leader.”

Considering how horribly Biden is bungling this thing as our countrymen are subjected to violent assault at the hands of Islamic extremist fighters who just made him look like a fool, one certainly understands why Harris had such a hard time appearing the least bit confident in our commander-in-chief. It’s her job to have his back, and she seemingly couldn’t even do that. Our country is in the hands of these people.

Does anyone in the administration have faith in Biden right now? Or anyone anywhere for that matter?

Isa Cox, Contributor

Isa grew up in San Francisco, where she was briefly a far-left socialist before finding Jesus and her husband in Hawaii. She now homeschools their two boys and freelances in the Ozarks.@crunchyconmama

Hidden on Page 508 of the Infrastructure Bill Is a Plan to Make It Too Expensive to Drive a Car


Reported by Taylor Penley | August 4, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/hidden-page-508-infrastructure-bill-plan-make-expensive-drive-car/

The cost of living is on the rise, calls for yet another wave of pandemic restrictions have begun and now, buried deep in the so-called bipartisan infrastructure bill, the left has laid out yet another idea to bring Americans to their knees. Make no mistake: The suffering is intentional, goal-oriented and not bound to stop anytime soon. Still, one proposal in the 2,702 page infrastructure bill seems especially cruel — cruel enough to make it too expensive for many Americans to even drive a car.

Nick Short of the Claremont Institute highlighted an item on Pages 508-519 of the bill that would introduce a national per-mile motor vehicle user fee on a trial basis.

“Buried on page 508 of the 2,702 page infrastructure bill is a pilot program for a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee (MBUF) which is basically a long-term plan to make it too expensive to drive a car,” Short said Tuesday on Twitter.

The pilot program is set up “to test the design, acceptance, implementation, and financial sustainability of a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee, to address the need for additional revenue for surface transportation infrastructure and a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee” and “to provide recommendations relating to the adoption and implementation of a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee,” the bill says.

An article from The Lid Blog attached to Short’s tweet detailed the proposal even further, breaking down each component, from the program’s objectives to its proposal that “volunteers” from each state should discover different ways to collect data on miles driven by “both commercial and private vehicle operators.”

On Page 513, the proposal says that the “Secretary of the Treasury shall establish, on an annual basis, per-mile user fees for passenger motor vehicles, light trucks, and medium- and heavy-duty trucks.” In theory, these per-mile user fees would vary by vehicle contingent upon several factors, including — you guessed it — environmental impact.

To ease any apprehension about participating in the pilot program, the measure indicates that participants’ identities will be protected, perhaps, as The Lid said, to prevent ostracization “if this happens and achieves the desired result.”

The left can chalk up this test run of what eventually might turn into a full-blown measure to make owning a vehicle next-to-impossible as an effort to be “environmentally conscious,” but is it instead another way to cripple our existing ways of life?

We might dismiss it now, but imagine telling yourself five years ago that the government would order small business closures, codify when and how Americans could worship and adopt an increasingly draconian do as I say, not as I do” policy to address a global pandemic.

From the way we work to the way we breathe, so many aspects of our lives have already changed — albeit willingly, for some. What’s so different about changing how we get to one place from another?

With $10 million dedicated to this program for each year from 2022 to 2026, it’s easy to see how the government doles out what it acquires from hardworking Americans.

Any Republican lawmakers who vote in favor of this “bipartisan” bill have no right to label themselves “conservative.”

This proposal is the antithesis of conservatism.

Taylor PenleyContributor,

Taylor Penley is a political commentator residing in Northwest Georgia. She holds a BA in English with minors in rhetoric/writing and global studies from Dalton State College. As a student, she worked in government relations and interned for Georgia’s 14th congressional district. She previously published an article with Future Female Leaders and published a rhetorical analysis of President Reagan’s Brandenburg Gate Address in a collegiate journal. She aspires to earn an MA and a PhD in journalism in the near future.

Capitol Police Arrest Democratic Congresswoman for Storming Federal Building


Reported by Jack Davis | July 16, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/capitol-police-arrest-democratic-congresswoman-storming-federal-building/

The chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus celebrated her arrest Thursday after leading an incursion of protesters into the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio said that breaking the law was an important way to illustrate her belief that voting reforms passed by state legislatures will disenfranchise black voters.

“I stand in solidarity with Black women and allies across the country in defense of our constitutional right to vote. We have come too far and fought too hard to see everything systematically dismantled and restricted by those who wish to silence us,” Beatty said in a statement on her website.

She said more protests will follow.

“Be assured that this is just the beginning. This is Our Power, Our Message,” the congresswoman in the statement.

“You can arrest me. You can’t stop me. You can’t silence me,” Beatty said on Twitter.

NBC News reported that the protesters who joined Beatty in the incursion demanded passage of the so-called For the People Act, a Democrat bill that would largely put elections under the thumb of the federal government instead of the states.

Capitol Police said the demonstrators were arrested after refusing to disperse.

“This afternoon, nine people were arrested for demonstrating in a prohibited area on Capitol Grounds,” the department said in a statement on Thursday.

“At approximately 3:30pm, the United States Capitol Police responded to the Atrium in the Hart Senate Office Building for reports of illegal demonstration activity. After officers arrived on the scene, they warned the demonstrators three times to stop. Those who refused were arrested for D.C. Code §22-1307. Two males and seven females were transported to USCP Headquarters for processing,” Capitol Police said.

Unlike the coverage of the Jan. 6 incursion of the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-President Donald Trump, there was no hue-and-cry in the media about Beatty and the other protesters staging an “insurrection” or “threatening our democracy.”

Many Republicans have said the fight over election reform legislation is an attempt by Democrats to use their current congressional majority as a means to cement leftist rule in America.

“Democrats want to rig every election going forward to make it nearly impossible for a conservative to win again,” Fox News host Laura Ingraham said Wednesday.

“They’re now effectively arguing that the very voting rules that delivered two two-term victories for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are essentially just like Jim Crow 2.0,” she said.

“So this leaves them really with only one option in their mind, which is to promote racial fear-mongering in pretty much everything around them. We already know what they’re doing in our schools, to our workplaces, the military, even to now our system of voting,” Ingraham said.

Fox News host Sean Hannity said the left’s fuss over voting rights is part of a strategy to sway the 2022 elections.

“So what does this really all about? We all know there’s nothing racist about integrity in elections. Democrats are obviously worried. Chances are they now believe they probably will lose in 2022 and maybe even 2024,” he said Thursday on “Hannity.”

“Mark my words, if Democrats suffer huge losses in 2022, they will blame racist right-wing voter suppression. … The truth isn’t important to the Democratic Party or the media mob, for that matter. Power is all that matters,” Hannity said.

Jack Davis, Contributor,

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Bombshells

A.F. BRANCO on July 1, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-bombshells/

Biden and the Democrats own the rising crime and murder rate 100% while they blame guns and the GOP.

Democrat Crime Wave
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco coffee table book “Keep America Laughing (at the left)” ORDER HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

Today’ TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Cause and Effect

A.F. BRANCO on June 23, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-cause-and-effect/

Democrats continue to berate and defund the police causing the crime rate to sore sharply.

Bashing the Police
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – What’s In A Name

A.F. BRANCO on June 24, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-whats-in-a-name-2/

Critical Race Theory is about dividing the country and indoctrinating children with Marxism.

Critical Race Theory Brainwashing
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco coffee table book “Keep America Laughing (at the left)” ORDER HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

Michael Brown Op-ed: What the IRS got remarkably right in the midst of a terribly wrong ruling


Commentary By Michael Brown, CP Op-Ed Contributor| Monday, June 21, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/what-the-irs-got-remarkably-right.html/

Michael Brown
Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries. He is the author of 25 books and hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire. | Courtesy of Michael Brown

Just type the words IRS, Christian, and Bible in your search engine and you’ll get a flood of results, most of them starting with headlines like this: “IRS denies Christian nonprofit tax exemption, saying biblical values are Republican.” Or this, “IRS denies tax-exempt status to Christian nonprofit group because ‘Bible teachings are typically affiliated with the Republican Party’.”

Naturally, there has been outrage among Christian conservatives over this ruling, pointing to this yet another example of the IRS’s anti-Christian, anti-conservative bias. That’s also why most of the commentary has focused on the egregious ruling itself, which is being appealed.

Yet, in the midst of this very wrong ruling, the IRS made a very right observation: by and large, the Republican Party is more aligned with biblical teaching than is the Democratic Party.

Of course, neither major party is fully aligned with God and His Word. And, without a doubt, the world of politics cannot be confused with the purity of the spiritual realm and the kingdom of God. We can also debate which party’s policies are closest to biblical values when it comes to helping the poor or the immigrant.

That’s why, on principle, even though I have voted for Republican candidates for years while not voting for a single Democrat, I am registered as an Independent. It’s just my way of saying that I cannot align myself fully with any political party.

At the same time, when it comes to important biblical values, in the great majority of cases, the Republican platform is more aligned with Scripture than is the Democratic platform, to the point of getting the backhanded recognition of the IRS.

As for the organization involved in this ruling, it is called Christians Engaged, and its stated purpose is: “to awaken, motivate, educate, and empower ordinary believers in Jesus Christ to.”

Their threefold emphasis is: “Pray for our nation and elected officials regularly. Vote in every election to impact our culture. Engage our hearts in some form of political education or activism for the furtherance of our nation.”

Yet when they applied for tax exempt status, they were rejected.

In the words of the official IRS ruling (I’m quoting the most relevant section), “Specifically, you educate Christians on what the Bible says in areas where they can be instrumental including the areas of sanctity of life, the definition of marriage, biblical justice, freedom of speech, defense, and borders and immigration, U.S. and Israel relations. The Bible teachings are typically affiliated with the [Republican Party] and candidates. This disqualifies you from exemption under IRC Section 501(c)(3).”

Again, the mocking headlines were well deserved, including this one, from RedState: “The IRS says if you believe in God and the Bible, you are working for the GOP.”

That’s why, for good reason, the ruling is being appealed by First Liberty Institute, which has argued that the IRS ruling “errs in three ways: 1) [it] invents a nonexistent requirement that exempt organizations be neutral on public policy issues; 2) [it] incorrectly concludes that Christians Engaged primarily serves private, nonexempt purposes rather than public, exempt purposes because he thinks its beliefs overlap with the Republican Party’s policy positions; and 3) [it] violates the First Amendment’s Free Speech, and Free Exercise, and Establishment clauses by engaging in both viewpoint discrimination and religious discrimination.”

Yet in the midst of the pushback against the IRS, many have missed the biting irony of the words of the ruling where biblical teaching is associated with the Republican Party. In large measure, the IRS got this exactly right.

As noted in RedState, “The Bible, yes, IRS, the word is capitalized, is not neutral on the sanctity of life. It is not neutral on homosexuality. It is not neutral on marriage. It is not neutral on justice.”

Let’s remember that the Democrats positioned themselves as the party of the Religious “Nones” (meaning, people with no religious affiliation).

And it is the Democrats who have become increasingly radical in their pro-abortion zeal.

And the Democrats who are pushing the Equality Act, which guts religious liberties in favor of LGBT extremism.

As I noted in September 2019, “There is no question about it. There is not even a desire to hide it. The Democrat Party continues to grow spiritually darker to the point of actually proclaiming itself the party of the religiously non-affiliated. Is it any surprise?”

Or, as I pointed out in August 2020 (with regard to the Biden-Sanders “Unity Plan”), “God is never mentioned in the document. Not once.” In contrast, “the word gender occurs 22 times.

“More importantly, ‘transgender’ occurs twice, and in very specific contexts: ‘we will act expeditiously to reinstate Department of Education guidance protecting transgender students’ rights under Title IX and make clear that schools shall not discriminate based on LGBTQ status.’”

In sum, “LGBTQ” is “mentioned 17 times in the plan” while “‘religion’ is mentioned once, ‘Christian’ and ‘Jew’ and ‘God’ are not mentioned at all, but ‘LGBTQ’ is mentioned 17 times. Need I say more?”

And what of the rising, virtually unchecked tide of anti-Zionism and antisemitism within the Democratic Party?

For good reason the IRS pointed to what “the Bible says” with regard to “U.S. and Israel relations.” Here, too, the Republican Party stands much closer to Scripture than does the Democratic Party.

So, while the IRS ruled quite wrongly in denying Christians Engaged tax-exempt status, it ironically got one thing right: if you teach the Bible accurately, by and large, you’ll end up siding with the Republicans rather than the Democrats.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program.  He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries. He is the author of 40 books.  Connect with him on FacebookTwitter, or YouTube.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The John Lewis Act Is the Dems’ Path to Permanent Power


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 16, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/16/the-john-lewis-act-is-the-dems-path-to-permanent-power—p–n2591101/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

The John Lewis Act Is the Dems' Path to Permanent Power

Source: AP Photo/Chuck Burton, File

The official position of Fox News is that the Democrats’ John Lewis vote-stealing bill is “narrower” than the Democrats’ “For the People” vote-stealing bill. (This will be an exhibit in my museum titled, “Stupid People Can Never Help Your Cause.”)

Yes, it’s “narrower” in the sense of being 1 MILLION times worse. The John Lewis bill will do everything the “For the People” bill does — and so much more! They just don’t tell us what, exactly. The language of the bill is full of anodyne, uplifting language about equal voting participation — but the details will be turned over to left-wing zealots at the Department of Justice, suddenly empowered to enforce voting rules so insane that no elected official would dare vote for them.

Inasmuch as nearly every congressional Democrat is fine with the provisions in the “For the People” bill — which are ludicrous — imagine how much worse the “You Can’t Blame Me” bill is.

It will be faceless bureaucrats at the Department of Justice who give meaning to the happy words in the John Lewis bill. Federal government employees — i.e., the people actually making the rules — cannot be voted out of office. (Or fired — this is government work.) Indeed, these are people who could never be elected to any office on account of their repellent political views and, often, repellent physical appearance.

This is how Democrats impose fascistic rules on the citizenry without ever having to cast a dangerous vote: They write laws with vague statements of high principle, then dump the actual rule-making onto a government agency, where refugees from the ACLU issue edicts outlawing private property, due process, free speech and honest elections.

Recall:

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who ordered a nice Idaho couple to halt work on their home because it was allegedly on a protected wetland (in the middle of a subdivision with many other homes). That was environmentalist wackos at the EPA.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who required universities to deny basic due process rights to students accused of rape. That was feminist loons at the Department of Education.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who directed Obama’s IRS to target groups with “tea party” or “patriots” in their names. That was liberal ideologue Lois Lerner and other civil service functionaries.

The lunatics at these agencies look like Reason Personified compared to the DOJ’s voting rights attorneys.

In 2013, author Charlotte Allen described one fair-minded DOJ staffer, whose job it was to rewrite state voting laws:

“On the morning of January 21, [2013] just before President Obama’s second inauguration, Rep. Paul Ryan … was roundly booed by the gathered crowd as he left the Capitol to attend the ceremonies …. Within minutes Daniel J. Freeman, a young career trial lawyer with the Voting Section of the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division … took credit in a Facebook post for instigating the anti-Ryan derision.”

1. Paul Ryan? Pencil-necked, open borders, Never-Trump Paul Ryan? That’s the guy who got Freeman so riled up?

2. The obnoxious Freeman is no longer a young career trial lawyer at the DOJ. Now he’s a senior career trial lawyer at the DOJ.

Among the innovations dreamed up by fanatics like Freeman, Arizona was informed it could not ask for identification from people delivering more than 10 early ballots. Nothing fishy about that!

Arizona’s voting laws were subject to federal oversight because of its well-known history as a slave state and avid practitioner of Jim Crow. (I may have to check my notes on that.)

Actually, Arizona was bossed around by liberal activists at the DOJ for 40 years because back in 1972, it didn’t have bilingual ballots. Those weren’t instituted until 1974. They may as well have donned white hoods and burned crosses!

Oddly, Mississippi’s election laws were also subject to approval by the DOJ — despite the fact that blacks already voted at far higher rates than whites in that state. By contrast, Massachusetts did not require oversight of its voting laws, although in that fancy liberal state, black people voted at far lower rates than whites.

It’s almost as if only red states have their voting laws nitpicked by left-wing lawyers in Washington. I wonder if that would help Democrats win presidential elections?

Ironically, meaning totally predictably, the original 1965 Voting Rights Act was necessary because Democrats were trying to prevent black people from voting. Today, Democrats are using these new “voting rights” bills to ensure that 110% of black people vote, even if they are convicted felons, don’t live in the state, didn’t actually fill out a ballot or are dead.

It wasn’t until 2013 that the Supreme Court mercifully overturned key portions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. (Citing the overwhelming Senate vote for the wonderfully named Voting Rights Act, Justice Antonin Scalia remarked at oral argument: “This is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress.”)

While it’s great that ideologues like Dan Freeman had their wings clipped by the Court, the previous 40 years of their harassment tells you what they want to do. The John Lewis voting rights bill will put them back in the saddle!

States will be ordered to keep dead voters on the rolls, give violent felons the right to vote and jettison any voter I.D. requirements. (Interestingly, even after all the media demagoguery, black people still overwhelmingly support voter I.D. laws.)

There’s no disincentive to government lawyers pursuing frivolous cases to the end of the Earth. Even if they eventually lose, they don’t have to worry about court costs or legal fees. They don’t pay ’em. You do.

The “For the People” voting rights bill is the floor of what these petty bureaucrats will require. Those are the bare-minimum “voting rights” that will be imposed on the states by the DOJ. That’s the level of absurdity Democrats are willing to vote for in plain sight. What great ideas does Dan Freeman have that even Democrats couldn’t endorse on the record?

What is the voting “rights” equivalent of the EPA’s relentless persecution of homeowners, the Duke lacrosse case or the IRS’s abuse of power? Because that’s what the John Lewis voting rights bill will deliver.

‘Open brawl’: House Dems rip Rep. Omar for equating US, Israel, and Hamas — with some reportedly calling her an ‘anti-Semite.’ Omar claps back.


Reported by NEWSCHRIS FIELD | June 10, 2021

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/dems-rip-omar-us-israel-hamas-anti-semite/

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) upset a lot of people this week when she equated the U.S. and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban. It turns out it wasn’t just Republicans who are calling her out for her remarks. A dozen of her fellow U.S. House Democrats issued a statement Wednesday night criticizing her statements. And now a report has surfaced that the split between Omar and Democratic caucus is more significant than previously reported, with some Democratic lawmakers reportedly calling her an “anti-Semite” privately.

What did Omar say?

In a Monday tweet, Omar claimed the U.S., Israel, Hamas, and the Taliban have all committed “unthinkable atrocities” and human rights abuses.

“We must have the same level of accountability and justice for all victims of crimes against humanity,” she said.

The tweet included a clip of Omar questioning Secretary of State Antony Blinken how those who perpetrate human rights abuses — including, she said, Hamas, the Taliban, and Israeli security forces — will be held accountable. Omar’s tweets and questions for Blinken came in the wake of thousands of Hamas rocket attacks against Israel in May, to which Israel responded with targeted air strikes. During the conflict, Omar accused Israel of committing war crimes.

How did her Democratic critics respond?

On Wednesday, 12 Democratic representatives, led by Illinois Rep. Brad Schneider, issued a statement condemning Omar’s accusations.

“Equating the United States and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban is as offensive as it is misguided,” the statement began. “Ignoring the differences between democracies governed by the rule of law and contemptible organizations that engage in terrorism at best discredits one’s intended argument and at worst reflects deep-seated prejudice.”

“The United States and Israel are imperfect and, like all democracies, at times deserving of critique, but false equivalencies give cover to terrorist groups,” the dozen Democrats concluded. “We urge Congresswoman Omar to clarify her words placing the US and Israel in the same category as Hamas and the Taliban.”

Schneider was joined by Democratic Reps. Jake Auchincloss (Mass.), Ted Deutch (Fla.), Lois Frankel (Fla.), Josh Gottheimer (N.J.), Elaine Luria (Va.), Kathy Manning (N.C.), Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Dean Phillips (Minn.), Kim Schrier (Wa.), Brad Sherman (Calif.), and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.).

Things, however, are reportedly worse than even that statement let on.

According to Punchbowl News, the fallout from Omar’s actions “has erupted into an open brawl” and the “fight threatens to leave a deep divide among Democrats.” It could even cost Omar her seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Punchbowl reported that a group of Jewish Democratic lawmakers met on a call Wednesday and were listening to a speaker address concerns about the right’s anti-Semitism. The discussion, however, “quickly turned to Omar’s recent remarks and what they should do in response.”

This is not the first time Democrats have had to contend with Omar’s anti-Semitic rhetoric, the outlet noted, citing the March 2019 anti-bigotry resolution the House was forced to pass in response to her multiple contentious statements. Apparently, Omar’s schtick is wearing on some of her liberal colleagues, as a “number of Omar’s fellow Democrats believe Omar is an anti-Semite,” Punchbowl reported, “even if they don’t say so publicly.”

Omar claps back

The left-wing Minnesota lawmaker did not take kindly to the Democrats’ Wednesday statement about her latest remarks. She went on Twitter to rip her fellow lawmakers for their “islamophobic tropes” and their “constant harassment & silencing.”

“It’s shameful for colleagues who call me when they need my support to now put out a statement asking for ‘clarification’ and not just call,” she said. “The islamophobic tropes in this statement are offensive. The constant harassment & silencing from the signers of this letter is unbearable.”


Voting Rights: It’s ‘Racist’ Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 09, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/09/voting-rights-its-racist-not-to-let-democrats-cheat—p–n2590760/

Voting Rights: It's 'Racist' Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Why aren’t Republicans screaming from the rooftops about the Democrats’ plans to change voting rules to give themselves an advantage? Their sleazy election bills, HR 1, the “For the People Act,” and HR 4, the “John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” are intended to help Democrats win majorities in both houses of Congress, at which point they will ignore Republicans entirely, end the filibuster, and pass everything in AOC’s Dream Journal — amnesty, gun control, a wealth tax, and a rainbows and unicorns energy bill.

So it’s kind of important for Republicans to kill these bills in the crib. It shouldn’t be hard. All they have to do is tell people what’s in them.

Are Republicans counting on Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to save them? The GOP defeated Hillary Care in the 1990s far more decisively … then it came roaring back a few years later as Obamacare.

Currently, Manchin opposes the For the People bill, but supports the even more execrable John Lewis bill. Both will completely rewrite state election laws to favor Democrats, but at least For the People will be done by Congress. The John Lewis bill will give unelected bureaucrats at the Justice Department vast power to impose voting rules on the states. Based on previous such exercises of unaccountable power, 10-year-olds will soon have the right to vote. (See Title IX.)

Unless Republicans agree to ludicrous voting rules that give Democrats a partisan advantage, they’re racist. That’s the full argument. Republicans are trying to “suppress the vote” of black and brown people! John Lewis risked his life for the right to vote!

If that’s why Republicans don’t want to talk about these bills, they better get used to it. They’re going to be called “racist” a lot more if that’s all it takes to stifle the opposition.

Of course, Democrats’ own voters respond to John Lewis’ touching story by saying, Good for him, but — when is the election again? Tuesday? Yeah, that’s not going to be convenient for me.

And that’s the nub of the problem. The Democrats have a lot of what we call “unmotivated voters.” Risk their lives to vote? They won’t risk missing a couple hours of TV.

These are people who don’t pay attention to the news (that’s why they’re Democrats); don’t speak English (that’s why they’re Democrats); or don’t have a fully developed pre-frontal cortex because they’re under the age of 26 (that’s why they’re Democrats). And so on.

Consequently, Democrats have to mobilize armies of volunteers to carry their voters on gurneys to the polls on Election Day.

Wouldn’t it be easier if they had a few months to get their voters to the polls? What if their voters didn’t have to show up at all?

Why, yes! That would be much easier.

This is why the For the People bill mandates universal mail-in voting. Asking people to show up to vote is a dirty trick to “rig our democracy,” according to the left-wing group Indivisible. Litter the countryside with mail-in ballots months before an election — or you’re a Nazi.

In fact, apart from a worldwide pandemic, there’s no reason for mail-in voting. Studies show it increases voter turnout only modestly. But mail-in voting sure presents a lot of opportunities for fraud! It’s almost like Democrats consider that a feature, not a bug.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Election Data and Science Lab cited two main avenues for mail-in ballot fraud:

— “First, the ballot is cast outside the public eye, and thus the opportunities for coercion and voter impersonation are greater.”

In other words, instead of filling out a secret ballot in the presence of election officials, you will be out and about, at home, at the office, at the ballpark with your ballot, able to prove to others how you voted — to impress them, or perhaps because you’re being paid or threatened. And that’s assuming it’s you holding the ballot.

— “Second, the transmission path for [mail-in] ballots is not as secure as traditional in-person ballots. These concerns relate both to ballots being intercepted and ballots being requested without the voter’s permission.”

Not to worry! The Democrats deal with the possibility of imposters requesting mail-in ballots by … prohibiting the states from requesting voter I.D.

Huh, that’s odd. If you wanted to ensure that only eligible voters are voting, wouldn’t you want to — oh wait, I see.

Liberals will not rest until convicted felons — a key Democratic constituency — are fully participating members of our democracy. Or at least have ballots that can be filled out for them.

Unfortunately, some of our more unenlightened states believe that a person who has been convicted of violating society’s laws should be denied the right to choose who writes them. The For the People bill fixes that by forcing states to give felons the right to vote.

Speaking of felons, the For the People Act requires states to automatically register people to vote whenever they provide information to state agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, public universities, and, off the top of my head, state welfare bureaucracies, unemployment offices and prison facilities.

That’s a lot of ballots for Democratic volunteers to mine!

In 1994, in response to the stalking and murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer by a crazed fan who got her address through the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Congress passed the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, prohibiting state DMVs from releasing personal information to the public. One of the main sponsors was Sen. Barbara Boxer, who recited case after case of women stalked, harassed, raped and killed by men who had tracked their victims with information provided by the DMV.

With the automatic voter registration in the For the People bill, federal law would require states to release that information. Simply by getting a driver’s license or unemployment benefits, your name, address and phone number would be available to your stalker through the voting rolls. (Also to bill collectors, parole officers, process servers, etc.) Voter registration lists are publicly available for electioneering purposes.

The Democrats’ “voting rights” bill is a stalkers’ delight. But at least no one will have his vote “suppressed” by having to engage in the monstrously difficult task of registering to vote or showing up on Election Day. Your choice, America: A few pesky stalkers kill their victims, or Democrats call you “racist.”

Ted Cruz Slams Democrat Voting Bill: ‘Designed To Ensure Democrats Never Lose Another Election’ (VIDEO)


Reported By Mike LaChance | Published May 13, 2021

Read more at https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/05/ted-cruz-slams-democrat-voting-bill-designed-ensure-democrats-never-lose-another-election-video/

The Democrats’ ridiculously named ‘For the People Act’ is nothing more than a power grab, intended to keep Democrats from losing elections. Ted Cruz went off on Democrats and the bill this week, calling it out for what it really is.

The American people need to understand what Democrats are really trying to do here.

This legislation I believe is the most radical legislation the Senate has considered in the nine years I’ve been here and it is the most dangerous legislation pending before the United States Congress.

I listened to the speeches this morning. I listened to Sen. [Chuck] Schumer’s speech where he recounted this country’s shameful history of Jim Crow laws. And he’s right. Jim Crow laws were bigoted, racist, and disenfranchised millions of people.

It is worth remembering that those Jim Crow laws were drafted by Democrats. They were implemented by Democrats and they kept Democrats in power.

Now today’s talking point repeated in the media is that was the Democrats of yesterday, not today. Well today, the Democrats are doing it again. This legislation—to use a phrase that has been popularized on the media recently—is Jim Crow 2.0. This legislation would disenfranchise millions of Americans.

Many of us are referring to this legislation as the “Corrupt Politicians Act” … Sen. Schumer talked about politicians picking their constituents. That’s what this legislation does. This legislation is designed to ensure that Democrats never lose another election.

This legislation would register millions of illegal aliens to vote. It is intended to do that.

Watch the whole video below:

https://lockerdome.com/lad/12826702833454694?pubid=ld-8687-9357&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com&rid=&width=844https://www.youtube.com/embed/wF5EgC2oiyA?feature=oembed

All of the Republicans need to start speaking up as loudly as Ted Cruz is here. This is about the future of the country and whether or not we will have fair and honest elections ever again.

Cross posted from American Lookout.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fishy Bureau of Investigation

A.F. BRANCO on May 5, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-fishy-bureau-of-investigation/

A once very trusted institution the FBI has deteriorated into a police enforcer of the democrat party.

FBI FISA Violations
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Crackpots

A.F. BRANCO on May 6, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-crackpots/

Democrats, through their media, are using race to tear America apart for political gain and power.

Democrats Use Race to Split Up America
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Conjoined Bullies

AFB on April 19, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-conjoined-bullies/

Corporate America is merging with the radical left to bring down the republic.

Corporate Merger With Radical Left

Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Trigger Lock

A.F. BRANCO on April 20, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-trigger-lock/

Democrats want to Pack SCOTUS because they stand in the way of their radical socialist agenda.

Democrat Push Packing SCOTUS

Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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


I have had these thoughts for a while hoping someone else more eloquent would say the same thing. If that has happened, I apologize for this drivel.

First of all, I wish those life forms that arrived from the planet Moron would board up and go back to their universe and leave us the hell alone. It’s moronic to take 10’s of thousands jobs away just because you want to go “green”. Even the least of all morons will agree that you don’t shut down one industry while you develop another.

These life forms have never started a business, hired workers and maintained a payroll. As a results they have these “pie-in-the-sky” ideas that are Pollyanna, and lack the concern for the American people and the lives they are building.

Need more proof they are from the planet Moron? If you really do understand the middle class and the lives, they build based on the income they earn, then you never insult them telling them to go to work in the Solar market when you don’t have any idea what those jobs, where available, are actually paying. Such stinking thinking is the result of Socialistic stinking thinking. Only pretend you care and let them eat cake.

Based on the results of the last four years it has become obvious to me that we need to fire all the Morons from the Planet Moron, and the human life forms that have had their brains eaten by the life forms Moron, then ship them back to planet Moron. Then hire only businesspeople who have started businesses, maintained a payroll, and have demonstrated common sense in their business practices. ALL LAWYER TYPES NEED NOT APPLY.

Second. Once the Morons have left, then we can stop the MOB RULE. Let us be very honest here. The Leftist have developed a MOB RULE mentality that drives every aspect of their rule. At times it is outright intimidation: DO WHAT WE WANT OR WE WILL HURT THIS CITY, THE INNOCENT BUSINESS OWNERS AND WHOEVER GETS IN OUR WAY. It works, because they always get away with it and no one ever goes to jail and then to prison.

Other times they advance toward holding entire cities hostage until they get what they want, what verdict they want, the election outcome they want or any other thing they desire, but know they cannot obtain by legislative, or other normal means.

Mob Rule implies the actions of “the mob”. Operating just inside the law to obtain their sordid gains. The Left is very aware they cannot win any more elections unless it’s by mob rule because their message is no longer of any relevance.

Have we reached the point where the “bully” has won and cannot be defeated? Are we as a nation going to be ruled by these mobs, or are we going to get our freedom back? Can it be done without bloodshed? Anyone praying that way?

Please give me your perspective, ideas, prayers, or any comments you would like to add to the conversation.

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Party of Hate

A.F. BRANCO on April 16, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-party-of-hate/

Democrats and their militant soldiers in BLM and Antifa, are exactly the fascist they try to label conservatives with.

Democrat Fascism

Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – American Graffiti

A.F. BRANCO on April 18, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-american-graffiti/

The “Land of 10,000 Lakes” has become the land of 10.00 riots with Walz and Maxine Waters as instigators.

Minnesota Riots

Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

Democrats introduce bill to add 4 seats to the Supreme Court; Pompeo calls effort ‘political games’


Reported By Michael Gryboski, Christian Post Reporter | Thursday, April 15, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/democrats-introduce-bill-to-add-4-supreme-court-seats.html/

An overcast sky hangs above the U.S. Supreme Court on December 16, 2019, in Washington, D.C. | Samuel Corum/Getty Images

Democrats in U.S. Congress have announced controversial legislation that would add four seats to the U.S. Supreme Court in response to the current conservative majority. However, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has reportedly said she won’t bring such legislation to the floor for a vote. 

Introduced Thursday, the bill is known as the Judiciary Act of 2021 and would increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court for the first time since the 19th century. Sponsors include House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York, Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Hank Johnson of Georgia and Rep. Mondaire Jones of New York. In the Senate, the bill is backed by Sen. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts.

In a statement, Markey claimed that “Republicans stole the Court’s majority, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation completing their crime spree.”

“Senate Republicans have politicized the Supreme Court, undermined its legitimacy, and threatened the rights of millions of Americans, especially people of color, women, and our immigrant communities,” he argued.

“This legislation will restore the Court’s balance and public standing and begin to repair the damage done to our judiciary and democracy, and we should abolish the filibuster to ensure we can pass it.”

Over the past couple of years, some progressive politicians and activists have pushed to add more justices to the Supreme Court to counter what is now a 6-3 conservative majority. During his only term in office, President Donald Trump appointed three justices to the Supreme Court. Those confirmations came after Republicans in the Senate blocked President Barack Obama’s 2016 nomination of Merrick Garland following Justice Antonin Scalia’s death. 

Following Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, Democrats were upset that the Republican-controlled Senate quickly confirmed Barrett to the court last October just days before the 2020 election but never held a confirmation vote for Garland even though he was nominated months before the 2016 election. 

Last week, President Joe Biden signed an executive order creating a commission comprised of 36 individuals to assess the Supreme Court’s current status and whether to reform it. House Speaker Pelosi reportedly declared Thursday that she would not bring the bill to the floor for a vote. According to CNN’s Manu Raju, Pelosi responded with a “no” when asked if she would bring a bill to expand the Supreme Court to the floor. However, she reportedly said that she backs the White House commission to study the idea.

“I think it’s an idea that should be considered,” she reportedly said. “It’s not out of the question … I have no intention to bring it to the floor.”

Former White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany is not sold by Pelosi’s remarks. 

“Do not fall for the Left’s game. Dems put forward a Supreme Court packing bill. Pelosi not there yet but says she supports Biden ‘bipartisan’ commission,” McEnany tweeted. “Commission is 2-to-1 stacked w/ liberals Supporting commission = Supporting court packing.” 

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo criticized the legislation in a tweet Thursday morning. 

“Our Supreme Court Justices uphold the rule of law, not the emotion of law,” he wrote. “Packing the Supreme Court to tilt favorable outcomes brings partisan politics into the courtroom. SCOTUS is the last place we need political games.”

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina called expanding the Supreme Court a “terrible idea” and vowed to vote against it. 

Critics of the plan to pack the high court include Walter Shapiro of The Brennan Center for Justice, who wrote in 2019 that the plan seems “like a banana-republic attempt to change the rules in the middle of the game.” Shapiro drew a parallel to President Franklin Roosevelt’s attempt to pack the court when its conservative majority often struck down his New Deal efforts.

He noted that, eventually, Roosevelt abandoned his effort in part because the makeup of the Supreme Court began to change more in his favor without the need to add justices.

“The principled argument against 21st-century court packing is that it is dangerous to tamper with the mechanisms of democracy to thwart a single political figure,” wrote Shapiro.

“For times change while power eventually ebbs. But restructuring the Supreme Court could have lasting repercussions long after the current crisis is as forgotten as the mid-1930s conservative decisions that jeopardized the New Deal.”

Follow Michael Gryboski on Twitter or Facebook

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Pork-a-Structure

A.F. BRANCO on April 13, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-pork-a-stucture/

According to the Democrats, everything on their socialist wish list, like the New Green Deal, is now infrastructure.

Green New Infrastructure

Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Count Fraudula

A.F. BRANCO on March 30, 2021 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-count-fraudula/

Voter ID and HR 1

There’s only one reason Democrats don’t want Voter ID and it will drastically cut down election fraud. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

Op-ed: Former Obama WH Doc: Biden ‘Hiding’ from Public Is ‘Major Red Flag,’ Something Isn’t Right


Commentary by By Samantha Chang | Published March 22, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/former-obama-wh-doc-biden-hiding-public-major-red-flag-something-isnt-right/

Ronny Jackson, who was the White House physician to former Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, has joined a growing legion of Americans (and medical experts) who are gravely concerned about the physical and mental health of President Joe Biden.

Jackson — a retired Navy rear admiral who now represents Texas as a Republican congressman — sounded the alarm on Sunday when he said Biden’s lack of public appearances is a “MAJOR red flag” signaling that something is seriously wrong with the 78-year-old career politician. Biden has yet to hold a formal news conference as president.

“I served as White House physician under THREE Presidents,” Jackson tweeted. “I’ve seen what it takes physically AND mentally to do the job.’

“I can tell you right now that the way Biden is hiding from the public is a MAJOR red flag. Something’s not right!”

Jackson made the remarks two days after Biden tripped three times while walking up the staircase of Air Force One. Keep in mind that he was previously vice president for eight years, so he has walked up those same steps numerous times before. It’s not as if he’s unfamiliar with those stairs.

The White House comically blamed the wind for Biden’s blunder, but the sad imagery of a septuagenarian stumbling helplessly as cameras rolled ignited a worldwide feeding frenzy.

 

While the liberal American media tried to downplay Biden’s epic stumble, the British and other international press headlined it (as they should, since he’s supposed to be the “leader of the free world”).

 

Jackson is not the only physician who has expressed concern about Biden’s mental and physical fitness.

YOU CAN READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE BY GOING TO https://www.westernjournal.com/former-obama-wh-doc-biden-hiding-public-major-red-flag-something-isnt-right/

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

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


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

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

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

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

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

1. Openly Breaks the Constitution

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

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

2. Set Up Star Chambers to Intimidate Judges

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Eliminate Voter ID Election Security

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

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

5. Register Millions Of Criminally Present Foreign Citizens to Vote

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

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

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

6. Explode Opportunities for Election Cheating

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. Prevent Cleaning Up Voter Rolls

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

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

8. Unleash Mobs on Political Donors

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

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

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

9. Gerrymander Districts to Favor Democrats

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

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

10. Make Vote Hacking Easier

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14. Mandates Ballot Drop Boxes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Science for the Lambs

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fearless Leaders

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Blind Trust

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Ouch Potato

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Custody Battle

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Love Gov

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

Cuomo WomanPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Red Handed

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Vive la révolution

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Enemy Within

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

Capitol WallPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Road Trip

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

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Superspreader

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

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

Donald Trump’s lead impeachment attorney plans to use Democrats’ own words against them at Senate trial


Former President Donald Trump’s lead impeachment attorney previewed his defense strategy during an interview on Friday, revealing that he plans to use Democrats’ own inflammatory rhetoric against them.

Speaking with Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Bruce Castor, the former acting attorney general of Pennsylvania, confirmed that he will use “dueling video” to combat evidence that Trump’s rhetoric about the election incited the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

After predicting that Democrats plan to use video of Trump during his Senate trial, Ingraham asked, “Will you then respond with Maxine Waters, a number of other Democrat officials not speaking out about the Antifa and other extremist rallies over the last summer?”

“I think you can count on that,” Castor responded. “If my eyes look a little red to the viewers, it’s because I’ve been looking at a lot of video.”

Earlier in the interview, Castor explained that there is plenty of evidence showing Democrats are essentially guilty of what they claim Trump should be convicted in the Senate over.

Well, 2020 was somewhat of an unusual year, and it wasn’t all due to COVID. And there’s an awful lot of a tape of cities burning and courthouses being attacked and federal agents being assaulted by rioters in the street cheered on by Democrats throughout the country, and many of them in Washington, using really the most inflammatory rhetoric that’s possible to use. And certainly, there would be no suggestion that they did anything to incite any of the actions. Certainly, there wasn’t any anyhow.

But here, when you have the president of the United States give a speech and says you should peacefully make your thinking known to the people in Congress, he’s all of a sudden a villain. So you got to better be careful what you wish for. It’s all prosecutors trick. When you don’t have a good enough case, you just put up all the really flashy stuff, and then kind of smooth over the fact that it doesn’t really connect up to the guy that’s on trial.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) argued Sunday that Republicans should apply the same impeachment standard to Democrats that they are using against Trump. In fact, Paul explained that if the standard Democrats use is applied fairly, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should be impeached.

“If we’re going to criminalize speech, and somehow impeach everybody who says, ‘Go fight to hear your voices heard,’ I mean really we ought to impeach Chuck Schumer then,” Paul argued on “Fox News Sunday.”

“He went to the Supreme Court, stood in front of the Supreme Court and said specifically, ‘Hey Gorsuch, Hey Kavanaugh, you’ve unleashed a whirlwind. And you’re going to pay the price,'” Paul continued. “This inflammatory wording, this violent rhetoric of Chuck Schumer was so bad that the chief justice, who rarely says anything publicly, immediately said this kind of language is dangerous as a mob tried to invade the Supreme Court.”

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Walls For D.C.

Biden and the Democrats don’t believe in walls unless they’re around the Capital.

Biden’s WallPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Red Ink

Democrats are not only the authoritarian party but also the party of Big Corporations, the rich, and the elite.

Democrat HandbookPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Climate Hoax Czar

The Irony is lost on Biden’s Climate Czar John Kerry in regard to him traveling the world in a fuel-guzzling private jet.

John Kerry Private JetPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

New Mexico Democrat’s bill could criminalize parents teaching kids how to shoot, according to gun group


A New Mexico Democratic state senator has introduced a bill that could criminalize parents who teach their children how to shoot firearms if the children is not considered an “authorized user,” according to a state pro-gun group.

State Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez (D) introduced State Bill 224, which says in part, “It is an offense for a firearm owner or authorized user to store or keep a firearm in any premises unless the firearm is secured in a locked container or secured by a gun lock or other means so as to render the firearm inaccessible or unusable to any person other than the owner or other authorized user.”

The Daily Wire stated that a minor “may be an authorized user only if the minor is at least twelve years of age and has successfully completed a firearm safety training course.”

SB 224 adds, “If a firearm owner or authorized user knows or reasonably should have known that a minor, an at-risk person or a prohibited person could gain access to a firearm belonging to or under the control of that owner or authorized person, and if a minor, an at-risk person or a prohibited person obtained access to that firearm, it is an offense if the firearm owner or authorized user failed to secure the firearm in a locked container or by a lock or other means so as to render such firearm inaccessible or unusable to any person other than the firearm owner or other authorized user.”

In response to the bill, the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association said that the bill’s “storage mandate” would “make it a crime for a child to handle your firearm unless the child was 12 or older and had previously completed a firearms safety class.”

“You would become a criminal for taking your child to go shooting if they had not previously taken some kind of formal class,” NMSSA said in a statement on the proposed legislation. “The bill is an uneducated attempt to demonize firearms. … It is already a crime to place a child in a situation that endangers their life, this law does nothing to add to a child’s safety.”

The association added that the bill as-is is “completely unenforceable” unless the government intends on conducting door-to-door inspections.

“If a prohibited possessor gains access to your firearm you are liable as well,” NMSSA added. “Albuquerque is the property crime capital of America; if your home or vehicle was broken into and a convicted felon stole your firearm, you could be charged with a crime under the bill. Instead of taking on the issue of the crime wave that has engulfed Albuquerque and other parts of the state, Sedillo Lopez wants to blame you, someone just seeking to defend yourself, if your firearm is stolen.”

And There It Is: First Bill Introduced by Dems Would Codify Controversial 2020 Election Changes That Handed Them Victory


Reported By Elizabeth Stauffer | Published January 25, 2021

Democratic Rep. John Sarbanes of Maryland has introduced the first bill of the 117th Congress, a bill that would profoundly transform the way America conducts its elections. H.R. 1 is a breathtaking power grab by the Democrats and threatens the very bedrock of our democratic republic by nearly guaranteeing one-party rule in Washington for years to come.

According to a statement on Sarbanes’ website, “the 2020 election underscored the need for comprehensive, structural democracy reform. Americans across the country were forced to overcome rampant voter suppression, gerrymandering and a torrent of special-interest dark money just to exercise their vote and their voice in our democracy.”

Sarbanes tells his constituents that “H. R. 1 is a transformational anti-corruption and clean elections reform package” intended to “clean up corruption in Washington, empower the American people and restore faith and integrity to our government.”

The stated purpose of H.R. 1, ironically called the “For the People Act,” is: “To expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and implement other anti-corruption measures for the purpose of fortifying our democracy, and for other purposes.” The full text of H.R. 1 can be viewed here.

The real purpose of the bill is to make permanent many of the changes made to state voting systems and procedures ostensibly to facilitate voting in the age of COVID-19.

One of the most notable features of H.R. 1 is that it strips states of the right to set their own standards for how elections are to be conducted. Election laws will be determined at the federal level.

Under this bill, states would be required to promote the use of mail-in voting, to offer online applications for voter registration, and to provide automatic and even same-day voter registration.

H.R. 1 would all but eliminate voter ID laws. It would prohibit states from “requiring identification as a condition of obtaining a ballot.” However, the bill would allow a state to require “a signature of the individual or similar affirmation as a condition of obtaining an absentee ballot.” After all, we must protect the integrity of our elections.

In Section 1005, the bill seeks to prohibit a state “from requiring applicants to provide more than last four digits of Social Security number.” Currently, in some states, if an individual without a driver’s license registers to vote, an applicant is required to supply the full Social Security number.

READ THE REST OF THIS IMPORTANT REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/first-bill-introduced-dems-codify-controversial-2020-election-changes-handed-victory/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jim Jordan Calls Out Democrats’ ‘Double Standard’ In Fiery Speech During Impeachment Proceedings


Reported By Jack Davis | Published January 13, 2021 at 12:00pm

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/jim-jordan-calls-democrats-double-standard-fiery-speech-impeachment-proceedings/

Jordan spoke as the House moved forward with the process of impeaching President Donald Trump, citing last week’s Capitol incursion and Trump’s words and action before, during and after the violence. Jordan is among the Republicans opposing impeachment, which is likely to pass the House. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said impeachment is unlikely to make it on the Senate calendar until after Trump’s term in office has ended.

Jordan said that Republicans who last week wanted to voice objections to the Electoral College vote that gave President-elect Joe Biden his victory were only doing something Democrats have done before.

“In his opening remarks, the Democrat chair of the Rules Committee said that Republicans last week voted to overturn the results of an election. Guess who the first objector was on Jan. 6, 2017? First objector: the Democrat chairman of the Rules Committee,” Jordan said, referring to Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.

“And guess which state he objected to? Alabama. The very first state called. Alabama. President Trump, I think, won Alabama by like 80 points,” Jordan said, before consulting notes and saying that Trump in fact won the state by 30 points.

READ THE BALENCE OF THIS REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/jim-jordan-calls-democrats-double-standard-fiery-speech-impeachment-proceedings/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Ocasio-Cortez, other Democrats reveal what agenda they will push with control of White House, Congress


As the dust settles from Georgia’s monumental Senate runoff elections, Democrats are making very clear what agenda they will pursue now that they will likely control the White House and both chambers of Congress.

As of Wednesday morning, Raphael Warnock (D) is the projected winner over Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R), and it appears that Jon Ossoff (D) will defeat Sen. David Purdue (R). If these results stand, the Senate will be split 50-50, giving Democrats control of the upper chamber because Vice President-elect Kamala Harris will serve as a tie-breaking vote.

What do Democrats plan to do?

Taking control of Congress and the White House is a significant feat, and it allows one party to advance its agenda without much resistance.

Now, Democrats will have the opportunity to advance their policies, many of which have been blocked by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) for the last six years.

Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) revealed Tuesday exactly what Democrats can do with their newfound power by passing legislation blocked by McConnell.

  • Stimulus Checks: House Democrats passed a bill that would provide Americans with $2,000 stimulus checks after President Donald Trump asked for stimulus checks greater than $600. The Republican-controlled Senate, however, squashed the effort.
  • The Equality Act“The Equality Act would would provide consistent and explicit anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people across key areas of life, including employment, housing, credit, education, public spaces and services, federally funded programs, and jury service.”
  • The DREAM Act: A bill introduced to Congress nearly a dozen times over the last two decades, often with bipartisan sponsors, it would “pathway to legal status for undocumented youth who came to this country as children,” according to American Immigration Council.
  • Voting Rights Act: Democrats have attempted to legislatively restore a part of the Voting Rights Act that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013. With McConnell in charge of the Senate, Democrats have been unsuccessful in their endeavors.

Pappas said Democrats can also make headway on “infrastructure,” giving states and local governments more funding, likely referring to coronavirus-related aid, and “climate action.” It was not clear whether Pappas was referring to the far-left Green New Deal.

Other Democrats were more explicit.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Democrats can now pursue “student loan cancellation,” the end of the death penalty, and “climate justice.”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said Democrats can increase the minimum wage, advance “guaranteed health care,” promote “repro justice,” likely a reference to wider abortion access, and fight for “racial justice.”

“VICTORY in Georgia must lead to transformative change across America! Recurring survival checks, union jobs that pay a living wage, guaranteed health care, racial justice, voting rights, immigration reform, climate action, repro justice, education, and MUCH more. It can’t wait!” she said.

Brian Fallon, who served as a senior member of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, added that Democrats can now “eliminate the filibuster” and “reform the courts,” a likely allusion to packing the federal courts with liberal justices.

This power shift in Washington, D.C., is significant particularly because it happened so quickly.

Over the span of just two years, the Republican Party, under Trump’s leadership, lost the House (in the 2018 midterms), the White House, and now the Senate.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – In A Handbasket

The Georgia run-off election is America’s only hope against insane liberals taking over America.

Georgia Election Run-offPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

Dear Democrats: Stop Treating Black Men Like We’re Stupid Or Lose More Votes


Dear Democrats: Stop Treating Black Men Like We’re Stupid Or Lose More Votes

Democrats spent the weeks before the 2020 election ridiculing black men considering voting for President Trump as sellouts who could derail Joe Biden’s presidential bid. Biden himself said as much with his “you ain’t black” comment.

Some Biden supporters went even further. One professor claimed black men just wanted proximity to the patriarchy and power structures white men have maintained for generations. Once the media announced Biden crossed the 270 electoral vote threshold, the left’s approach changed from proactive intimidation to a retrospective explanation for the fact that exit polls indicated 19 percent of black men voted for Donald Trump.

One Democratic candidate for Congress said one in five black men voted for Trump because “they hate Black women.” The same outlets that declared white Trump voters in 2016 were misinformed, ignorant racists claimed black Trump voters—including the 9 percent of black women who voted for him—were self-loathing victims of “disinformation” campaigns.

Former President Barack Obama joined the chorus in a recent interview with The Atlantic. His entire analysis of the increase in black male support for Trump was that black men were attracted to “the bling, the women, and the money” that characterize both Trump’s public persona and hip hop culture. Hearing such a simplistic and dismissive explanation from someone as politically savvy as Obama was disappointing but terribly predictable. Therein lies the problem.

Today’s Democratic Party relies more on marshaling votes based on identity rather than ideas. That clearly didn’t work for many black men.

Stop Treating Black Voters Like We’re Stupid

Some black men may have been influenced by rappers who publicly endorsed Trump, but it is deeply insulting to assume black men in general are less attuned to their own political interests than any other group is.

One of those interests is public safety. Democrats can’t make the case for why the black father whose one-year-old son was fatally shot in the chest should be in favor of defunding the police. This tragedy is no anomaly. More than 400 children have been killed in street violence all across the country in 2020, and large cities have seen significant increases in shootings and homicides compared to last year.

Democrats have convinced black residents in the cities with the highest rate of violent crime—almost all run by Democrats—that they should be more afraid of the Boogaloo Boys than the Bloods and the Crips. It’s not hard to imagine some black voters being skeptical of such an obvious reality inversion.

Black fathers also care about their children getting a quality education. President Obama hasn’t made the case for why low-income black students shouldn’t have the same types of education options as his children. In 2008, he stated he was enrolling his daughters in private school because DC Public Schools weren’t going to meet their educational needs.

Yet one of the first things he did upon entering the presidency was attempt to defund the program poor DC families use to give their children access to private schools. With an average voucher of $9,531, the grant is less than one half of what DC’s traditional public schools spend per student and one-quarter of the tuition of Sidwell Friends, the school the Obama girls attended.

President Trump and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos increased funding for the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program and publicly support charter school expansion. In contrast, Biden has pledged to eliminate the voucher program once in office and his supporters in the National Education Association oppose charter schools that are extremely popular with black parents.

Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza can’t go into a black barbershop in Atlanta and satisfactorily explain why the men there should support her organization that is committed to “disrupting” the nuclear family. Asking that question, as well as why BLM removed the language from their website, would seem like a natural response to an organization that claims to care about the lives of black people.

Garza also can’t explain why a dad who coaches his daughter’s track team should get behind the Equality Act—a bill Biden has pledged to sign—which would allow a biological male who identifies as a girl to compete against his daughter at a high school track event where awards and college scholarships are on the line. When Flo-Jo, the fastest woman in history, posts a world record in the 100-meter dash that wouldn’t even land her among the top 6,000 men’s times, I think any father has a right to question the impact this law would have on fairness in girls’ sports.

Earn Our Votes, Don’t Just Assume Them

The pitch to black voters from Biden’s surrogates was straightforward: “You may not be excited about him, but we need to get Trump out first and get to policy specifics later.” For a certain segment of black voters, that wasn’t enough.

Some black voters have always been conservative but others considered Trump’s record on the pre-COVID economy and other important issues more important than his tweets, brash persona, and frequent accusations of racism. That is why conservatives should treat black voters like people—rational individuals with deeply held values and specific interests—not indistinguishable components of an amorphous melanated blob.

That doesn’t mean Republicans should run from issues involving race. Leftists incorrectly attribute disparities in social and economic outcomes to systemic racism, but there should be substantive conservative responses to allegations of racial arrest quotas in New York City and unconstitutional stops and searches in poor black neighborhoods in Baltimore. Failure to do so will embolden Democratic politicians to continue their attempts to whip voters in the booth the same way they whip votes in Congress.

A smart, self-interested Democratic Party would ask itself whether Trump’s increase in non-white support may indicate a larger trend underway. Unfortunately, the party’s intellectual wing and its allies in corporate media are among the most incurious and condescending people in this country.

If self-hatred and selfishness are the best explanations party operatives can come up with, they’ll get even less of the black male vote the next election cycle. Instead, they should take time to explain to black voters why Democrats think government bureaucrats and special interest groups should have more influence on where children go to school than their parents do.

They should also have to explain why celebrities and multi-millionaire donors living in gated communities support paying bail for violent criminals who go back to terrorize working-class neighborhoods. And the ultimate question is why the party that claims to oppose all systemic racism and value black lives vigorously promotes abortion policies that disproportionately reduce the black population—a goal shared by today’s white nationalists as well as Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizards of the past.

All of these questions deserve honest, thoughtful responses, not empty platitudes and predictable euphemisms. The lack of answers to this point shows that black men don’t need to defend their choices. Democrats need to defend their ideas.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Delano Squires is the creator of the blog Truth, No Chaser, and has also written about race, religion, relationships, and culture for Black and Married with Kids, The Root, and The Grio. He holds a B.S. in computer engineering from the University of Pittsburgh and an MPP from The George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter at @Mr_Squires.

History Repeats Itself: Democrats Are Using Tactics of the Marxists of 1917 in Russia to Steal 2020 Election


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published December 22, 2020 at 7:19am

Once again we are republishing this analysis by John L Kachelman, Jr. We first published this piece back in October before the election.

2020 the “Perfect Storm” facing our Republic— All three branches of our Government are in peril

Historical Discovery…An election in 1917 forecast the election in 2020! Here are the elements from 103 years ago!

  • Years of preparatory work were spent in misleading and mis-directional propaganda

  • Contested voting results marred the election’s finality and ultimately its dismissal

  • Claims that the poor were going to be disenfranchised of their votes

  • The scheduled voting was extended by two months

  • Division, violence, slander and libel were widespread

  • A delusional/cunning/conniving campaign made unrealistic promises to win the population

  • Anger and mob violence were deliberately stirred against “privilege,” possessions, and status

  • Deceptive claims persuaded the “majority” they were robbed of their electoral victory

  • Inevitable civil war was sparked at the election’s end because Lenin’s group failed to win the majority

  • The dissolution of the old State and a “transformation” of the new system was promised to lead to true socialism but it brought history’s worst and longest ruling tyrant

And here is how it happened…

Here is a basic reminder of your 9th Grade American Civics materials…The Founding Fathers of our Republic designed a system of governing to prevent the evils inherent in the onerous governing systems of Europe. The Republic was to be governed in a way that the majority would have a say BUT safeguarded against a rogue majority controlling the nation. A deliberate system of “checks and balances” was wisely incorporated against evil efforts to seize national control.

The ultimate safeguard was the separation of the State’s governing into three distinct bodies. While each would have an impact upon the others, that impact was deliberately limited. The Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the Republic were designed to be independent but function with unity to guide the nation, preserve freedoms, and guard the human rights that are often disenfranchised by evil systems and philosophies. One of the greatest feats of our Republic is the exercise of individualism when these three branches of governing are properly functioning.

However, at this point in our nation’s historical narrative the “perfect storm” threatens ALL THREE of these safeguards of our Republic. And my disconcerting observation is that many prance and dance around with a Pollyannish attitude denying the reality of our current situation. The prevailing cultural concern is as absurd as the attitude of one busily rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic!

The assault on the EXECUTIVE BRANCH

The resistance has been hard at work even prior to President Trump’s inauguration. Attempts to nullify the electoral process have been constant. The evil agenda was visible. Our President has suffered evil resistance of historic proportions. The basic cause is his commitment to the U.S. Constitution. It is the unchanging Constitution that provides the legal governing making the USA an exceptional nation of individuals. This fixed and knowable Constitution gives our nation the strength and energy envied by the world and loathed by tyranny. )The Resistance/DEMS/BLM/ANTIFA demand an activist Court that will change our Republic’s basic foundational principles.)

The stated position of the resistance has been loud and long—they have robbed President Trump of his first four years as President. They have dared to present the most ridiculous reasons for his disqualification and removal. They have manipulated, deceived and extorted support for their evil agenda. They have ignited violence that has divided and destroyed the civility of the USA. Their evil purpose was to achieve the political purge of a duly elected President of the United States of America. Our President has been nominated for multiple Nobel Peace Prizes for his exceptional ability to broker true peace between Middle Eastern nations. But the resistance shrugs forgetting they excitedly embraced the Peace Prize awarded to Obama which is admitted now as an award for nothing! The resistance’s political maneuvering and evil mission is well documented.

Those of the resistance are described by inspiration. Their conniving and cunning evil is a constant action seeking to destroy legitimate order. Psalm 36:4, “He plans wickedness upon his bed; He sets himself on a path that is not good; He does not despise evil.” (See also Ecclesiastes 10:20)

Even the classics describe the reality of this evil. From Stevenson’s pen we remember the confession that describes those seeking to nullify the legality of President Trump’s election. Like the pained soul of Henry Jekyll the resistance can confess, “I lost my identity beyond redemption…had I risked the experiment while under the empire of generous or pious aspirations, all must have been otherwise, and from these agonies of death and birth, I had come forth an angel instead of a fiend…At that time my virtue slumbered; my evil, kept awake by ambition, was alert and swift to seize the occasion.” Perhaps the most troubling reference that Stevenson’s pen gives to the resistance character states, “O my poor old Harry Jekyll, if ever I read Satan’s signature upon a face, it is on that of your new friend.”

Inspiration and the Classics unite in describing today’s controlling evil that occupies every thought of the Progressive/Liberal/BLM/ANTIFA “resistance” as “Satan’s signature upon a face.”

This is the first element of today’s “Perfect Storm.” There are two more elements…

The assault upon the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

It is the Legislative Branch of our Republic’s government that involves the citizenry in the governing process. The population’s vote is a significant and treasured freedom. That vote expresses the desires of each State of the Union and is recorded by the Electoral College so that a free election is not controlled by a militant mob. The Founding Fathers wisely saw the potential of a militant group manipulating and coercing control. The establishment of the Electoral College was a masterful move safeguarding the Republic’s freedoms. By this method the most populous States are equal with the least populous—true equality.

The 2020 General Election is recognized as a critical point in our nation’s history. It can be said that every election is critical and previous elections have suffered the militancy of Progressives/Liberals attempting to undermine the Constitutional foundation of our nation. These past challenges failed because the general population was aware of the evil being campaigned and were educated regarding the safeguards of our Constitution. But the context has dramatically changed for the 2020 General Election. In this current election the Constitutional safeguards are condemned and the population is ignorant of just how fragile individual freedom is. It appears that many have been groomed and are eager to believe the Progressive/Liberal/Democratic lies and embrace anarchy. This is not a new situation. History is amazing as it details how the past continues to explain the present.

Consider the Russian Revolution. I offer just a scant discussion on Lenin’s role in this aspect of Russian politics. Hopefully I will have opportunity to offer a more complete discussion. Consider the first “free election” that Russia experienced. It was held in October or November 1917 (the month depends upon which calendar you consult). Lenin promised a “free” election where all votes would be equal and each citizen would be heard. The election was scheduled and a number of political parties provided the voters a choice. Among the many parties were two dominating parties: the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (Lenin’s Bolsheviks).

The propaganda fueling this election is intriguing. Lenin had confidence that his party would be an overwhelming victor. He was convinced that his pamphleteering during his exile was persuasive. He was convinced that only he knew best what the poor citizens needed for happiness in life. Lenin had devised a governing system by which the State would help the poor citizen to have free health care, free food, personal land ownership, and the erasure of all class “privileges” by redistributing wealth/financial resources/personal property. Under Lenin’s control there would be no more denial of personal rights, no more prejudice of persons, and no more unjust financial levels. All would be totally “equal” IF Lenin’s perfect Revolutionary State was allowed to transform into the Marxist utopia.

Here is where history becomes instructive regarding the Legislative Body of the State.

When the Tsar abdicated, the Russian Provisional Government was formed. Its purpose was to organize the free elections for the Russian Constituent Assembly. The provisional government lasted only eight months and was replaced by the Bolsheviks. A significant footnote to this period is that the Provisional Government was unable to make decisive policy decisions due to political factionalism and a breakdown of state structures. The anarchy fomented by Lenin and the Bolsheviks rendered a civil governing impossible. Whatever legislative bills were presented were instantly killed by opposition. Revolutionary unrest fueled violence. This was a deliberate design of non-cooperation and pure resistance! The deliberate campaign for divisiveness and refusal to perform governing duties is a sobering similarity to the resistance in modern day American politics. Lenin’s free election was conducted but here are some troubling facts from its history:

1) The election was designed to be held on specific dates BUT some argued that the peasants in the outlying territory needed more time to get their votes counted. So, the ballot counting was extended in some places by TWO MONTHS!

2) Throughout the 1917 campaign Lenin argued that the citizens deserved a government that represented “the proletariat’s interests” because, in his estimation, all other governments represented the “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.” Lenin argued that the rich would never give up their “privileges” and so the soviets would need to seize power by violence. Lenin’s propaganda fueled the division that would destroy the Russian nation. He urged violence nurtured by envy and jealousy arguing that some had “privileged status” that others did not and this great “inequity” could only be removed with a violent overthrow.

3) Even though the first free election included a number of different political parties, Lenin was confident that his Bolsheviks would win. That did not happen. The final tabulation exposed Lenin as suffering defeat and his Bolsheviks only garnered 23.26% of the vote. The Socialist-Revolutionaries emerged  with 37.61% of the vote. Lenin was unhappy and contested the results! Lenin refused to concede protesting the legitimacy of the election.

4) The objective of the resistance was a one-party government and an absolute silencing of opposition. “It is the duty of the revolution to put an end to compromise, and to put an end to compromise means taking the path of socialist revolution” Lenin, Speech On The Agrarian Question November 14 (1917).

Carefully consider how Lenin embraced the freedom of voting while masterfully disguising his evil objective of silencing the opposition and developing a one-party ruling government.

After the election results were announced, Lenin stood and revealed the coup. The results were called flawed. Those in opposition were eventually murdered. Lenin instituted his famous “dictatorship of the proletariat.” Lenin said this was the best course for the average citizen and this dictatorship would dissolve when all privileged distinctions were erased, all wealth inequities removed, and all land ownership seized. And the Russian population permitted this dictatorship to exist!

When applied to the 2020 General Election in the USA, this historical anecdote should sound national alarms! The very concepts that Lenin used to nullify the free election of Russia in 1917 are being used in today’s election. In fact, some of the very words and phrases that were used by Lenin are parroted by the Democratic Progressives today and characterize the membership of Democratic Party in the USA!

When the election process of our governing Constitution is compromised and dismissed as archaic and inapplicable THEN our nation has lost the compass for safely navigating the treacherous existence in this world.

The assault upon the JUDICIAL BRANCH

History reminds its students that the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justices were forever changed in 1987 with Joe Biden’s Judiciary’s malevolent confirmation hearing of Judge Robert Bork. Biden was campaigning to be the nomination of the Democratic Presidential candidate (which he would lose to Dukakis because of Biden’s plagiarism). In 1987 the custom was for such hearings to last two days or less. Under Biden’s chairmanship Bork’s hearing was weaponized and lasted TWELVE days. Such a reprehensible action has earned its own idiom in American language—“so and so was ‘Borked’.”

The 1987 Democratic Party’s politicizing and weaponizing the confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court appointments opened the floodgates for the most contentious events in the governing of the United States of America. One only needs to go back to the recent hearings to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018. The personal slander, insidious innuendos, manufactured complaints and a host of other evil actions have become accepted political weapons (Or as Speaker Pelosi remarked, “arrows in our quiver”). In past times it was customary that the sitting President was respected and his nominations were accorded with approval, even if the conservatives knew they were approving a Progressive/Liberal who despised the literalist view of the U.S. Constitution they voted for the confirmation. But now there is a horrid specter of divisiveness and vindictiveness enveloping the process.

The General Election of 2020 spotlights the tragic devolving of the status of the U.S. Supreme Court. It is suggested by some, with validity, that the Supreme Court is no longer focused upon apolitical justice but has assumed an active role in establishing law that the U.S. Constitution reserves only for the Legislative Branch.

The Democrats/Progressives/Liberals have announced their intent to “pack” the Supreme Court with Justices who disrespect the U.S. Constitution. They want a left-leaning Court that will sanction the total dismemberment of the constitutional statutes that made America a great nation. The far-left Daily Kos cautioned Republicans that a “future government controlled by Democrats is likely to pursue — court-packing —  as the best way to rebuff a conservative Court majority viewed as illegitimate.” Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told voters during an October 2018 campaign event that Democrats should “pack the Supreme Court of the United States of America” after taking the House, Senate, and Presidency. Leading Democrats also warned that if the justices issue a pro-Second Amendment ruling, and if Democrats win the White House and the Senate in 2020, then they will fundamentally remake the High Court.

Former President Franklin Roosevelt issued this same threat in the 1930s after facing legal obstacles with his New Deal and subsequently “threatened to expand the Court by six seats for a new total of 15 justices so that he could get the rulings he wanted.” The American people, however, rejected his threat, leading to massive Republican victories in the 1938 midterm elections.

Former Democrat presidential candidates Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and now vice-presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) announced that they were open to reshaping the court. “We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” Harris said, according to Politico. “We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”

During the summer of 2020 several major progressive groups, including Take Back The Court, Demand Justice, Progressive Change Institute, and the Sunrise Movement, signed a letter declaring their support for increasing the number of justices by “at least” two seats. The resistance wrote in part: “The fastest, most effective way to make the court representative of all Americans is to enact legislation increasing the size of the Court by at least two seats, and to quickly fill those seats with justices who will safeguard our democracy.” Note: In the context of this reference it is best to remember Lenin’s manipulative ploy that his “free” election would best represent “all Russians”?

In March 2019, President Trump astutely dismissed mounting calls from his Democratic opponents to pack the Supreme Court. “The only reason they’re doing that is they want to try and catch up, so if they can’t catch up through the ballot box by winning an election, they want to try doing it in a different way,” he added.

The late Justice Ginsburg balked at the proposition of packing the Supreme Court. “It would make the Court look partisan,” the late justice told National Public Radio’s Nina Totenberg last year.

The Judicial Branch of the government is to interpret laws respecting the United States Constitution’s limits. Once this unbiased governing is compromised, there is no lawful regulations for civility in our nation.

Concluding Thoughts…

This is where the United States of America is positioned as the General Election of November 2020 nears. A discord and division prevail that has never existed. This violence has been stoked with bitterness. The Progressives/Democratic Party/BLM/ANTIFA assure us that regardless of the election there will be violence. We are being conditioned to think that electoral results will take weeks or months to be validated and even then, they will be challenged. The vitriol marking the battleground is undeniable. Following Lenin’s example in 1917 the Democrats have been told never to concede. The results are already announced, “Furious Democrats are considering total war — profound changes to two branches of government, and even adding stars to the flag (i.e. adding the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico as States thus insuring Democrats have two solid additions to their column)  — if Republicans jam through a Supreme Court nominee then lose control of the Senate.”

As the National Election of 2020 approaches we read of violence, destruction and carnage in the public sphere…Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s recent death sparked a political firestorm, as Republicans prepare for a contentious, pre-election confirmation showdown and some Democrats threaten to, quite literally, burn the country down.

The ”Perfect Storm” facing the Republic of the United States of America has formed and threatens the three pillars of our civility.

After Lenin’s Bolsheviks permitted a “free election” they moved quickly to strangle freedoms. Lenin’s opinion of the poor proletariat having the right to vote for individual choices morphed into a ruling class identified as the “Politburo.” The first Politburo consisted of: LeninTrotskyKrestinskyKamenev, and Stalin. Lenin died. Trotsky was exiled to Mexico and was murdered. Krestinsky and Kamenev were assassinated. That left Stalin. Stalin manipulated the bureaucratic apparatus and seized power. By the 1930s, Stalin had transformed the Politburo into the supreme executive and legislative body of the Communist party and the Soviet government. Stalin was in command of its membership, decisions, and debates. The party congress now not only did not elect the politburo, but its own membership was fully controlled by the politburo. Not only had Lenin’s vision of a one-party political government been achieved but now it became a one-man political government! Individualism had been erased. The individual had ceased to exist and all had become “the State.”

The ”Perfect Storm” in Russia’s history resulted in the totalitarian reign of Stalin’s terror. Such is the conclusion of Russia’s first free election.

What will YOU do regarding the “Perfect Storm” in which our Republic is now struggling?

Please read the historical documentation available and you will realize
this is not a conspiracy theory but a historical constant!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Political Football

Many folks are accusing Dr. Fauci of continuously moving the science goalpost.

Fauci Moving the GoalpostPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fatal Attraction

Many feel Biden, Harris and the Democrats have a lot to do with the failure with 2020 election security.

Election SecurityPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Trust But Don’t Verify

Democrats fighting against only legal votes being counted in the 2020 election.

Illegal VotesPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

California Dem Official Wonders How To ‘Deprogram’ Conservatives Like In ‘Post-WWII Germany’


Reported By  Tim Pearce |  | DailyWire.com

Strap in. You mind is about to be explored. (RichVintage via Getty Images)

A Democratic Party official in California wants to “deprogram” tens of millions of Americans who watch Fox News and get information from other right-wing sources.

David Atkins, a regional director for California Democrats, posted a tweet on Tuesday asking how to “deprogram 75 million people” who watch Fox News and, presumably, voted for President Trump in the 2020 election. He compared the task to what was done in “post-WWII Germany or Japan.”

“No seriously…how *do* you deprogram 75 million people? Where do you start? Fox? Facebook?” Atkins asked. “We have to start thinking in terms of post-WWII Germany or Japan. Or the failures of Reconstruction in the South.”

“This is not your standard partisan policy disagreement. This is a conspiracy theory fueled belligerent death cult against reality & basic decency,” he continued. “The only actual policy debates of note are happening within the [D]em coalition between left and center left.”

As his tweet gained traction on Twitter in the following days, he posted follow-ups attempting to clarify his position.

“I know conservatives are upset by some of the responses here. And yeah, many are out of line,” Atkins said. “But what do you expect people to do in self-preservation? The Right has been running 4 years on ‘f*** your feelings, my conspiracy theories are valid opinions, and we have more guns.’”

“You can’t run on a civil war footing hopped up on conspiracy theories hating everyone who lives in cities, mainlining Fox/Breitbart/QAnon, threatening to kidnap governors and shoot protesters, without people trying to figure out how to reverse the brainwashing,” he continued. “[I] mean, for chrissakes, conservatives are literally giving themselves COVID just to own the libs. They’re dying in COVID wards insisting they don’t have COVID because it must be a liberal plot. People are gonna try to figure out how to defend themselves.”

On Thursday, he posted the latest update to his thread, saying that he was not calling for “re-education camps.” He asserted that right-wing news is “propaganda” that acted as “cult programming.”

“And no, of course I’m not advocating ‘re-education camps’ or anything like that. The point is that conservative infotainment is disinformation propaganda indistinguishable [sic] from cult programming, and social media algorithms enable it,” Atkins said. “And yes, it might be healthy to break the spell of the cult programming by showing COVID wards, the kids in cages and other victims and consequences of the conservative infotainment cult on the local news, the newspapers, social media, etc, so that people see what they have done.”

On Monday, a South Dakota nurse criticized conservative patients who were hospitalized with coronavirus.

As The Daily Wire reports:

CNN hosted a nurse from South Dakota on Monday morning who ripped her conservative patients of the novel coronavirus for allegedly being filled with “anger and hatred” and denying the virus’ existence until their last dying breath.

“They come in, they’re horribly ill, they’re gasping for breath, and, yet, they don’t believe they have COVID?” CNN “New Day” host Alisyn Camerota teed-up registered nurse Jodi Doering.

“They don’t want to believe that COVID is real,” said Doering, claiming that this isn’t coming from “one particular patient, it’s just a culmination of so many people.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Gee, Why Can’t Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 18, 2020 4:00 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Gee, Why Can't Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?

Source: AP Photo/Harvey Georges

Trending

In 1980, Democratic President Jimmy Carter lost in a landslide to Ronald Reagan, 489-49 in the Electoral College. So naturally, Democrats concluded that Reagan had committed treason in order to steal the election, to wit: His campaign had conspired with Iranian ayatollahs to prevent 52 American hostages from being released until after the election.

And who can blame them? Carter’s economic policies had produced a 21% interest rate, a 17% mortgage rate and a 15% inflation rate in the coveted “hat trick” of presidential incompetence. His brilliant strategic ploy of abandoning the Shah of Iran had led to a 154% spike in oil prices and Islamic lunatics seizing our embassy and holding Americans hostage in Tehran, where they remained for 444 days, until Carter was safely removed from office.

With all that going for them — plus that old Mondale magic –Democrats were dumbstruck that they lost the 1980 election. What other than a dirty trick could explain it?

The Democrats’ theory was that a month before the election, members of Reagan’s campaign had clandestinely met with representatives of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Paris and offered to sell him weapons in exchange for a promise not to release the hostages, thus denying Carter a huge election eve triumph.

In other words, liberals believed the Islamo-fascist cutthroats who had been toying with Carter like a cat with a ball of yarn wanted Carter replaced by someone stronger, like Reagan. How else to explain the fact that, minutes after Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released?

A more plausible theory was given in a Jeff MacNelly cartoon showing Khomeini reading a telegram aloud: “It’s from Ronald Reagan. It must be about one of the Americans in the Den of Spies, but I don’t recognize the name. It says ‘Remember Hiroshima.'”

The lunatics behind the “October Surprise” conspiracy theory might have spent their days in obscurity, talking to super-computers of the future — as one theorist claimed she did — except that, after a decade of periodic eruptions in disreputable publications like The New York Times (Flora Lewis, August 1987), The Nation (Christopher Hitchens, July 1987), and Playboy magazine (September 1988), the Times began flogging the story in 1991, beginning with a lengthy op-ed by Columbia University professor Gary Sick.

Sick had been President Carter’s principal aide on Iran during the hostage crisis, which would be like being FDR’s chief adviser on “sneak attacks” in December 1941. Columbia hired Sick as a professor, apparently unable to find Carter’s aide in charge of gas prices.

Soon, other news outlets such as PBS’s “Frontline” and ABC’s “Nightline” began treating crazies howling at the moon as if they were serious intel sources. Carter himself called for a “blue-ribbon” commission to investigate, saying, “it’s almost nauseating to think that this could be true.” (Which is ironic because that was my reaction, word for word, upon learning that Carter had been elected president.)

The theory that Reagan had arranged to keep our hostages in captivity until after the election was originally hatched by Lyndon LaRouche, the second-most ridiculous person named “Lyndon” to ever run for president.

One of the key American “witnesses” to the conspiracy — and Hitchens’ main source — was paranormal expert Barbara Honegger, who said she heard voices from the future and that satellites were directed to part the clouds during Reagan’s inauguration so that the sun would shine only on him. Years later, Honegger promoted the theory that clocks stopped at the Pentagon at 9:32 a.m. on 9/11, proving that the plane could not have hit at 9:37.

So she was a credible source.

Another major player was fake CIA agent Richard Brenneke, who was about to be fired from his lucrative job with a left-wing think tank for failing to substantiate a different conspiracy theory: that Vice President Bush was running an Israeli-backed drugs-for-arms operation in Central America. To stave off his firing, Brenneke suddenly remembered that not only had he heard of the October Surprise, he had been there! A LaRouchite confirmed that he had seen Brenneke at the meeting — something Brenneke himself had not remembered until that very moment.

One by one, each of the Reagan campaign aides allegedly at the imaginary Paris meeting had their precise locations proved for nearly every minute of the crucial dates of Oct. 17-19, when the sources claimed the secret meeting had taken place.

Then it turned out Brenneke wasn’t at the nonexistent meeting, either. Signed credit card receipts proved he was at a Star Trek convention in Seattle on Oct. 17-19. Just kidding! It was a martial-arts tournament.

These were among the nuts behind the “October surprise” fable pushed by the major media and the Democratic Party for more than a decade after Reagan’s trouncing of Carter in 1980. Democratic-led congressional committees spent millions of dollars investigating the nutzo conspiracy theory, eventually concluding there was nothing to it, which I could have told them for say, $300,000.

At the conclusion of the House’s investigation, Rep. Lee Hamilton, the House Democrat who had chaired the October Surprise Task Force, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times, saying: “The task force report concluded there was virtually no credible evidence to support the accusations.”

On the same day, the Times published a rebuttal op-ed by Gary Sick.

And that, kids, is how you concede a presidential election with grace and dignity.

Lawsuit Claims 40,000-Plus Fraudulent Ballots Pumped Through Detroit For Joe Biden


Reported by Joy Pullmann NOVEMBER 12, 2020

A lawsuit filed Nov. 8 in Michigan alleges that Detroit, Mich. elections officials oversaw and openly encouraged election fraud totaling many “tens of thousands” of fraudulent ballots, plus other illegal election-tampering.

The complaint filed by an in-state conservative nonprofit legal group alleges numerous instances of illegal and suspicious activity in the Democrat stronghold encompassing Detroit, Wayne County. President Trump’s legal team has filed a separate lawsuit alleging additional voting crimes and irregularities in the county.

The current results of the presidential race in Michigan suggest an approximately 146,000-vote gap between President Trump and Joe Biden, and an 84,000-vote gap between U.S. Senate candidates Gary Peters (D) and John James (R). The Associated Press and the state’s Democrat officials say Biden has won the state’s electoral votes and that Trump’s claims of fraud are insulting and inaccurate.

Wayne County is estimated to have been the site of some 850,000 votes this year. If this lawsuit is accurate, however, a massive portion of these votes is fraudulent.

The Great Lakes Justice Center complaint provides “eyewitness accounts and direct evidence” that “approximately 40,000” unsecured, irregular ballots arrived in vehicles with out-of-state license plates at Detroit’s only vote-counting location, TCF Center, in the wee hours of the Nov. 4 morning during a shift change in election workers. Eyewitnesses signed affidavits saying that every one of this group of 40,000 ballots they saw “was counted orally and attributed only to Democratic candidates,” specifically Joe Biden.

Other eyewitnesses signed affidavits under penalty of perjury stating they saw multiple other piles of ballots, together additionally numbering in the tens of thousands, that were counted despite violating election law, sometimes at the direction of local election officials. This allegedly happened both before the election, during early voting, and during the election and subsequent vote count.

“After poll challengers started discovering the fraud taking place at the TCF Center, Defendant election officials and workers locked credentialed challengers out of the counting room so they could not observe the process, during which time tens of thousands of ballots were processed,” the complaint says. It also alleges:

  • “Defendant election officials and workers allowed ballots to be duplicated by hand without allowing poll challengers to check if the duplication was accurate. In fact, election officials and workers repeatedly obstructed poll challengers from observing. Defendants permitted thousands of ballots to be filled out by hand and duplicated on site without oversight from poll challengers.”
  • Poll challenger Daniel Gustafson signed an affidavit stating he “witnessed tens of thousands of ballots being delivered to the TCF Center that were not in any approved, sealed, or tamper-proof container…Large quantities of ballots were delivered to the TCF Center in what appeared to be mail bins with open tops. Contrary to law, these ballot bins and containers did not have lids, were not sealed, and did not have the capability of having a metal seal.”

The Federalist reported earlier this week on one affidavit filed in this complaint, from former Michigan Assistant Attorney General Zachary Larsen, but there are many,  many more, and the details are scandalous.

The First Big Batch of 40,000 Suspicious Votes

An affidavit signed by poll challenger Andrew Sitto tells more about the 40,000 ballots he says he saw brought in: “At approximately 4:00 a.m. on November 4, 2020, tens of thousands of ballots were suddenly brought into the counting room through the back door…by vehicles with out-of-state license plates (Exhibit C). It was observed that all of these new ballots were cast for Joe Biden,” summarizes the complaint.

Sitto’s affidavit expands on what he saw while observing the vote-counting process from election night, Nov. 3, overnight into the early morning of Nov. 4. He says by 4:30 a.m. on Nov. 4, right before a 5 a.m. shift change between poll watchers, one of two men in charge of the vote counting “got on the microphone and stated that another shipment of absentee ballots would be arriving and would have to be counted.”

“At approximately 4:30 a.m., tens of thousands of ballots were brought in and placed on eight long tables. Unlike the other ballots, these boxes were brought in from the rear of the room. The same procedure was performed on the ballots that arrived at approximately 4:30 a.m., but I specifically noticed that every ballot I observed was cast for Joe Biden,” his affidavit states. “While counting these new ballots, I heard counters say at least five or six times that all five or six ballots were for Joe Biden. All ballots sampled that I heard and observed were for Joe Biden.”

There Was a Second Big Dump of Suspicious Ballots

The lawsuit alleges the 40,000 vote dump is not the only suspicious one observed on Nov. 4 in Detroit. Poll challenger Robert Cushman attested that on Nov. 4, 2020 at approximately 9 p.m., he “was surprised to see numerous new boxes of ballots arrive at the TCF Center in the evening… I estimate these boxes contained several thousand new ballots when they appeared.” He noticed that none of the names on these new ballots were of registered voters, which poll workers were supposed to verify.

“I saw the computer operators at several counting boards manually adding the names and addresses of these thousands of ballots to the QVF system,” his affidavit states. “When I asked what the possible justification was to counting ballots from unknown, unverified ‘persons,’ I was told by election supervisors that the Wayne County Clerk’s Office had ‘checked them out.’” Subsequently, Cushman challenged the entire process encompassing these “thousands of ballots.”

Election workers are supposed to match the name on each ballot with a registered voter on the state’s official lists. Instead, Cushman says, the Wayne County Clerk’s officers told poll workers to add all the names on the ballots from these boxes to the state’s list, giving them all a false birth date of January 1, 1900.

Election rules also say absentee voters are supposed to be added to the state’s registered voter lists before 9 p.m. on Nov. 3, election day. All of the voters for these ballots were added after this deadline, at the direction of local election officials, Cushman says.

“None of the names of these new ballots corresponded with any registered voter,” the complaint says.

Whistleblower: Election Officials Broke the Law Big-Time

One of the affidavits is signed by a Detroit Elections Department worker whose identity is concealed in the court documents under whistleblower protections. A Great Lakes Justice Center attorney told The Federalist she snuck out yellow sticky notes during ballot processing to be able to stay and observe some of the illegal activities alleged in her affidavit. The affidavit alleges numerous illegal activities conducted by Wayne County election officials, affecting thousands if not tens of thousands of votes atop all those outlined above.

The whistleblower says that during her work processing early votes, “I was instructed by my supervisor to adjust the mailing date of these absentee ballot packages to be dated earlier than they were actually sent. The supervisor was making announcements for all workers to engage in this practice.” If true, this is fraud and election tampering.

The same sort of fraud, she alleges, happened on Nov. 4. That day, she says, “I was instructed to improperly pre-date the absentee ballots receive date that were not in the QVF [the state’s registered voter list] as if they had been received on or before November 3, 2020. I was told to alter teh [sic] information in the QVF to falsely show that the absentee ballots had been received in time to be valid. I estimate that this was done to thousands of ballots.”

Throughout her daily elections work in September through November 2020, the whistleblower says, “I directly observed, on a daily basis, City of Detroit election workers and employees coaching and trying to coach voters to vote for Joe Biden and the Democrat party.” This is also illegal. “I witnessed these workers and employees encouraging voters to do a straight Democrat ballot. I witnessed these election workers and employees going over to the voting booths with voters in order to watch them vote and coach them for whom to vote.”

The whistleblower also says Detroit election officials actively avoided verifying voters’ identities: “During the last two weeks while working at this satellite location, I was specifically instructed by my supervisor not to ask for a driver’s license or any photo I.D. when a person was trying to vote.”

The whistleblower also alleges encouraged voter fraud through the possibility of double voting: “I observed a large number of people who came to the satellite location to vote in-person, but they had already applied for an absentee ballot. These people were allowed to vote in-person and were not required to return the mailed absentee ballot or sign an affidavit that the voter lost the mailed absentee ballot.”

The suit names the City of Detroit, the Detroit Election Commission, Detroit Clerk Janice Winfrey, Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett, and the Wayne County Board of Canvassers as defendants. The Democratic Party has made a motion to join the lawsuit as defendants, meaning it is volunteering to be also sued for these alleged crimes.

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Her newest ebooks are“Classic Books for Young Children” and “32 Classic Games You Can Play Anywhere.” @JoyPullmann is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books.
Photo Photo By: Spc. Brian Pearson

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Democrats’ Guide to Losing Gracefully


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 11, 2020 2:15 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Democrats' Guide to Losing Gracefully

Source: AP Photo/Richard Drew  

Trending

Here are the times Democrats have conceded a presidential election with grace and dignity:

OK, now on to my column.

I hope someone is recording the media’s demands that Trump supporters ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION! inasmuch as the Democrats refuse to accept the results of any presidential election they lose, unless it’s a landslide, and sometimes even then.

After George W. Bush won the 2000 election — despite the media depressing Bush turnout in Florida by calling the state for Gore when polls were still open in the conservative panhandle — Gore contested the election until Dec. 13, the day after the Supreme Court called off the endless recounts (in only certain Florida counties) demanded by Gore.

The night of the court’s ruling, Laurence Tribe, the Harvard law professor who’d argued one of Gore’s cases before the court, and Ed Rendell, general chairman of the Democratic National Committee, went on TV and said it was time for Gore to concede.

Both were immediately attacked by their fellow Democrats and forced to retract their statements. Gore’s deputy campaign manager, Mark Fabiani, for example, told The New York Times that Rendell “seems to be more interested in getting his mug on TV than in loyalty.”

The next day, Gore conceded, telling his supporters he had “congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States,” adding, “while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it.”

But that still wasn’t the end of it! Weeks later, the Congressional Black Caucus tried to prevent congressional certification of the Electoral College for Bush, raising objection after objection on the House floor.

Over the course of the next year, the Florida ballots were painstakingly recounted by an independent investigative firm at a cost of nearly a million dollars, paid for by the same media outlets currently telling you to shut up and accept the results — including The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post and the Associated Press, along with several others.

The year-long, million-dollar recount led to this shocking conclusion: Bush still won. As the Times put it, contrary to the claims of Gore partisans, “the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore.”

And yet, to this day, Democrats claim Bush was “selected, not elected,” as so wittily put by Hillary Clinton.

Hillary was still harping on Bush’s stolen election when she ran for president in the 2008 cycle. At a 2007 primary presidential debate, she delighted the Democratic audience by remarking, “Well, I think it is a problem that Bush was elected in 2000. (APPLAUSE) I actually thought somebody else was elected in that election, but … (APPLAUSE).”

At a subsequent primary debate in 2008, Hillary said that she and President Clinton had been making great progress “until, unfortunately, the Supreme Court handed the presidency to George Bush.”

In 2006, Michael Kinsley claimed in The New York Times that the 2000 election was “actually stolen.”

And so on.

When Bush was reelected in 2004, Democrats again refused to accept the results of the election, and again attempted to block Congress’ counting of electoral votes, this time with the connivance of Sen. Barbara Boxer.

Their smoking gun? The election results in Ohio didn’t match the exit polls! If that’s not enough proof for you, and I can’t imagine why it wouldn’t be, the voting machines were manufactured by Diebold, and Diebold’s CEO was a Bush supporter. Yes, apparently, the voting machines in Ohio were rigged to flip votes from Kerry to Bush.

This crackpot theory was pushed assiduously by Vanity Fair (Michael Shnayerson in the April 2004 issue, and Christopher Hitchens in the March 2005 issue), Rolling Stone magazine (Robert F. Kennedy Jr., June 15, 2006), and in books: John Conyers’ “What Went Wrong in Ohio” — introduction by Gore Vidal — and “Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?” by Steven F. Freeman and Joel Bleifuss. (You’ll have to read it to find out!)

I haven’t even mentioned the craziest of the Democrat media complex’s attacks on the results of an election: Reagan’s 489-49 electoral landslide against Jimmy Carter in 1980. (Stay tuned!)

Election results, according to Democrats:

— 1960: Kennedy wins a razor-thin victory after a surprisingly high turnout of dead voters in Texas and Illinois — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1964: Landslide election for Lyndon Johnson — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1968: Nixon won with his racist (and mythical) “Southern strategy.”

— 1972: Nixon landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1976: Carter won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1980: Reagan won by traitorously colluding with Iran to prevent the release of American hostages before the election!

— 1984: Reagan landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1988: Bush 41 won in a landslide because of his racist Willie Horton ads.

— 1992: Clinton won with 43% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1996: Clinton won with 49% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2000: Bush 43 was “selected, not elected” after the Supreme Court stole it for him.

— 2004: Bush won because of Diebold hacking the voting machines in Ohio.

— 2008: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2012: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2016: Trump won after colluding with Russia to persuade them to purchase $200,000 in Facebook ads.

If that’s how we’re supposed to “accept the results of the election,” then WOW — game on!

How Pennsylvania Democrats Deliberately Stoked 2020 Election Chaos


Reported By Jennifer Stefano  9, 2020

I can’t tell you how many texts I’ve received this week from friends and acquaintances across the country asking—usually in all-caps and peppered with profanity—what is going on in Pennsylvania? As a native Philadelphian, and from my current vantage in politically coveted Bucks County, I can see why Americans are demanding answers.

Ballots can be counted up to three days after Election Day? Mailed ballots with no postmark still qualify? Unsupervised drop boxes scattered across cities are entrusted to secure tens of thousands of votes?

Sadly, it’s all true. None of these practices inspires confidence that the standard of “one person, one vote” is being upheld. Nor were these practices valid in any prior general election in Pennsylvania.

Scratching your head as to why we chose the most consequential election in our lifetimes to run an experiment? Here’s what I’ve told my friends: the experiment was a wild success—once you understand that the chaos we’re witnessing was the plan all along, carefully orchestrated by Pennsylvania Democrats, including the governor, party activists, and the state Supreme Court. Here’s how it happened.

In Pennsylvania, Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf used the COVID-19 pandemic as cover for hurrying through new voting rules that bypassed reasonable deadlines or restrictions. The result? Many voters now have deep suspicion about wide-scale voter fraud in Philadelphia.

Republicans and Democrats have long understood the problems with mass mail-in ballots. The usual stages of ballot security are lost: unlike absentee ballots, some people are claiming they received unsolicited mail-in ballots, a practice Pennsylvania does not allow. Could it be ballots are being illegally sent or is it simply that voters forgot they signed up to get them?

Worse, it’s impossible to ensure the ballot is filled out by the voter or with her approval. And when the ballot is submitted, the chain of custody observing that ballot is broken. It’s a recipe for contested election results.

The seeds of public distrust were sowed in June, when Wolf decreed by executive order that mail-in ballots in the primary election could trickle in from certain counties for an extra week. The state Democratic Party followed up in July by suing to similarly extend the general election deadline for mail-in ballots. Their suit also sought to allow unprecedented “drop boxes” to collect mail-ins and to limit the number of election observers.

Wolf’s administration then asked the state’s elected Supreme Court, which is 5-2 Democratic-majority and has become notorious for partisan rulings, to grant all the Democrats’ requests—and they did on Sep. 17. The court went further than expected, granting the Democrats’ deadline extension, approving drop boxes and satellite “election offices” for ballot collection, and even ruling that postmarks could not be used to verify when ballots had been mailed.

In addition, the court removed the Green Party presidential candidate’s name from the state ballot over a technicality, a move that may have shifted Green Party votes to Joe Biden’s camp. In their decision, the justices acknowledged that the new deadline violated state law but claimed that “in light of the current COVID-19 pandemic” such laws could be dismissed.

It got worse. Sensing an opportunity, the Wolf administration pronounced that county officials “are prohibited from rejecting absentee or mail-in ballots based on signature comparison.” On Oct. 23, not long before Election Day, the court approved this last nail in the coffin of election integrity.

On Thursday, Republican Sen. Pat Toomey expressed concern about these unprecedented rule changes that fueled this week’s chaos, making clear that free and fair elections aren’t a partisan issue. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to rule.

But on Oct. 28, the Supreme Court postponed any decision with a 4-4 ruling—excluding newly appointed justice Amy Coney Barrett—that returned the case to its court of origin. At the time, Justice Samuel Alito noted that it is likely “that the state Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution,” opening a possibility that the justices will review the case post-election, with the potential outcome of eliminating thousands of illegal ballots.

On Friday, GOP state House Speaker Bryan Cutler, who noted that the election “confusion is a direct result of the court decisions,” called for a full audit before any certification of the results. Cutler also cited Pennsylvania’s 100,000 provisional ballots—cast when a voter’s eligibility is in question—that further indicated problems with the mail-in system.

Elections decided by the courts is a nightmare scenario for either political party. But Wolf refused to reform the state’s election procedures in concert with the legislature. In October, GOP lawmakers proposed compromise legislation, House Bill 2626, that included several, but not all, of the governor’s proposed changes to Pennsylvania voting laws. Wolf threatened to veto their bill in an all-or-nothing negotiation standoff.

To prevent a future election debacle in Pennsylvania, we need election integrity reform through the normal legislative process. Only legal votes should be counted, and controls should be put in place—like polling place verification and absentee ballot chain-of-custody at every stage.

But Democrats have resisted these reforms for years, creating the present chaos. The U.S. Supreme Court must respond accordingly and assure Pennsylvanians that their election was fair—regardless of the presidential outcome.

Jennifer Stefano is chief innovation officer and vice president at the Commonwealth Foundation, Pennsylvania’s free market think tank.

He Killed Bin Laden, All He Needed Was 8 Words To Shoot Down Rioting Liberals!


One would think that if you had accomplished a task like killing the world’s most wanted man that you would be able to get through life pretty uneventfully after that.

Well, the problem is that in today’s climate you have the issue of every single thing someone says being looked at like it’s the launch codes or something. The issue with liberals complaining about everything is that it wouldn’t be so bad if they weren’t trying to burn down every major city.

Robert O’Neill killed the most murderous terrorist of all time: Osama bin Laden, the sick mastermind who was responsible for almost 3,000 deaths on Sept. 11, 2001, alone. He and the rest of SEAL Team 6 are immortalized as American heroes.

O’Neill is stateside now, having retired from the service. And he watched, as we all did, as our country took a turn for the worst in the wake of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis police custody on May 25. Make no mistake: That death was a tragedy. So was what followed — looting and rioting that debased not only Floyd’s death but also those who were protesting against it.

There’s nothing that convinces people of the righteousness of your cause less than turning neighborhoods into glass-strewn hulls of themselves. It was painful to watch, particularly in the midst of a generational crisis, both epidemiologically and economically.

Watching from home, O’Neill had eight words for the rioters destroying America:

“I cannot believe I fought to defend you.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Stumper: Should Trump Mention His Most Popular Issue?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 21, 2020 6:22 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Stumper: Should Trump Mention His Most Popular Issue?

Source: AP Photo/Elise Amendola

Trending

In 2015, Donald J. Trump decided he was going to run for president on popular ideas. This was a stunning, historic breakthrough in American politics. He made his announcement in a speech talking about Mexican rapists, pledging to deport illegal aliens and build a wall. And the rest is history.

I’m thinking he should try it again this Thursday night.

Recall that Trump’s famous escalator speech provided any number of possible campaign themes:

Bomb ISIS!

Take their oil!

Protect our veterans!

Bring our jobs home!

Repeal Common Core!

Repeal Obamacare!

Protect the Second Amendment!

Make China pay!

Concealed carry!

But that’s not what the crowds chanted. They certainly weren’t chanting “Reform Social Security!” or “Protect Ukraine’s national sovereignty!” No, the slogan that inspired a million T-shirts, chalk etchings, replicas and hashtags was: Build the wall!

Month after month, at every rally, whenever Trump mentioned the wall, the crowds went wild. It was Trump’s one surefire standing ovation, his “Free Bird” at a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert. Even before Trump would take the stage, his supporters would start the chant: “BUILD THE WALL!”

Before the 2016 Iowa caucuses, Daily Beast columnist Michael Moynihan tweeted: “Talked to lots of Trump supporters in Iowa. When I pointed out he wasn’t a conservative, all had same answer: ‘So? The wall!’”

Naturally, the media reacted as if Trump had called for gas chambers. But that just made him look like a brave truth-teller. The media furrowed their brows and explained that Trump was “riding a wave of anger against Washington.” He was appealing to “this very visceral, very angry populist working-class blue-collar worker.”

So it was furious boiling anger. On the other hand, if it was just trash talk the voters yearned for, why did New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie sink like a rock?

Political analysts kept droning on and on about Trump’s mysterious appeal, but in all their prolix analyses, I can’t find a single one saying, BOY, WERE WE WRONG ABOUT IMMIGRATION!

Even the so-called “Muslim ban” — vilified by the media — helped Trump. Why were we admitting people to our country who would turn around and shoot up the San Bernardino Inland Regional Center?

Back then, Trump’s attacks on the media were premised on policy — not their personal attacks on him. That’s why his supporters would never desert him, even as he was libeled from every media outlet every minute of every day.

The media claimed Trump’s popularity was just a cult of personality, but the one thing most voters weren’t wild about was his personality. Unfortunately, Trump may be the only person who actually believes the fake news on this. He seems to think that what drove him to a stunning upset victory in 2016 was that the public just adores the big lunk!

Rough estimate of topics in the typical Trump campaign speech, 2020:

40 minutes: Re-living 2016 election night

20 minutes: His experience with COVID — he’s better than ever!

15 minutes: Insults Biden, Kamala, the media

20 minutes: Brags about his crowd size and how his fans LOVE him (they never loved Reagan like this!)

0 minutes: Biden’s massively unpopular promise to amnesty illegal aliens and halt deportations on his “first day in office.”

Mass immigration is a huge boon for Democrats. It gives them lots of new voters. That’s immigrants’ primary skill: voting. We’ve become the country feared by John C. Calhoun, divided into people who work for a living and people who vote for a living.

Not only do Democrats need the votes, but their blind hatred of Everything Trump, means they are wedded to this ridiculously unpopular policy.

I have an idea! Why not make Biden talk about it?

New York magazine’s Andrew Sullivan (now on his own) and The New York Times’ Thomas Friedman and Frank Bruni — liberals all! — have begged the Democrats to drop the open borders nonsense. Even Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum wrote in astonishment last year that he couldn’t “see much daylight” between the Democrats’ ideas on immigration and “de facto open borders.”

Here’s Friedman, after watching a Democratic primary debate:

“I was shocked that so many were ready to decriminalize illegal entry into our country. I think people should have to ring the doorbell before they enter my house or my country.

“I was shocked at all those hands raised in support of providing comprehensive health coverage to undocumented immigrants. I think promises we’ve made to our fellow Americans should take priority, like to veterans in need of better health care.”

The media had a grand time calling Trump’s immigration policies “racist,” but unfortunately for them, Trump’s policies were popular with all kinds of voters. It wasn’t just “angry white men” who were losing their jobs and neighborhoods (and sometimes their lives) to immigrants. So were black people. So were Hispanics. So were teenagers. So were — well, to be fair, Asians were more likely to be the ones taking those jobs.

As Sullivan wrote: “[For Democrats, there are] no negatives to mass immigration at all, and no concern for existing American citizens’ interests in not having their wages suppressed through this competition.”

That’s probably why we don’t hear so much about Trump’s immigration policies being racist anymore. Now, it’s just the never-ending demand that Trump condemn “white supremacy.”

(Speaking of which, the debate this Thursday presents a golden opportunity to ask Trump the central question of this campaign. There’s a section on “Race,” and I think something along the lines of “Do you support white supremacy?” fits quite well under that rubric. Maybe — just maybe – we will finally get an answer to that question. Because let’s just admit it: If they don’t ask this time, they’re never gonna.)

If you want to know how Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in 2016 and not lose a single vote, look no further than his proposals on immigration.

It’s one thing to push an unpopular idea. The GOP does that all the time: the Trans-Pacific Partnership — how about the Iraq War?

How many people supported moving our embassy to Jerusalem? (Answer:36%.)

How many supported Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security? (Answer: 25%.)

How many supported Trump’s tax cuts? (Answer: 24%.)

How many thought immigration levels should be decreased or stay the same? (Answer: 75%.)

How many supported mass deportation of all illegal immigrants? (Answer: 54%.)

Trump’s genius was that he was pushing policies that were popular. Maybe he should try it again at this Thursday’s debate.

The Victims of Childhood Transgenderism Have Spoken Out; It’s Time for Joe Biden To Listen


Reported By Michael Austin | Published October 20, 2020 at 2:44pm

During Joe Biden’s ABC News town hall Thursday night, the Democratic presidential nominee expressed support for the radical idea of young children changing their gender.

“I’m the proud mom of two girls, 8 and 10,” Mieke Haeck from State College, Pennsylvania, said during the event in Philadelphia. “My youngest daughter is transgender.”

She then asked Biden how he would “ensure that the lives and rights of LGBTQ people are protected.”

“The idea that an 8-year-old child or a 10-year-old child decides, you know, ‘I decided I want to be transgender. That’s what I think I’d like to be. It would make my life a lot easier,’” the former vice president said. “There should be zero discrimination. … So I promise you there is no reason to suggest that there should be any right denied your daughter or daughters, whichever one or two –”

“One,” Haeck said.

“One, your daughter — that your other daughter has a right to be and do. None, zero.”

Over the past several years, the left has increasingly supported the notion of childhood transitioning — allowing teen, adolescent and even pre-adolescent children to decide what gender they are and whether they wish to undergo life-altering gender reassignment therapies and/or procedures.

Before Biden and his fellow progressives continue their trans-children crusade, however, there are some important voices they should listen to.

Walter Heyer

 

Walter Heyer, an outspoken advocate against the transgender movement, at one time identified as female.

Advertisement – story continues below

“My grandmother dressed me as a girl when I was 4, 5, and 6 years old,” Heyer wrote last year. “I was far too young to comprehend the long-term consequences of being encouraged to cross-dress at such a young age, much less fight back. In my child’s mind, it felt good to be the center of her attention. Now I call what grandma did to me ‘child abuse’ because her grooming of me as a female negatively affected my entire life.

“In adulthood, I was diagnosed with gender dysphoria and underwent unnecessary cross-gender hormone therapy and surgical gender change. I lived eight years as a woman and tried my best to make it work, but after surgery I still had gender dysphoria. Even worse, I was suicidal. Before giving me hormones and surgery, my medical providers should have helped me explore the possible psychological roots of my desire to escape into a female persona, but none did.”

Heyer spoke to The Western Journal about Biden’s statements in support of childhood transitioning, saying that “poor, disoriented, babbling Joe” is simply “following orders” from the LGBT lobby.

“If he did not support transgender kids, his campaign would have been over,” Heyer said in an email.

David Reimer

Although widely touted as proof positive of the efficacy of childhood transitioning, the case of David Reimer is the first example of the child-trans ideology being exposed for what it was: child abuse.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – What’s in a Name?

The New York Post has exposed Biden Family crimes validated on Hunters laptop computer.

Biden Crime FamilyPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Political Favors

AG Ellison asks a favor of the BLM and Antifa mob before they burn down his city.

Antifa and AG EllisonPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Dopehead

The media has always had a left-wing bias but since Trump, they’ve graduated to Left-wing Bias on steroids.

Left-wing Bias on SteroidsPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – A Higher Loyalty

Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation will help liberal activists on the court from destroying the Constitution.

Amy Coney Barrett HearingPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

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

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report | Wednesday, October 14, 2020


Top Stories
Americans Support Amy Coney Barrett’s Confirmation By Double-Digit Margin
Mazie Hirono Under Fire for Asking Amy Coney Barrett if She’s Ever Raped Anyone
Amy Coney Barrett: Roe v. Wade Can be Overturned, It is Not a “Super-Precedent”
Kamala Harris Tried to Put Pro-Lifers in Jail Who Exposed Planned Parenthood Selling Baby Parts

 

More Pro-Life News
Amy Coney Barrett Slams Liberals for Attacking Her Adopted Children: This is “Cruel”
Andrew Cuomo Blames President Trump for His Order Killing 15,000 Nursing Home Residents
Senator Lindsey Graham Praises Amy Coney Barrett For Being “Unashamedly Pro-Life
Facebook Censors News Story Exposing Kamala Harris Trying to Put Pro-Lifers in Prison
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

PLEASE HELP! LifeNews.com needs your help during our Fall fundraising campaign. Please click here to support pro-life ministry with a donation.

 

Americans Support Amy Coney Barrett’s Confirmation By Double-Digit Margin

A new national poll shows Americans support the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett by double-digit margins.


 

 

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Planned Parenthood CEO: “Biden-Harris Victory Could Really Help Move” Our Abortion Agenda Forward

Amy Coney Barrett Signed Letter Condemning Obama for Forcing Christians to Fund Abortions

Most Americans Don’t Support Roe v. Wade, A Majority Actually Oppose Abortion

CNN Slams Amy Coney Barrett: “Stolen” Court Seat Belongs to Justice Ginsburg

Democrat AGs and Prosecutors Refuse to Prosecute Abortionists for Killing Babies if Roe is Overturned

THE VIRGIN MARY SPEAKS TO AMERICA: “Come to Me, all mothers who weep for their children. Come to Me and I will solace you, and you will find great comfort with Me.” – Blessed Virgin Mary –  Join in Our Lady’s 50th Anniversary Vigil, September 26 to 28, 2020.  Priests go free, domestic air, hotels, meals. Buses available in various states. For info www.smwa.org or call 609-654-0245 or 609-206-2963.  For a free rose petal blessed by Jesus and Mary write to St. Michael’s World Apostolate, PO Box 514, Bayside, NY 11361 (ADVERTISEMENT)

Ten Reasons Americans Should Vote for President Donald Trump

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report | Tuesday, October 13, 2020


Top Stories
Amy Coney Barrett: Roe v. Wade is Not a “Super-Precedent” That Can’t be Overturned
Judge Amy Coney Barrett: “I’m Committed to the Rule of Law”
“Impressive!” Asked to Show Her Notes, Amy Coney Barrett Holds Up a Blank Notepad
Washington Post Attacks Amy Coney Barrett’s Children, Accuses Them of Spreading COVID

 

More Pro-Life News
Amy Coney Barrett Hints That Roe v. Wade Could be Overturned
There is NO Pro-Life Case for Voting for Pro-Abortion Joe Biden for President
Amy Coney Barrett: Justice Antonin Scalia is My “Mentor,” I’m an “Originalist” Like Him
CNN Slams Amy Coney Barrett, Complains She Will “Undo Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Legacy”
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

PLEASE HELP! LifeNews.com needs your help during our Fall fundraising campaign. Please click here to support pro-life ministry with a donation.

 

Amy Coney Barrett: Roe v. Wade is Not a “Super-Precedent” That Can’t be Overturned

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett says she doesn’t consider the Roe v. Wade decision that allowed abortion on demand a “super-precedent” that can’t be overturned.


 

 

MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Democrats Attack Amy Coney Barrett on Abortion Because Her Qualifications are Exceptional

Trump v. Biden is a Battle for the Soul of America and The Lives of Millions of Babies

CBS Praises Andrew Cuomo Despite Him Killing 15,000 Nursing Home Patients

Joe Biden Just Told 56% of Americans They Shouldn’t Vote for Him

Netflix CEO Defends “Cuties,” Says Conservatives Misunderstand Show That Sexualizes Children

THE VIRGIN MARY SPEAKS TO AMERICA: “Come to Me, all mothers who weep for their children. Come to Me and I will solace you, and you will find great comfort with Me.” – Blessed Virgin Mary –  Join in Our Lady’s 50th Anniversary Vigil, September 26 to 28, 2020.  Priests go free, domestic air, hotels, meals. Buses available in various states. For info www.smwa.org or call 609-654-0245 or 609-206-2963.  For a free rose petal blessed by Jesus and Mary write to St. Michael’s World Apostolate, PO Box 514, Bayside, NY 11361 (ADVERTISEMENT)

Pete Buttigieg is Wrong on Late-Term Abortions, Most are Done on Healthy Babies

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: