Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Democrats’

Hedieh Mirahmadi Op-ed: Be very wary of the US thought police


Commentary By Hedieh Mirahmadi, Exclusive Columnist | Thursday, May 12, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/be-very-wary-of-the-us-thought-police.html/

It was astonishing when I first read about the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Disinformation Governance Board.

In my 20 years of government service fighting terrorism, the most complicated element of our work was protecting the sanctity of free speech while preventing radicalization. We watched young Americans leave their families to either marry a stranger or die in a foreign war but could do nothing about it because they had not committed a crime. They believed the persuasive pleas of the recruiters and wanted to be part of something bigger than themselves.

Civil rights groups, free speech activists, and others were very wary of our efforts. They claimed we were infringing on religious freedom and free speech by monitoring the recruiters’ activity. Back then, the social media giants wanted no part in censoring online profiles unless they advocated the violent overthrow of the U.S. or encouraged acts of violence. We understood it as Americans; we are not in the business of policing ideas, however unpopular they may be.

The Supreme Court even established “an imminent threat” standard to ensure we did not regulate grossly unpopular or hateful speech. So, it was not until groups like ISIS and Al-Shabab were officially designated as foreign terrorist organizations that criminal charges could be imposed for recruitment and/or material support. 

Fast forward to today, and this new board is tasked with addressing the threat of disinformation. The repeated use of the word “threat” by DHS Secretary Mayorkas should be a cause for concern. It purposely creates connectivity between disinformation and the potential for physical harm, so there is a crime that can be investigated and eventually prosecuted.

We already have laws to address any potential harm stemming from intentionally providing false information. There are civil penalties in defamation and slander cases and criminal charges for perjury or obstruction of justice against government officials. However, the Constitution does not allow the government to punish the exaggeration of a story or having a different opinion from the cultural norm.

Look, for example, at all the controversy surrounding the Hunter Biden laptop. What was commonly touted as a wacky MAGA conspiracy was eventually demonstrated to be fact. Same with the research about the utility of masks in fighting off COVID infections and the risks associated with vaccines. Just because something may sound outlandish to some does not mean it’s false. The power of free speech is that the marketplace of ideas allows our opinions to evolve and change with new data. Isn’t that how we defeated slavery and gave women equal rights?

This recent push to criminalize “unpopular” speech started with the backlash against the parental rights movement. Passionate and angry parents at school board meetings triggered the Justice Department to issue a memo about prosecuting the “threat” to school officials. Soon after, DHS issued a National Terrorism Advisory, warning of a heightened terrorism threat caused by disinformation introduced by foreign or domestic actors. Consider the language of the bulletin very carefully:

“These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence.”

The alarming conclusion is this: Our leading national security agency says the most significant domestic terrorism threat today is from people who share unpopular ideas with others, which could make them angry enough to commit a crime. To address this apparent threat, they create a Disinformation Governance Board to advise the operational departments of DHS on who to investigate and possibly prosecute for these alleged crimes.

I am shocked and dismayed this is happening in the public service sector, where I dedicated most of my professional career. How is the U.S. government suddenly the arbiter of “truth?” And why is lack of public trust defined now as a potential terrorism threat?

As if the unconstitutionality of regulating truth in the public square was not bad enough, the choice to govern the Disinformation Board makes it obvious who is the intended target of this effort. Nina Jankowicz, a clearly left-leaning social activist, has already labeled opponents of CRT “disinformers” and considers gender-based harassment online to be a national security threat, equal to terrorism. 

U.S. law enforcement power should never be partisan. We saw how damaging that was during the Russian collusion debacle when corruption in senior leadership tarnished the stellar reputation of the FBI. DHS and FBI officials are also never meant to be the thought police. We pride ourselves on that as Americans. Thankfully, many legislators are voicing their objections to this partisan attempt to silence opposition.

Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee wrote to DHS that the “federal government has no place interfering with the rights of all Americans to speak publicly about their political views … In fact, the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that this kind of ‘core political speech’ is the primary object of First Amendment protection.” Ranking Senator Rob Portman said, “I do not believe that the United States government should turn the tools that we have used to assist our allies counter foreign adversaries onto the American people.”

It is no secret that the U.S. has directly engaged in “disinformation” campaigns in countries worldwide to defeat communism, totalitarianism, and in many cases, terrorist recruitment. The American people should not tolerate its government now turning around to tell us what truth we can or should believe.

As Christians, even those who try to remain “apolitical” must realize we will be the greatest casualty of this effort. Our truth about who Jesus Christ is as God incarnate and that life begins with conception can easily be weaponized against us when the arbiter does not believe in God’s word. Look at the underwhelming response by law enforcement as the radical’s torch Christian nonprofits and harass conservative Supreme Court judges at their homes. Nothing is being done to stop those crimes as if their truths or legal rights do not matter.

There are dark days ahead of us, “For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18). 

Hedieh Mirahmadi was a devout Muslim for two decades working in the field of national security before she experienced the redemptive power of Jesus Christ and has a new passion for sharing the Gospel.  She dedicates herself full-time to Resurrect Ministry, an online resource that harnesses the power of the Internet to make salvation through Christ available to people of all nations, and her daily podcast LivingFearlessDevotional.com.

Former Trump Officials Put Forward Plan to End The Border Crisis


REPORTED BY JENNIE TAER, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER | May 11, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/05/11/border-trump-biden-republicans-gop-immigration/

Border Patrol Agents Monitor U.S. Mexico Border
John Moore/Getty Images

A dozen former immigration and law enforcement officials, many of whom served in the Trump administration, along with several conservative advocacy groups wrote a letter to Congress Wednesday laying out their game plan to end the border crisis.

The newly-formed coalition, which includes conservative organizations like The Heritage Foundation and groups like the national Border Patrol union, wrote a letter Wednesday addressed to lawmakers urging that no “amnesty of any type” be included in immigration legislation come the next Congress. The plan includes making migrants ineligible for asylum if they’ve already passed through a “safe third country” on their way to the U.S., completing construction of the southern border wall, and giving states the authority to enforce immigration laws, according to the letter. (RELATED: Trump Responds In Just Two Words To Claim He Wanted To Shoot Missiles At Mexican Cartels)

“Congress should be emboldened with the mandate to immediately legislate unflinchingly, ensuring that neither this nor any future administration is again able to weaponize loopholes in the immigration system—and defiantly refuse to follow plain law—to purposefully drive mass illegal immigration to the United States,” the letter stated.

“When the 118th Congress opens with new majorities in both chambers, it will be in large part because Americans have rejected the Biden Administration’s purposeful dismantling of our nation’s borders and our immigration enforcement infrastructure,” the letter stated.

New Border Security Coalition Provides Congress With Roadmap to End Biden Border Crisis, Reduce Illegal Immigration https://t.co/XwGiUGyjWZ

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) May 11, 2022

Assuming Republicans take the majority in Congress, the plan would provide a roadmap for their policy agenda, former acting Customs and Border Protection (CBP) commissioner Mark Morgan said in a statement.

“For far too long, Republicans have talked about ‘comprehensive immigration reform,’ which translates to amnesty, or simply advocated throwing more money at the border to solve the latest crisis. Those days are over. Those policy prescriptions are a recipe for failure. If you want to truly secure the border through reducing illegal immigration, implement policies that work. We look forward to working with members to make that happen,” Morgan said.

“The opportunity to legislate has been missed in several previous Congresses but the stakes are too high for it to be missed again,” the letter read.

Thousands of ‘Ballot Mules’ Delivered Tens of Thousands of Votes for Biden? NY Post Publishes Devastating Claims


Reported By Jack Davis | April 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/thousands-ballot-mules-delivered-tens-thousands-votes-biden-ny-post-publishes-devastating-claims/

A new report that analyzed the forthcoming movie from conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza warns that based on the 2020 election, Democrats have a “cunning plan” for the future.

After previewing the documentary “2,000 Mules,” New York Post columnist Miranda Devine wrote that “pesky evidence is starting to emerge of systematic schemes to subvert the electoral process — which must not be allowed to happen again if we are to restore faith in elections.”

Devine called the movie — which debuts next month — “the most compelling evidence to date” concerning the race between then-President Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden and said research conducted by the election integrity group True the Vote reveals what appears to be “suspicious ballot harvesting.”

The Western Journal reached out to the Biden White House for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

The research Devine cited relied on sophisticated tracking and surveillance video to reach its conclusions.

True the Vote acquired 3 trillion geo-location signals from cellphones that were near ballot drop boxes and election nonprofits in the weeks leading up to the Nov. 3, 2020 vote.

“Then they went searching for ‘mules,’ operatives who picked up ballots from election NGOs — such as Stacey Abrams’ outfit, ‘Fair Fight Action’ — and then carried them to different drop boxes, depositing between three to 10 ballots in each box before moving to the next,” Devine wrote.

Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, said she chose the term “mule” for the people involved in the operation because “it felt a lot like a cartel, it felt like trafficking … This is in its essence ballot trafficking … You have the collectors. You have the stash houses, which are the nonprofits. And then you have the mules that are doing the drops.”

Devine wrote that the network included individuals in battleground states who collected ballots from organizations that were ostensibly out to help everybody vote and then put them in drop boxes, a few at a time.

“The extent of the operation is jaw-dropping,” she said.

“When a mule is matched with video, you can see the scheme come to life,” she wrote.

Devine noted one snippet from the film.

“A car pulls up at a drop box after midnight. A man gets out, looks around surreptitiously, approaches the box, stuffs in a handful of ballots and hightails it out of there. Then he goes to the next box, again and again,” she wrote.

D’Souza said the efforts of the mules could have swung the election based on his contention that at least 380,000 potentially fraudulent votes were tracked by the project.

“Shockingly, even this narrow way of looking at just our 2,000 mules in these swing states gives Trump the win with 279 electoral votes to Biden’s 259,” he said.

Devine said that’s hard to prove. “There is no way to scrutinize those ballots now and see if they are fraudulent but if we must have drop boxes at election time, they need to be secure and under 24/7 surveillance,” she said.

She said Republicans cannot spend all of their time on the 2020 election because it “makes them look like sore losers.”

However, she also noted an interview with Trump in which he compared the election to a diamond theft at Tiffany’s.

“There’s no getting the diamonds back now. But we can stop the store being robbed again,” Devine wrote.

Jack Davis

Contributor, News

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.

Democrats Get some Brutal News from New York


Reported by will | April 25, 2022

Read more at https://patriotfetch.com/2022/04/democrats-get-some-brutal-news-from-new-york-wiley/

New York is a blue state, right? Yes, but Democrats attempted to go too far in using their redistricting powers to make it an even deeper blue. In going so far to try and block Republicans from being able to win seats, the Democrats broke the law, so their redistricting plan just got slapped down by the state appeals court. The Hill, reporting on that decision, notes that:

The ruling noted that under the 2022 congressional map, there are four Republican-majority districts and 22 Democratic-majority districts; in comparison, in the 2012 map there were eight elected Republicans and 19 elected Democrats, indicating that the latest map was skewed blue.

Further, the court itself, describing the horribly biased nature in which the New York Democrats went about designing the map and how elections analysis expert Sean Trende was able to show that the districts were so biased in favor of the Democrats as to be impermissible, said:

Trende concluded that the enacted congressional map pressed republican voters “into a few [r]epublican-leaning districts, while spreading [d]emocratic voters as efficiently as possible.” Trende analyzed the differences between his ensemble of simulated maps and the enacted map using various methods, including application of the “gerrymandering index,” which, he concluded, rendered it “implausible, if not impossible” that the enacted redistricting plan had been drawn without partisan intent. Trende also portrayed his results in scatterplots, which he explained showed how “[t]he only place where the [e]nacted [c]ongressional [m]ap falls within expectations is in safely [d]emocratic districts,” whereas the more competitive districts were made safer by packing republican voters into other republican leaning districts.

Continuing, and giving another example of the bias involved in the district-shifting, said:

Specifically, Trende’s simulation reflected that the four most republican-leaning districts in the enacted congressional map were more republican-leaning than any of his initial 5,000 simulated maps. Of the next nine most competitive districts, the enacted map was, in each, more democrat-leaning than any or nearly all of the initial 5,000 simulated maps.

The court then ordered the legislature to create a new map, one that would survive its scrutiny, by April 30th, though an appeal from New York’s far-left leadership is expected. If that appeal is unsuccessful and the current map, which would probably take four seats away from Republicans, doesn’t hold, that’s bad news for Democrats. 2022 is already predicted to be a red wave year with Democrats needing every tool available to keep the wave from turning into a tsunami. When that’s paired with how DeSantis has gone about redistricting Florida and the mixed results of redistricting elsewhere, the loss of the four seats Democrats could have been handed by New York’s efforts is substantial.

The GOP is predicted to retake the House regardless. But the magnitude of that victory depends on a number of factors, including redistricting. With this win for the GOP in even deep-blue New York, the likelihood of the red wave becoming a red tsunami looks higher than ever.

By: Gen Z Conservative, editor of GenZConservative.com. Follow me on Parler and Gettr.

This story syndicated with permission from Will, Author at Trending Politics

Democrats’ Culture War is Destroying Their Ability to Govern Competently Enough to Fool Voters


REPORTED BY: NATHANAEL BLAKE | APRIL 25, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/25/democrats-culture-war-is-destroying-their-ability-to-govern-competently-enough-to-fool-voters/

donkey

The ideology making Democrats unpopular is also preventing them from understanding why they are unpopular.

Author Nathanael Blake profile

NATHANAEL BLAKE

MORE ARTICLES

New York Times columnist Charles Blow recently claimed to be “truly shocked” by a poll showing President Biden with a 33 percent approval rating. I was shocked, too — how could his approval rating be that high?

Blow, of course, is surprised at Biden’s unpopularity, and worried that the Democrats are stumbling into a bloodbath in the November midterms. Blow is paid to understand and explain politics and culture to his readers. That he is surprised reveals a lot about the bubble he is in. And his meandering analysis of Democrats’ problems illustrates how the ideology making Democrats unpopular is also preventing them from understanding why they are unpopular.

Blow initially blames Biden — for being too much of a “decent man … sober and straightforward” rather than a “showman.” This is a ludicrous assessment of a politician, who, until age caught up with his tongue, was one of D.C.’s preeminent bloviators. Nonetheless, Blow’s ordinary partisan delusion is less interesting than the ideological blind spots revealed when he turns to genuine sources of Biden’s unpopularity, such as “the fear of crime and the pinch of inflation” and that “Republicans are playing heavily into culture war issues.”

Class and Culture Wars Merge

Although Blow does not seem to realize it, these issues combine to reinforce voters’ disapproval of Biden. Democratic failures on bread and butter issues such as crime and inflation are related to the culture-war radicalism that has captured their party. Twitter, not the blue-collar union hall, is now the heart of the Democratic Party, which is controlled by the educated, urban professional-managerial class, epitomized by woke, union-busting CEOs. This faction has merged the class and culture wars — championing cultural radicalism, entrenching its own economic interests, and neglecting the common good.

The Democrats are the party of wealthy diversity consultants lecturing hourly workers about white privilege and cis-heteropatriarchy while inflation eats away at wages and investment firms buy up homes in the hope of making America a nation of permanent renters. The governing priorities of those running the Democratic Party are sending government money to their clients (from teachers unions to Planned Parenthood) and waging culture war.

Dems Are Fanatical Culture Warriors

And they are fanatical culture warriors. Consider Blow’s complaint that the GOP is “challenging the teaching of Black history and the history of white supremacy in schools, as well as restricting discussions of L.G.B.T. issues and campaigning against trans women and girls competing in sports with other women and girls.” He adds that “Republicans are using white parental fear, particularly the fears of white moms.”

This litany of whines highlights the bubble Blow and his audience at The New York Times are in. Ordinary Americans know the difference between teaching history and teaching poisonous ideology derived from critical race theory. Americans understand that it is unjust for males to compete in women’s sports, and that it is perverse to teach young children about sex and gender ideology. They are angry when educators encourage children to transition, and outraged when they hide it from parents.

Voters have also noticed that the cultural left never stops where it says it will. We were assured that the LGBT movement was about tolerance for consenting adult relationships; now it is about transgender toddlers, child drag queens, and men in girls’ locker rooms. We are also now told that being anti-racist somehow means judging people based on the color of their skin. Blow and other bubbled liberals may be okay with mastectomies for confused teenage girls, but most Americans are not.

This cultural radicalism erodes Democrats’ ability to govern competently. Sometimes this is the result of neglecting the basic tasks of government in order to prioritize boutique cultural issues, other times it is a direct consequence of ideology, as exemplified in the crime wave resulting from woke prosecutors and defunding the police.

Cushioned from Consequences

In either case, wokeness is an ideology for those who are cushioned from its consequences. Indeed, wokeness is primarily a phenomenon of the college-educated, and especially the well-off; it is a niche, luxury political philosophy that thrives among the privileged and in the shelter of academia.

But though it is often a political liability, there are ways it serves the interests of its adherents. In particular, woke ideology legitimates the rule of the woke over the non-woke, and justifies economic exploitation and socio-political repression. Wokeness claims to reveal the systems of unjust oppression that permeate society; it focuses on race, sex, and gender, and relegates economic class to a second-tier concern. This allows many of the privileged and powerful to claim to be righteous allies of the oppressed without having to sacrifice economic or social power or position. Indeed, many can claim to be oppressed themselves. This is why wokeness tends to focus on BIPoC and LGBT representation in boardrooms and Ivy League campuses, rather than helping the working class.

The Wicked Working Class

Thus, it is to be expected that woke discourse often suggests that the working class (especially working-class whites) have it coming for their sins of racism, sexism, transphobia, and so on — the wicked deserve punishment, not sympathy. This is why pundits such as Blow are so quick to accuse dissenters of racism and bigotry. And it is why the woke left supports oligarchic power in pursuit of its aims, and eagerly uses economic, technological, and cultural power to suppress dissent.

This is why professors are having to submit woke loyalty oaths in the form of diversity statements, and why mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion training has become the norm in the corporate world. This is why the left is eager to use social media censorship to suppress “misinformation” — which in many cases is truth that is inconvenient to the regime (e.g., the Hunter Biden laptop story).

It is also why the left cannot understand its own failures. They have isolated themselves in a bubble that has drifted so far from reality and the concerns of normal voters that even electoral disaster may not bring them back to Earth. Cocooned in privilege and ideology, they think Biden is doing just fine. But most Americans have had enough of a government that is more committed to transitioning children than to controlling crime and inflation.


Nathanael Blake is a senior contributor to The Federalist and a postdoctoral fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – TDS, Truth Derangement Syndrome

A.F. BRANCO | on April 19, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-tds-truth-derangement-syndrome/

Democrats and the mainstream media are having a meltdown over the possibility of Elon Musk buying Twitter.

Democrates Meltdown over Elon Musk
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

DONATE to Branco Toons – 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 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 President Donald Trump.

Bill Maher tells Joe Rogan why the Democratic Party is ‘going to get their a** kicked in November,’ says people are hungry for ‘common sense’


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | April 13, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-maher-joe-rogan-democrats-midterms/

“Real Time” host Bill Maher predicted to podcaster Joe Rogan this week that the Democratic Party is “going to get their ass kicked” during midterm elections in November because they have all but abandoned “common sense.”

“I’m always saying to the Democrats, just don’t be the party of no common sense and you will be surprised at what amazing success you will have, as opposed to what’s going to happen, which is they’re going to get their ass kicked in November,” Maher explained during an appearance on Tuesday’s episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience.”

The liberal talk show host has gained some notoriety among conservatives in recent years due to his penchant for calling out increasingly radical left-wing ideas. But on Tuesday, Maher asserted that he’s not the one who has changed; rather, progressive in the country are the ones who have drifted away from broadly accepted norms.

“The left has gotten goofier. So, I seem more conservative, maybe,” he argued. “But like, it’s not me who changed. I feel I’m the same guy.”

“Five years ago, we hadn’t spent $6 trillion to stay home. I mean, I understand we had to do something with the pandemic,” he continued. “Five years ago, no one was talking about abolishing the police. There was no talk about pregnant men. I mean, looting was still illegal. So, like, have I changed? No, because if someone had said 20 years ago ‘I’m not sure looting is a bad thing,’ I would’ve opposed it then. So, I haven’t changed.”

Bill Maher on the Hunger for Common Senseyoutu.be

Later, when discussing why both he and Rogan have experienced a growth in their followings, Maher said, “I think it’s because we are both seen as people who are commonsensical.”

“And that is what there is a hunger for, I think, in America, more than anything, is common sense. Away from the extremes,” he added.

Elsewhere in episode, the two commentators discussed Big Tech censorship of the coronavirus lab-leak theory as an example of how everything in America has become politicized and categorized into one of two “extremes.”

“It wasn’t cool that [Twitter] didn’t allow the lab-leak theory to be talked about,” Maher said. “For months, you couldn’t even mention it. And that is certainly something that was open to question.”

“I mean, it was like, to me, the very kind of issue that if Twitter was really doing the job it should would be a healthy forum for people to go back and forth and say, ‘Well, here’s why I think COVID probably came from bats because A, B and C’ and then, ‘Well, but you know, there was this lab in Wuhan that was studying coronaviruses and somebody could have walked out with it on their shoe,'” he continued. “‘Can’t we even look into that?'”

“For Twitter to take that off, that to me was a huge red flag,” he added.

Rogan responded by saying, “It was crazy because it wasn’t resolved. It just wasn’t resolved. It wasn’t resolved amongst virologists, there was no way they could know.”

“Even the Biden administration admits that,” Maher cut in. “[Robert] Redfield, the former head of the CDC, firmly believes that it was in a lab, but again, that becomes the conservative view. For what f***ing reason, why — I can’t even follow the logic of why we pick, ‘OK, if you think it came from the wet markets, you’re a Democrat. And if you think it came out of the lab, you’re a Republican.’ It’s like what the f*** does it have to do with a Republican or Democrat?”

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Anti-Constitutional

A.F. BRANCO | on April 9, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-anti-constitutional/

Though being light on child porn and crime and crime in general, RINOs like Romney helped confirm KBJ.

Kentanji Brown Jackson Confirmed
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Who Gives a Dam

A.F. BRANCO | on April 10, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-who-gives-a-dam/

Many Democrats and RINOs are bracing for a red wave hoping that a wall of dark money will save them.

Minnesota Red Wave
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Blasting Back Worse

A.F. BRANCO | on April 11, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-blasting-back-worse/

Biden ending Title 42 will make the already huge disaster at the border much worse.

Biden to End Title 42
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

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 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 President Donald Trump.

‘Shellacking’: NBC anchor sounds alarm for Democrats over 2022 midterm election, forecasts major losses


Reported by CHRIS ENLOE | March 31, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/nbc-anchor-sounds-alarm-for-democrats-over-2022-midterm-election/

NBC News anchor Chuck Todd forecasted Wednesday that Democrats are headed for a “shellacking” in the upcoming 2022 midterm elections. Breaking down the latest NBC News poll, Todd demonstrated how three key metrics squarely paint Democrats in “dangerous territory.” According to the poll:

  • 71% of Americans believe the country is “headed in the wrong direction”;
  • President Joe Biden’s job approval rating is only 40%;
  • Republicans hold a lead over Democrats on the generic ballot, indicating more voters favor the GOP over Democrats for the upcoming election.

Todd explained the negative figures are historic for NBC’s poll, which has been running for decades.

“The current wrong track in our poll: 71%. What is really striking is third straight poll where the direction of the country has been above 70% — only been one other time where’ve had that in our poll. It is not a good time [for Democrats],” Todd said. “Look, 65% wrong track is a bad number. 71%? That’s why it is in the shellacking category.”

Poll Numbers Push Democrats Into ‘Dangerous Territory’ In Midterm Meter www.youtube.com

Regarding Biden’s job approval rating, Todd pointed to the 2006 midterm election — which resulted in Democrats winning the House and Senate — as a possible analog.

“When you start dipping below 45%, you’ve got a problem, and you’re gonna have midterms that are in the bad-to-shellacking ratio,” he explained. “President Biden is at 40. George W. Bush was at 39% in 2006. We know how that turned out. So, you see, that’s also in shellacking territory.”

The NBC poll found that voters favor Republicans over Democrats on the generic ballot 46% to 44%. According to Todd, that figure deceivingly suggests Democrats are better off than they really are.

“The bottom line is, generic ballot, if the Democrats are losing, it means they’re gonna get walloped,” Todd said.

In fact, the 2010 midterm election was the last time Republicans held a two-point lead over Democrats in the generic ballot in NBC’s poll. In that election, Republicans gained a whopping 63 seats in the House and six seats in the Senate.

If “shellacking,” “dangerous territory,” and “walloped” are not intense enough predictions for Democrats, Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who helped conduct the NBC poll, had one more powerful description of what the NBC poll means for Democrats.

“What this polls says is that President Biden and Democrats are headed for a catastrophic election,” he said.

After Throttling The Hunter Biden Laptop Story With ‘Hacked’ And ‘Russian Disinformation’ Lies, Propaganda Press Quietly Admit It Was Completely Legit


REPORTED BY: JORDAN BOYD | MARCH 17, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/17/after-throttling-the-hunter-biden-laptop-story-with-hacked-and-russian-disinformation-lies-propaganda-press-quietly-admit-it-was-completely-legit/

Hunter Biden laptop

Big Tech, the corrupt corporate media, and Democrats throttled the completely legitimate Hunter Biden laptop story one month before the November 2020 election by lying that the reporting was Russian disinformation.

Now a year and a half after a mere mention of the story got you nuked from the internet by power-hungry tech oligarchs, and with Joe Biden safely in office, the propaganda press is quietly admitting what conservative media immediately verified: that the story was legitimate all along. The president’s son did abandon his laptop, which contained a treasure trove of damning and compromising information about Hunter Biden’s sketchy foreign business dealings and their connection to the now-president.

On Wednesday, The New York Times stealthily admitted, in an understated article focused on a federal investigation into Hunter’s taxes, that the laptop story was legitimate and that he was under scrutiny for shady relationships with Chinese and Ukrainian energy companies, which might have violated “foreign lobbying and money laundering rules.” The quiet confession that the laptop was real and not “Russian disinformation,” as many Joe Biden advocates claimed without evidence at the time, was buried in the article nearly 25 paragraphs down.

The New York Post first reported in October 2020 that a “Smoking-gun email” discovered on an abandoned laptop demonstrated “how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad.” The news was devastating enough to hurt Joe Biden’s chances to topple former President Donald Trump, so the corrupt elites who control our nation’s streams of information banded together to brand the story as misinformation that deserved to be censored and suppressed.

Shortly after the Post broke the news, Politico rushed to publish a letter signed by dozens of former intelligence heads from the CIA, Department of Defense, National Security Agency, and more smearing the laptop story as “Russian disinformation.” These so-called “experts” admitted that they had never seen the laptop nor that they had any evidence to suggest that their “Russia, Russia, Russia” theory was accurate, but the letter quickly became the basis for the left to wage a censorship war on anyone and everyone who amplified the Hunter corruption narrative.

Even when current intelligence leaders confirmed that there was never any evidence that the Hunter laptop story was disinformation, Democrats kept spreading the lies to destroy their ideological opponents.

The New York Times was among many of the deliberately dishonest media outlets (and eager Russia collusion hoaxers) who intentionally downplayed the findings on the laptop and mischaracterized them to save the elder Biden from criticism. Some media companies such as NPR, which eagerly relied on the debunked Steele dossier to push anti-Trump coverage, declined to give the story any coverage at all because they said it “doesn’t amount to much.”

Big Tech also censored the New York Post’s reporting and prevented the story from being circulated on its platforms using phony policies. Twitter claimed the reporting violated its “hacked materials policy,” which it has since refused to enforce, and banned the New York Post from tweeting until it took the article post down.

Facebook also reduced distribution of the bombshell article because the Democrat operatives who staff the Silicon Valley giant claimed the story needed to be “fact-checked,” which even the company has admitted is just a bogus excuse for censorship.

The same people who knowingly bought into and spread the Russia collusion hoax colluded to deplatform and discredit their political and ideological enemies in the run-up to a highly-contested election. They were successful in their endeavors, with Biden ultimately ousting Trump from office, which is why they can now safely pretend they never lied about and throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story.

That story of deep familial corruption had the potential to change Americans’ votes in the 2020 election. That’s why Big Tech, the corrupt press, and Democrat blue checkmarks deemed themselves the gatekeepers of information for Americans and made the calculated decision to meddle in the election through censorship and suppression.

Despite the New York Times quietly now admitting the legitimacy of the laptop, don’t expect an apology from them or any other corporate media outlets, pundits, Democrats, or Big Tech. They have demonstrated over and over that their missteps are no good-faith journalistic “errors” warranting a “correction” or follow-up story a year and a half later. They will do whatever it takes to empower themselves and their political allies.


Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordangdavidson.

Biden’s Gas Prices Are The ‘Unity’ President’s Latest Way To Force You To Do What He Says


REPORTED BY: KYLEE ZEMPEL | MARCH 11, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/11/bidens-gas-prices-are-the-unity-presidents-latest-way-to-force-you-to-do-what-he-says/

Biden's gas prices

Americans are watching gas prices shoot up a bit higher every single day. Thanks to President Joe Biden’s green energy dreams and relinquishing of U.S. energy independence since his very first day in the Oval, ordinary people are paying the price. As The Federalist reported, it’s affecting everyone — from stay-at-home moms to office commuters, to small and large business owners. Biden, however, doesn’t seem to care. The president and his administration are bizarrely blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for the high prices, which have been rising ever since Biden took office. Even worse, they’re suggesting the best way for you not to have to worry about the high prices at the pump is to buy an electric car. To prevent the stress of high gas prices in the future, “The best thing we can do is reduce our dependence on fossil fuels” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on Monday.

“Loosening environmental regulations won’t lower prices,” Biden tweeted the next day. “But transforming our economy to run on electric vehicles, powered by clean energy, will mean that no one will have to worry about gas prices. It will mean tyrants like Putin won’t be able to use fossil fuels as a weapon.”

In other words, if you can’t afford to pay $4 or $5 a gallon for gasoline, just buy a Tesla.

The fact is that while the president and corporate media point the finger at Putin, Biden is the one really using “fossil fuels as a weapon.” The Democrats in charge don’t care that you can’t afford to leave your house if it means they can force their green energy agenda. Pricing gas-powered drivers out of the market is a feature, not a bug, and they’ve been admitting it all along.

You’ll remember how after the Colonial Pipeline cyberattack, when low supply and high demand caused a gasoline price hike, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm stressed she was “all in” on achieving Biden climate goals and said with a chuckle and contempt for fuel users, “You know, if you drive an electric car, this would not be affecting you, clearly.”

It’s no slip of the tongue. This has been the consistent refrain from the administration. Oh, you don’t like the price of gas? Good. Buy an electric car so we can hit our climate goals, rube.

This isn’t just the Democrats’ way of handling the green energy versus fossil fuels debate, either. This is their posture toward all their policy goals — and all the Americans who disagree with them and might threaten to hold up their agendas.

We watched it throughout Covid. When enough Americans (many of them healthy and young) didn’t get the vaccine right away, the administration cracked down and issued federal mandates that workers must get the shot if they wanted to keep their jobs. “Oh, you’re not getting vaccinated. Fine. You’re fired.”

When children were home doing schoolwork under the watchful eyes of their parents, who soon discovered gender propaganda and divisive critical race theory in their kids’ learning materials, they took the fight to their local school boards — to the dismay of Democrats, who then branded them as domestic terrorists. “Oh, you don’t like masks, CRT, and soft porn for your kids? Fine. We’ll sic federal law enforcement on you.”

Now they’re continuing the same attitude with their climate goals and the Americans who aren’t on board. “Oh, you won’t drive electric. Fine. We’ll drive gas prices so high you can’t go anywhere.”

It’s remarkable in light of what Biden, the media, and even Trump-deranged Republicans promised Americans this administration would be: a return of decency and decorum, an outstretched arm, and “unity,” “unity,” UNITY!”

Instead, Americans got nothing but division, derision, and coercion — and the continuing clear message from the administration and its allies that if you disagree with their policy goals, that’s fine. They’ll just make your life a living hell until you have no option but to give in to their control and comply with their demands.

But hey, no mean tweets.


Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. She previously worked as the copy editor for the Washington Examiner magazine and as an editor and producer at National Geographic. She holds a B.S. in Communication Arts/Speech and an A.S. in Criminal Justice and writes on topics including feminism and gender issues, religious liberty, and criminal justice. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Democrats Aim To Increase Taxes On Big Oil Amid Record Gas Prices


Reported by THOMAS CATENACCI, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT REPORTER | March 10, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/03/10/democrats-aim-to-increase-taxes-on-big-oil-amid-record-gas-prices/

Prices Of Gas And Consumer Goods Rise As Inflation Hits 40-Year High
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

A group of House and Senate Democrats introduced legislation Thursday that would implement a new tax to prevent Big Oil corporations from “profiteering.” The effort, led by Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and California Rep. Ro Khanna, would introduce the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax to the U.S. tax code, according to the announcement. Whitehouse said the tax would ensure the world’s largest oil companies don’t take advantage of the ongoing Ukraine crisis to boost gas prices and rake in greater profits, adding that American consumers have “seen this script before.”

“We cannot allow the fossil fuel industry to once again collect a massive windfall by taking advantage of an international crisis,” Whitehouse said in a statement. “I propose sending Big Oil’s big windfall back to the hardworking people who paid for it at the gas pump.”

The lawmakers noted that Big Oil companies have recently reported record profits. In 2021, Chevron reported an annual profit of $15.6 billion, Exxon Mobil reported $23 billion in profit and BP reported $12.8 billion in annual profits. (RELATED: BP Oil Rakes In Biggest Profit Since 2013)

Under the legislation, oil companies that produce or import at least 300,000 barrels of oil per day will be hit with a tax worth 50% of the difference between the current cost of oil and the average cost between 2015-2019. Smaller oil companies, which account for the majority of domestic energy production, would be exempt from the tax, according to the announcement.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse speaks during a Senate Judiciary hearing on Sept. 15. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse speaks during a Senate Judiciary hearing on Sept. 15. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Revenue generated from the windfall tax would then be rebated back to Americans as a tax deduction, according to the announcement. Single filers would receive about $240 each per year and joint filers would receive $360 per year when the price of oil hits $120 per barrel. There would be a phase out for single filers earning more than $75,000 per year as well as $150,000 for joint filers, the announcement said.

“Americans want to put pressure on Putin, but they need help with high gas prices,” Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, said. “So let’s tax oil companies’ war profiteering and send gasoline rebate checks to Americans.”

Overall, Democrats projected the bill to generate $45 billion per year if the price of oil stayed at $120 per barrel. (RELATED: ANALYSIS: White House Keeps Misleading Public On Oil, Gas Leasing. Here Are The Facts)

However, the U.S. oil benchmark declined to $105.89 per barrel on Thursday. Still, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused uncertainty in global energy markets, leading to higher oil and gasoline prices.

On Monday, the average cost of gasoline nationwide surpassed $4.104 per gallon, breaking the all-time record. Gas prices have continued to surge, hitting $4.32 per gallon on Thursday, up nearly 54% year-over-year.

“As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sends gas prices soaring, fossil fuel companies are raking in record profits,” Khanna said in a statement. “These companies have made billions and used the profits to enrich their own shareholders while average Americans are hurting at the pump.”

“I’m glad to introduce this legislation with Senator Whitehouse that will provide an incentive to cap gas prices and put money back in the pockets of consumers,” he added.

Whitehouse, Khanna and the White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Joe Biden’s State Of The Union Previewed Dems’ Fake Attempt To Walk Back Their Culture War


REPORTED BY: EMILY JASHINSKY | MARCH 02, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/02/joe-bidens-state-of-the-union-previewed-dems-fake-attempt-to-walk-back-their-culture-war/

Joe Biden’s ”State of the Union” address clearly marked an attempt by his White House to make their culture war seem like an afterthought. It’s not, of course, as evidenced by the president’s description of abortion as “health care” and his demand that Congress pass the radical Equality Act. But the bulk of Biden’s speech focused on “meat and potatoes,” as Chris Hayes repeatedly claimed during MSNBC’s coverage.

It’s true, Biden dedicated much of his address to Ukraine, infrastructure, the economy, health care, and Covid-19. He earned a robust round of applause with a line that said, “We should all agree the answer is not to defund the police. It is to fund the police.” He touched on guns, immigration, and the environment, but they were hardly his focus. Notably, Joy Reid lamented the absence of Jan. 6 from Biden’s address, arguing it was characteristically devoid of “red meat.” Reid was right to find that balance remarkable. Rather than signaling a shift away from Democrats’ scorched-earth culture war, Biden’s speech signaled a shift away from the party’s strategy of obsessing over identity politics. This comes with an enormous caveat: Democrats cannot and will not meaningfully make any such pivot beyond rhetoric.

Until they’re willing to drop truly radical policies like the Equality Act, it’s all smoke and mirrors meant to distract voters from what they’re actually doing to the culture. Democrats cannot simply pretend the summer of 2020 and the lockdowns never happened, no matter how much the media might help them try, because the party has now spent years committing to inflated definitions of bigotry that would condemn any moderation from their positions. Sure, voters have short memories and the media is complicit. But these definitions are now baked into our institutions. They are ingrained in the minds of a generation. They’re clung to by journalists and activists that Democrats need to please.

Samuel Goldman of George Washington University disrupted the annual flood of breathless SOTU tweets with a great reminder on Tuesday night. “Guys, this speech is not for you,” he wrote. “It’s for D-leaners who disapprove of the administration and these are the lines that worked for them in focus groups. Don’t overthink it.”

That’s exactly right and it’s also why Biden’s “meat and potatoes” tone felt different. From recalls and losses like Terry McAuliffe’s to Biden’s dismal ratings to Covid missteps and brutal new polls, establishment Democrats (and even their allies in the corporate press) are worried enough about their power to start making small sacrifices in the culture war, even if they’re superficial. And they have to be superficial, because establishment Democrats have spent years emboldening the cultural left, so much that small departures from dogma are now treated as bigotry by a vocal minority of their base. While those voices may be a minority of the base, many of them are very powerful, and they can weaponize all of Democrats’ prior cultural leftism against them to level accusations of racism and sexism and all the other -isms over rhetoric alone. See this tweet Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., blasted out to her 900,000 followers after the speech.

Biden’s heavy focus on “meat and potatoes” signaled a cynical but long overdue attempt by the Democratic establishment to convince voters they’re not frenzied culture warriors. Unfortunately for Biden and his party, they are indeed frenzied culture warriors and they’re going to have a difficult time proving otherwise without alienating the radicals they’ve tried so hard to appease. It’s at least good news that voters are rejecting cultural leftism so clearly, even Beltway liberals are noticing.


Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Troubleshooter

A.F. BRANCO | on February 13, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-troubleshooter/

The Democrats treat the high crime problem they created as though they didn’t create it.

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

A.F. Branco Cartoon – From the Heart

A.F. BRANCO | on February 14, 2022 https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-from-the-heart-2/

Biden Valentine’s Day where his achievements aren’t real, and his radial policies are a pile of schiff.

Biden Valentine’s Day
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.

Samantha Chang Op-ed: Biden Nuclear Hire Is Drag Queen Who Talks About ‘Sex with Animals’ and Has Called NIH Chief ‘Daddy Fauci’


Commentary By Samantha Chang | February 11, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/biden-nuclear-hire-drag-queen-talks-sex-animals-called-nih-chief-daddy-fauci/

The Biden administration continues to make bizarre recruiting decisions for top government jobs on the basis of toxic identity politics. A recent addition to President Joe Biden’s motley crew of dubious hires is drag queen Sam Brinton, who was tapped last month as the “Deputy Assistant Secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy for the Department of Energy.”

Rather than touting his qualifications for the job, Brinton — who lists his pronouns as “they”/”them” — bragged on Twitter about his unique status as the “first gender fluid person in federal government leadership.”

In a biographical statement on an LGBT website provided by Brinton, he boasted about having “worn his stilettos to Congress to advise legislators about nuclear policy and to the White House, where he advised President Obama and Michelle Obama on LGBT issues.”

The bio continued: “He shows young men and women everywhere he goes that they can be who they are and gives them courage. Once, while he was walking around Disney World in 6 inch stilettos with his boyfriend, a young gay boy saw Sam with his boyfriend and started crying. He told his mother, ‘It’s true, Mom. WE can be our own princess here.’”

Brinton is an active member of the Washington, D.C., chapter of a drag queen society known as the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,” the National Pulse reported Thursday.

The drag queen has referred to White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci as “Daddy Fauci” and even called him a “saint.”

There are also photos on social media where he displays his fondness for “pup play,” a sexual role-playing game.

In a 2016 interview with the LGBT-focused Metro Weekly magazine, Brinton discussed his fetish in detail.

“Pup and I have what I feel is one of the most ideally perfect connections between our personal and kink life,” he said. “Both of us have other partners, so we come into this space, and then we come out of it, knowing the boundaries of where your kink and non-kink relationships begin and end.”

Brinton acknowledged that others didn’t understand his activities.

“One of the hardest things about being a handler is that I’ve honestly had people ask, ‘Wait, you have sex with animals?’” he told Metro Weekly. “They believe it’s abusive, that it’s taking advantage of someone who may not be acting up to a level of human responsibility. …

“The other misperception is that I have some really messed up background, like, did I have some horrible childhood trauma that made me like to have sex with animals.”

This is who’s helping Biden run the country right now, which is in shambles amid record inflation, soaring crime, race wars and ongoing border invasions.


People can do whatever they want in the privacy of their homes (provided it’s not illegal or hurting anyone), but the fact that the kinky sex life of a high-level Department of Energy executive overshadows his qualifications is truly alarming. This is how empires crash and burn.

Under Biden, we are witnessing the real-time destruction of America — economically, culturally and socially. And we’re only in Year 2 of his reign.

Truth and Accuracy

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Samantha Chang, Contributor,

Samantha Chang is a politics writer, lawyer and financial editor based in New York City.

@Samantha_Chang

You’re Not Crazy. The New Left Really Is at War with Reality


COMMENTARY BY: MIKE GONZALEZ | FEBRUARY 01, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/01/youre-not-crazy-the-new-left-really-is-at-war-with-reality/

Marx's grave, London

In debates about critical race theory and other manifestations of identity politics, Americans are being confronted with a particularly virulent form of Marxism, which some call cultural Marxism. Its adherents think they can create a new reality, because at bottom they do not believe in objective nature. Conservatives engaged in an important conversation over the exact proportion of natural law and natural rights must ensure their attention is not diverted from sworn opponents who deny the existence of either.

Very roughly, the natural-law crowd emphasizes society’s “common good,” while those on the natural-rights side stress individual liberties. They have bigger problems than each other though.

Adherents of a new left have no time for fundamental truths, but believe that each era’s conceptual framework is what creates reality. Man may apprehend natural phenomena through his senses, but he can only comprehend the world through society’s reigning concepts.

Marxist Belief

Marxists believe those in power create this perceptional superstructure. “The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class,” Marx himself wrote in “The Communist Manifesto.” Max Horkheimer, the neo-communist who led the Frankfurt School in the 1930s and ’40s and first came up with Critical Theory, was as usual more wordy, but essentially said the same thing.

“The power of healthy human understanding, or common sense … are conditioned by the fact that the world of objects to be judged is in large measure produced by an activity that is itself determined by the very ideas which help the individual to recognize that world and to grasp it conceptually,” Horkheimer wrote in a foundational 1935 essay.

To critical race theory, an American mutation of critical theory, that powerful conceptual framework is white supremacy. In fact, the first task of CRT, wrote the editors of the 1995 collection of essays that serves as the theory’s tablet (which they refer to as “The Big Red Book”), is “to understand how a regime of white supremacy and its subordination of people of color have been created and maintained in America.”

It is embedded in the “‘ordinary business’ of society,” wrote Richard Delgado in his far slimmer primer on CRT.

Man Creates Reality

The obvious implication is that, if you eliminate the conceptual framework — presto! you change nature and reality. Horkheimer says this is what happens with each passing historical era: “There are connections between the forms of judgment and the historical periods. A brief indication will show what is meant. The classificatory judgment is typical of prebourgeois society: this is the way it is, and man can do nothing about it…. Critical theory maintains: it need not be so; man can change reality (italics added for emphasis).

From this, we can extrapolate why members of this new left believe that man can change his sex, which is just “assigned” at birth: because they are both Godless and materialist, they believe man is omnipotent. Things are not as they are because God or nature made them that way. Things are as they are because we conceive them so. Man creates reality.

This turns philosophy and theory on their head. Philosophy studies the true nature of things. But since there is no fundamental truth, philosophy becomes the motor to create a new reality.

Marx himself, once again, started it, writing in 1843, “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” Five years later, he added in the Manifesto, “Communism abolishes eternal truths. It abolishes all religion and all morality.”

CRT’s Goals to Dismantle Society

About a century and a half later, Harvard University’s Derrick Bell, the godfather of CRT, wrote, “As I see it, critical race theory recognizes that revolutionizing a culture begins with the radical assessment of it.” The works of CRT are suffused with calls for “theoretical deconstruction” and the like.

These are the true foes of those who want to conserve what is good about America (i.e., conservatives). They see all of American society as an oppressive hegemonic narrative that should be destroyed and replaced with a counter-narrative. “I believe we all have work to do to keep dismantling the organizing principle of this society,” says Alicia Garza, a founder of Black Lives Matter, a force that has already done a lot of cultural dismantling.

But starting in late 2020, a force has risen to push back: parents. “It didn’t take long for parents of all races to figure out that their children were being indoctrinated into a repellent ideology. Since the implementation of CRT at the school level began, genuine parental resistance to it bubbled up,” writes Abe Greenwald in a Commentary piece chronicling the counter-revolution.

Conservatives Shouldn’t Forget Common Enemy

Bright conservative minds engaged in an intellectual debate over the future of conservatism cannot forget this other fight against our common enemies. On one side of the conservative debate (and this is an oversimplification) are some who believe the emphasis should be on natural law (the eternal precepts that govern man’s action); on the other are those who stress the natural rights, or the individual rights, that man has because of his nature.

As Catholic University’s Melissa Moschella recently told me, they are tied at the hip, however. We have a natural right to free speech because our nature permits us to speak, but also because free speech is a prerequisite for discovering truth, an aspect of human flourishing. Our nature also permits us to commit murder, but we have no right to exercise that capacity because it is contrary to human flourishing, and therefore to natural law. These distinctions, let me assure you, are lost on Marx, Bell, or Garza.

I have good friends and mentors on both sides of the conservative debate. They are intelligent, patriotic, and courageous. Their issues do matter. But let’s remember who are the real enemies of fundamental truth, and not become immersed in internal debates over theological principles, as the Byzantines did in 1453 when the Ottomans were at the gate.


Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Mail-In Voting Law As Unconstitutional


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | JANUARY 31, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/31/pennsylvania-court-strikes-down-mail-in-voting-law-as-unconstitutional/

hands holding paper mail in ballot

On Friday, a Pennsylvania court declared the state’s statute authorizing no-excuse mail-in voting was unconstitutional. Within hours, Pennsylvania officials filed a notice of appeal with the state Supreme Court, putting on hold the lower court decision and thereby leaving in place the vote-by-mail option until the state’s high court rules.

With Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices elected on a partisan ticket and Democrats currently holding a 5-2 majority on the state’s high court, Democrats are predicting the no-excuse mail-in voting law will be upheld. That forecast seems accurate given the hyper-partisan approach to legal analysis seen since the 2020 election. It’s unfortunate because yesterday’s opinion in McLinko v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reached the proper conclusion as a matter of constitutional analysis and controlling precedent.

The McLinko case consisted of two lawsuits consolidated by the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. Both cases challenged the constitutionality of no-excuse mail-in voting. Doug McLinko, a member of the Bradford County Board of Elections, was the plaintiff in one case, and Timothy Bonner and 13 additional members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives were the plaintiffs in the second case.

At issue in the consolidated case was Act 77, which, as the court explained in Friday’s opinion, “created the opportunity for all Pennsylvania electors to vote by mail without having to demonstrate a valid reason for absence from their polling place on Election Day.” The plaintiffs argued that provision violates Article VII, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

Article VII, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides (emphasis added):

Every citizen 21 years of age, possessing the following qualifications, shall be entitled to vote at all elections subject, however, to such laws requiring and regulating the registration of electors as the General Assembly may enact.

1. He or she shall have been a citizen of the United States at least one month.

2. He or she shall have resided in the State 90 days immediately preceding the election.

3. He or she shall have resided in the election district where he or she shall offer to vote at least 60 days immediately preceding the election, 10 except that if qualified to vote in an election district prior to removal of residence, he or she may, if a resident of Pennsylvania, vote in the election district from which he or she removed his or her residence within 60 days preceding the election.

The key language in Section 1, the plaintiffs argued, and the court held, was “shall offer to vote,” which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had previously interpreted in Chase v. Miller, a case from 1862. At issue in Chase was whether 420 votes received from Pennsylvania soldiers fighting in the Civil War, who had cast their ballots by mail, were valid. While Pennsylvania’s legislature had authorized absentee ballots for military members, the state Supreme Court held the Military Absentee Act of 1839 violated the state’s constitution because “offer his vote” required in-person voting, explaining:

To ‘offer to vote’ by ballot, is to present oneself, with proper qualifications, at the time and place appointed, and to make manual delivery of the ballot to the officers appointed by law to receive it. The ballot cannot be sent by mail or express, nor can it be cast outside of all Pennsylvania election districts and certified into the county where the voter has his domicile.

We cannot be persuaded that the constitution ever contemplated any such mode of voting, and we have abundant reason for thinking that to permit it would break down all the safeguards of honest suffrage. The constitution meant, rather, that the voter, in propria persona, should offer his vote in an appropriate election district, in order that his neighbours might be at hand to establish his right to vote if it were challenged, or to challenge if it were doubtful.

In other words, “to offer his vote,” required a qualified elector to “present oneself. . . at the time and place appointed” and to make “manual delivery of the ballot.” The fuller discussion in Chase, however, provides a helpful reminder of the long-understood danger of absentee voting: “a break down” of “the safeguards of honest suffrage.”

Pennsylvania’s constitution was later amended to permit electors in military service to vote by absentee ballot. Then in 1923, the state legislature again attempted to expand absentee voting to allow non-military citizens, “who by reason of his duties, business, or occupation [are] unavoidably absent from his lawfully designated election district, and outside of the county of which he is an elector,” to cast an absentee ballot in the presence of an election official.

Another election dispute, however, resulted in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1924 In re Contested Election of Fifth Ward of Lancaster City, declaring the 1923 Absentee Voting Act unconstitutional. The Lancaster decision again concluded that the “offer to vote” language of the Pennsylvania state constitution requires in-person voting. Because at that time the constitution only authorized absentee voting for individuals absent by reason of active military service, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held the 1923 Absentee Voting Act unconstitutional.

“However laudable the purpose of the [1923 Absentee Voting Act], it cannot be sustained,” the Pennsylvania Supreme Court explained, adding: “If it is deemed necessary that such legislation be placed upon our statute books, then an amendment to the Constitution must be adopted permitting this to be done.”

In Friday’s decision in McLinko v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the three-judge majority opinion found Chase and Lancaster City controlling and struck down Act 77’s authorization of no-cause mail-in voting. In holding Act 77 unconstitutional, the McLinko court rejected the acting secretary of state’s argument that Article VII, Section 4 of the Pennsylvania Constitution granted the state legislature authority to allow mail-in voting for any reason. That constitutional provision provides: “All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law: Provided, That secrecy in voting be preserved.”

The court rejected Pennsylvania’s argument, noting that when Lancaster City was decided, the Pennsylvania high court had quoted the entire text of Article VII, Section 4, and yet held that the “offer to vote” language required in-person voting unless the constitution expressly authorized absentee voting. Friday’s decision explained that Section 4 merely authorized the state to allow mechanical voting, as opposed to voting by ballot. (Two judges dissented from the McLinko decision, reasoning that mail-in voting is not a subset of absentee voting but a new method of voting the legislature may be approved under Section 4.)

Pennsylvania’s acting secretary of state’s argument that Section 4 of the state constitution authorizes the legislature to permit no-fault mail-in voting defies logic. As the McLinko court explained, if Section 4 gave the legislature that power, then there was no need for the state’s constitution to be amended in 1997, to add as a permissible basis for absentee voting, “observance of a religious holiday or Election Day duties.”

While concluding it was bound by Chase and Lancaster City, the majority in Friday’s decision in McLinko added that “no-excuse mail-in voting makes the exercise of the franchise more convenient” and that, “if presented to the people, a constitutional amendment to end the Article VII, Section 1 requirement of in-person voting is likely to be adopted.” “But a constitutional amendment must be presented to the people and adopted into our fundamental law,” the court in McLinko concluded, “before legislation authorizing no-excuse mail-in voting can ‘be placed upon our statute books.’”

The majority’s detailed analysis in McLinko was correct, both as a matter of constitutional interpretation and precedent. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, however, will not be bound by its decisions in Chase and Lancaster City, even though the principal of stare decisis should caution the justices against overturning that precedent.

That prudential principle is especially relevant here, where the “offer to vote” language “has been part of the Pennsylvania Constitution since 1838 and has been consistently understood, since at least 1862, to require the elector to appear in person, at a ‘proper polling place’ and on Election Day to cast his vote.”

A decision by the Democratic-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court abiding by that precedent and reminding its citizens that the constitution controls notwithstanding the passions of the day would also go a long way toward healing a divided populace.

Further, striking Act 77 now, when no votes have been cast and no citizens would be disenfranchised, would do no harm to Pennsylvanians. That was the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s justification in Kelly v. Commonwealth, for refusing to consider the constitutionality of Act 77 as part of a challenge to the results of the November of 2020 based on the equitable doctrine of “laches.”

“At the time this action was filed on November 21, 2020, millions of Pennsylvania voters had already expressed their will in both the June 2020 Primary Election and the November 2020 General Election,” the state Supreme Court explained in Kelly v. Commonwealth and striking the state statute at that point, “would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of Pennsylvania voter.”

There is no such danger, now, however. So, will the constitution control or will the partisan interests of the Democratic-majority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court supplant the rule of law? Sadly, that latter danger is everpresent.


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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – What Could Go Wrong?

A.F. BRANCO on January 29, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-what-could-go-wrong/

After the disaster Biden created in Afghanistan can He be trusted with the Ukraine-Russia issue?

Can Biden be Trusted?
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco. ©2022

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Birds of a Feather

A.F. BRANCO on January 30, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-birds-of-a-feather-2/

This is the Democrat party of Minnesota, but it could be any blue state in America.

Democrat Convention 2022
Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Old Man, Look At “Your” Life

A.F. BRANCO on January 31, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-old-man-look-at-your-life/

Anti-free-speech advocate Neil Young gave Spotify an ultimatum, it’s either Rogan or me? Spotify chose Rogan.

Neil Young, Rogan, and Spotify
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

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 Video: Ashli Babbitt Tries to Stop Violent Capitol Agitator Seconds Before Being Fatally Shot


Reported By Jared Harris | January 26, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/new-video-ashli-babbitt-tries-stop-violent-capitol-agitator-seconds-fatally-shot/

A newly released video appears to show Ashli Babbitt attempting to stop a violent rioter inside the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, incursion. Moments after the scene was filmed, Babbitt would be fatally shot by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.

Despite several instances of violence, including the one where Babbitt intervened, the young Air Force veteran was the only person shot during the riot. But newly released footage puts an even bigger question mark on the shooting, the investigation of which appears to have lost many of the facts while being fast-tracked.

Independent journalist Tayler Hanson released the 25-second video clip on Tuesday. In the footage, a man identified as Zachary Alam punched through a window in the Capitol as nearby police did nothing to stop him. Babbitt appeared to grab Alam’s backpack, causing him to turn and look at the 35-year-old veteran right before she delivered a punch to the middle of his face. As the impact sent his glasses falling, the camera shifted away from the encounter. According to Hansen, this was only seven seconds before Babbitt was fatally shot by Byrd while seemingly attempting to scale a hastily assembled police barricade. Footage of the encounter that preceded the shooting can be seen below.

WARNING: The following video contains graphic language that some viewers will find offensive.

The Department of Justice arrested Alam on Jan. 30, 2021. A case document from the DOJ shows a mountain of charges against him, including several related to alleged assaults on police. While Alam is presumed innocent until proved guilty, video of the encounter likely will not do him any favors in court.

While Babbitt has been vilified by liberals and mainstream media hit pieces, this bombshell video appears to prove that the young veteran was not there to cause violence and chaos and instead actively attempted to stop the destruction. She did not back down when the crowd grew more amped but instead appeared to be in disbelief that police were failing to intervene.

“I believe she saw their inaction as odd or off, and was ultimately confused as to what was happening,” husband Aaron Babbitt told The Epoch Times.

“She was a take-charge kind of person,” Babbitt continued. “Her frustrations show that the cops who should’ve been taking charge — weren’t.”

Although Democrats and the Capitol Police appear to consider this case closed, emerging evidence shows the public has not been given a clear and complete picture of this year-old killing.

Jared Harris, Assignment Editor

Jared has written more than 200 articles and assigned hundreds more since he joined The Western Journal in February 2017. He was an infantryman in the Arkansas and Georgia National Guard and is a husband, dad and aspiring farmer.

Only 10 Percent of J6 Committee Subpoenas Relate to the Capitol Riot


REPORTED BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | JANUARY 20, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/20/only-10-percent-of-j6-committee-subpoenas-relate-to-the-capitol-riot/

Liz Cheney and Bennie Thompson

The House Select Committee established to probe the Capitol riot is not interested in probing the Capitol riot. According to a Federalist analysis of the 84 subpoenas publicly issued by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Select Committee on Jan. 6, only 8 have targeted individuals or groups with any connection to the Capitol riot. The rest have taken aim at former government officials and private citizens in a smear campaign for exercising their constitutional right to protest.

The 84 subpoenas do not include the more than 100 seeking the telephone records of individuals whose identities remain under seal, both from the public and from those whose privacy the committee seeks to violate.

“Every member of this committee is dedicated to conducting a non-partisan, professional, and thorough investigation of all the relevant facts regarding January 6th,” said Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney upon accepting Pelosi’s appointment as vice chair. “We owe it to the American people to investigate everything that led up to and transpired on January 6th.”

Except the committee absent of Republican-appointments at Pelosi’s direction is far from non-partisan, and the probe’s investigation is far from focused on the security failures at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Born in the ashes of a 9/11-style commission blocked by Republicans when Democrats refused a genuine investigation of violence on Capitol Hill, Pelosi’s Select Committee on Jan. 6 has remained faithful to its central purpose. That purpose is seeking retribution against political dissidents while offering a smokescreen to Pelosi’s own culpability in her failures to reinforce Capitol security. Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., made that much clear last summer in an interview with CNN.

“If you look at the charge that we have in the resolution, it says the facts and circumstances around January 6. I don’t see the speaker being part and parcel to that,” Thompson said.

According to Thompson, Pelosi’s apparent refusal to approve activation of the National Guard not once, but six times, according to testimony from former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, fails to fall under the umbrella of “facts and circumstances around January 6.”

Meanwhile, federal agencies run by Democrats have colluded with Pelosi’s deputies in the House to block a genuine investigation of the security failures at the Capitol by Republican lawmakers kicked from the speaker’s select panel.

Earlier this month, House Republicans penned a letter to Pelosi outlining at least four times last year the speaker’s deputies denied to provide records shedding light on the security decisions of Jan. 6.

“There is irony in the fact that the same time House Democrats are holding witnesses in criminal contempt of Congress for raising genuine questions of legal privilege,” wrote Illinois Rep. Rodney Davis, “you continue to obstruct Republican access to House records relating to the security preparedness of the Capitol complex.”

In October, the FBI similarly stonewalled GOP lawmakers who requested the same briefing given to members of the Select Committee.

Out of the 84 subpoenas issued by the panel, for which its authority remains questionable after Pelosi barred GOP appointments, at least one targeted a private citizen with no connection to any of the events on Jan. 6, whether it be the turmoil at the Capitol or the Trump rally at the White House.

Andrew Surabian, a Republican operative working to unseat Cheney in Wyoming, was subpoenaed by the lawmaker’s committee last week.

“During the time period that the rally was being organized, Mr. Surabian was overseeing a Super PAC in support of Republican Senate candidates in Georgia,” Surabian attorney Daniel Bean said in a statement. “Mr. Surabian is a close friend to Donald Trump Jr. and is running a Super PAC that opposes the reelection of one of the members of the committee. Accordingly, we believe this is nothing more than harassment of the Committee’s political opponents and is un-American to the core.”

Eight subpoenas from the committee have sought information more directly related to the Capitol unrest, including subpoenas to three right-wing groups and their leaders. Proud Boys International LLC, Oath Keepers, 1st Amendment Praetorian, and each of their chairmen have been summoned by the probe.

On Wednesday, Nicholas Fuentes and Patrick Casey of the America First Movement were handed subpoenas based on the committee’s suspicions of involvement in the chaos that unfolded at the Capitol.


It Doesn’t Matter That Voters Hate Joe Biden If Democrats Can Rig Elections


REPORTED BY: BOB ANDERSON | JANUARY 19, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/19/it-doesnt-matter-that-voters-hate-joe-biden-if-democrats-can-rig-elections/

Joe Biden

Just a month before the 2020 election, radio host Rush Limbaugh commented that Democrats “resent the whole premise behind elections. Look, they don’t believe they should have to persuade anybody to agree with them … The modern-day Democrats have to go through the motions of campaigning, and they have to go through the motions of trying to win the hearts and minds of voters. But they resent the h-ll out of it. And in their world, it’s the one thing standing in their way: This need, this requirement to win elections. And I’m just telling you: As soon as they can figure out a way to eliminate elections, they will do it.”

Today, Democrats are engaged in a full-court press to pass legislation that would brush state election safeguards aside and codify the shenanigans of 2020 into federal law. They’ll nuke the filibuster if they can, a step never taken previously for high-priority legislation but pursued now for a bill that nobody is marching in the streets for. Anything to cement themselves into a permanent position of power.

As Joe Biden himself said, “It’s about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote. Who counts the vote? That’s what this is about, that’s what makes this so different from anything else we’ve ever done.” Indeed.

Voters Aren’t Clamoring for Democrat Priorities

It’s hard being a Democrat lately. Just ask Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. After promising to hold a vote to eliminate the filibuster and force through passage of their “voting rights” bill by Martin Luther King Jr. Day (January 17), he had to push it back again. This, of course, comes on the heels of a stinging defeat of the Biden administration’s Covid vaccine mandate by the Supreme Court. That failure was preceded by the “Build Back Better” bill being stalled in the Senate, perhaps for good.

Party leaders are upset, but the truth is that voters are not enthusiastic about much of this. There are no marches for mandates. Nor is there any grassroots demand for Build Back Better or the federalization of state elections. And a recent poll found that support for the filibuster has only grown since Democrats began their push to eliminate it (now by a 53 percent to 27 percent approval to disapproval margin).

Democrats Mistakenly Double Down

Democrats may fail at policy, but they’ve always been reliably competent at the game of politics, zeroing in on votes with great precision. Have you noticed they haven’t been themselves lately, though? Even after taking a shellacking in statewide elections in Virginia and New Jersey last November, a moment when sane politicians typically learn from defeat, they instead doubled down. In her usual well-reasoned manner, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., commented after the electoral bloodbath that Democrats were beaten, not because of the president’s agenda, but because they hadn’t done enough to “excite, speak to, or energize a progressive base.” Never mind that voters knew what was at stake — and clearly rejected it.

One would have thought that older and more seasoned politicians might have guided the young House member back to reality, but the ragin’ Cajun himself, James Carville, only sparked her outrage in saying that “stupid wokeness” had cost the Democrats. James comes from the era of old-school politics, one that abided by the cardinal rule: “Never piss off voters.” He’s surely aware of its corollary: “If you do, then turn back – ASAP.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should know better, but she responded, “no, no,” when asked if the election results in Virginia and New Jersey would cause Democrats to rethink their plans. Full steam ahead.

Democrats Out of Touch

The president lamented that his big ticket bills hadn’t been passed before Election Day, and then concluded, “but I’m not sure I would have been able to change the number of very conservative folks who turned out in red districts that were Trump voters.” For a politician who’s been in public office for nigh 50 years, that kind of logic seems disturbingly unhinged. How exactly does one surmise both that the party’s losses were due to not passing the big agenda soon enough (AOC’s position), and that it would not have mattered anyway because, you know, the red wave was coming? Excuses, blindness, or something else? It’s hard to tell.

We’re left to ponder: Have Democrats lost the ability to navigate public opinion? Does it even matter to them anymore? With the midterm elections just 10 months away, and the polls moving away from Democrats, will they continue to walk off the electoral cliff or bring themselves back to reality?

No Compromise

President Bill Clinton, who also saw his party shellacked in a midterm, acted in the way that sensible politicians normally do. He called up the new Republican speaker of the House and asked how they could work together. The result was a Democrat president signing on to welfare reform and abandoning his unpopular quest for government-run universal health care. Voters rewarded him with re-election.

Nothing seems to faze Joe, though. No compromise ever seems possible. There are, of course, times it’s noble to dig the heels in. Faced with an approaching enemy, Winston Churchill proclaimed, “Never give in, never give in, never, never, never — in nothing, great or small, large or petty — never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense.” So where is the honor and good sense in ignoring voters who now give this president an embarrassing 33 percent approval rating?

Instead of finding common values to unite the nation, Biden calls those who disagree with him a bunch of racists. “Do you want to be the side of Dr. King or George Wallace?,” Biden pontificated in a speech pushing his “voting rights” bill. “Do you want to be the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis? This is the moment to decide, to defend our elections, to defend our democracy.”

Churchill battled the Nazis. Biden battles half of the country who simply disagrees with his party on a matter of policy — that is, who should control state elections — and whether we should suddenly abandon a Senate rule that’s existed for more than 200 years.

Not the Will of the People

Instead of being the moderate voters thought he was and simply calling up Republicans to find common ground legislation, policies for which voters would reward him, Biden remains ideologically ensconced in a White House driven by leftist special interest groups — venturing out to speak only to his own party’s caucus. Facing a headwind of opposition, he told the group of fellow Democrats on the Hill, “I don’t know that we can get this done … but I know one thing, as long as I have a breath in me … I’m going to be fighting to change the way these legislatures have moved.” Perhaps that’s the problem, Mr. President. You’re pushing a process rather than the will of the people.

Real Clear Politics notes that “it isn’t accidental that, in the generic ballot … the Democrats’ current vote share is 42.8%, nearly mimicking Biden’s.”

And “what does [RCP’s model] tell us about 2022? … a Republican-controlled Senate starts to come into the picture when Biden’s job approval falls to around 51% and becomes the most likely outcome at around 48%.” Biden is now at 42 percent approval in the RCP average, and that math should be clear to Democrats — but somehow, they seem unconcerned.

Maybe there’s a logical reason, a method to their madness. After pulling off the statistics-bending, six-fold swing-state wonder in the wee hours of election night 2020, perhaps Democrats now have reason to believe they’re no longer accountable to voters. Public opinion and polls become meaningless when you control the election process, when the courts turn a blind eye, and when the media blocks any honest inquiry.

Rush was right. Democrats are now working harder to change the election system than to change your mind because, as their actions demonstrate, they don’t care what you think. They just want to win.


Bob Anderson is a partner and CFO of a hotel development company and a former aerospace engineer who worked on the International Space Station and interned in Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) at the Pentagon. He is also a licensed commercial pilot.

California Weighs Doubling Taxes to Pay For Single-Payer Health Care System That Would Cover All Illegal Aliens


Reported By Cristina Laila | Published January 17, 2022

Read more at https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/california-weighs-doubling-taxes-pay-single-payer-health-care-system-cover-illegal-aliens/

California lawmakers are weighing DOUBLING taxes to pay for a single-payer health care system that would cover all illegal aliens. California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) last Monday proposed a budget that would give all illegal aliens health coverage.

In 2019, California extended health coverage to illegals 26 and under. In 2021, California began covering illegals over the age of 55. Now Newsom wants ALL illegals in California to have health coverage, and Californians may see a tax increase of roughly $12,250 per household.

Fox Business reported:

California lawmakers unveiled a new bill at the beginning of the year that would establish a single-payer health care system – an ambitious plan that would be funded by nearly doubling the state’s already-high taxes.

A new analysis from the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan group that generally advocates for lower taxes, found that the proposed constitutional amendment would increase taxes by roughly $12,250 per household in order to fund the first-of-its-kind health care system. In all, the tax increases are designed to raise an additional $163 billion per year, which is more than California raised in total tax revenue any year before the pandemic.

Under the bill, the top marginal rate on wage income would soar to 18.05% – well above the median top marginal rate of 5.3% and the state’s existing rate of 12.3%. There would be an 18-bracket system, with higher taxes kicking in for individuals earning more than $149,509. The highest rate would apply to those who earn more than $2,484,121.

California would also expand the payroll tax paid by employees who earn more than $49,990 in annual income if they work for a company that has more than 50 workers. Walczak noted the plan could deter small businesses from expanding by inadvertently creating a tax cliff. For instance, if a company that had 49 workers earning $80,000 each hired one additional employee, they would suddenly create a tax bill of more than $90,000.

Finally, the state would also adopt a new 2.3% gross receipts tax (GRT) on qualified businesses minus the first $2 million in annual gross receipts, at a rate more than three times that of the country’s current highest GRT.

Cristina Laila

Cristina began writing for The Gateway Pundit in 2016 and she is currently the Associate Editor.

Democrats Prepare To Dump Joe Biden Now That He’s Served His Purpose


Reported BY: BOB ANDERSON | DECEMBER 20, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/20/democrats-prepare-to-dump-joe-biden-now-that-hes-served-his-purpose/

Joe Biden getting a vaccine
Just a year after a record 81 million Americans voted for Joe Biden, they’re now being told it didn’t work out. BOB ANDERSON / MORE ARTICLES

When The New York Times begins publishing op-eds saying Joe Biden should not run again, and that he should announce it soon, then the gig is officially up. Biden is a lame duck. Perhaps someone should tell him.

Columnist Bret Stephens is right to note that the president would be 86 years old at the time of the next election cycle, and that he now “seems … uneven. Often cogent, but sometimes alarmingly incoherent.” More simply, Joe is old and tottering—and he’s unpopular to a startling degree. As Stephens notes, even passage of a multi-trillion-dollar “infrastructure” spending bill didn’t boost his numbers much. He suggests the president liberate his party by freeing new (and younger) candidates to begin exploring a path to the presidency.

Sure, the question of Joe’s future “need(s) to be discussed candidly, not just whispered constantly.” At the same time, can we also ask the other obvious question candidly? Why did the media cover for an elderly septuagenarian with clear age-related issues, thrusting him into a job he was never truly capable of holding—and subjecting the nation to a dangerous period without a strong leader? It’s fine to have a mea culpa moment, and truth delivered late is better than truth denied forever, but as the nation stumbles along with a puppet president there should be some accountability.

Just a year after a record 81 million Americans voted for Biden, they’re now being told it didn’t work out. Sorry. It’s coming within the timeframe of the traditional presidential “honeymoon,” that brief period presidents are normally at their zenith of political power and brimming to pass a bold agenda. Perhaps we should give the public some adjustment time to avoid whiplash from this quick pivot. After all, it wasn’t long ago that the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin was telling them Biden was completely fit for duty, someone who “with his aviator sunglasses (plus his promotion of exercise during the Obama administration), projects vitality and energy.

Just more than a month before the election last year, a Forbes article claimed Trump and Biden might be super agers who would be expected to significantly outlive other men their age. Trump’s activity on the campaign trail perhaps warranted that description, but Biden not so much. He spent more days underground than Punxsutawney Phil and showed frequent difficulty with coherency on the campaign trail, from trying to describe COVID losses for the past hundred years to quoting you know, the thing.”

Days after Biden’s election victory last year, Matt Viser of the Washington Post tweeted that “Joe Biden would often jog onto stage, showing how physically vigorous he is and attempting to dispel questions about his age. Now that he’s the oldest president-elect in American history, that doesn’t change.”

Has it changed now, Matt?

The truth is that establishment Democrats wanted Joe, and they selected him, despite his age and numerous warning signs regarding his mental acuity. He was the blank canvas on which anything could be written, and he could be sold as a “moderate.”

As Bernie Sanders surged in the polls in early 2020 with 45 delegates after the first three primaries and Joe languished in a distant third place with 15, the party took control. Rep. Jim Clyburn stepped in and delivered an influential endorsement in South Carolina that pushed African-American support to Biden’s campaign, propelling him to victory. Stories immediately appeared claiming Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, and Pete Buttigieg had no realistic path to the nomination.”

Despite trailing early in fundraising behind the well-organized Sanders fundraising machine, the Democrat establishment pivoted to push donations to Biden. As the NYT admitted in an article at the time, “The elite world of billionaires and multimillionaires has remained a critical cog in the Biden money machine.” Bernie’s small-dollar donors were no match for the large bundles of corporate and PAC cash. With a lot of help from a sycophantic media, Biden was elected president of the United States, without serious inquiry regarding his physical and mental abilities. Now, suddenly, it’s time to plan Joe’s exit before the new Oval Office carpet has fully settled in place?

We should note that it wasn’t Joe stumbling up the stairs of Air Force One that troubled Democrats into questioning Joe’s fitness. They didn’t question his stability when he at times spoke gibberish. They didn’t seem worried when his physical exam failed to report on his cognitive ability. No, his collapse in the polls is why Joe is suddenly being challenged on the question of running again, and despite Chuck Todd’s protestations, it can’t be blamed on Trump.

It turns out that the public is a bit smarter than Democrats guessed. Reading prepared speeches from a teleprompter is not a substitute for leadership. Neither is putting one’s head down on the presidential podium like a child in the face of tough questions about a military failure in Afghanistan. The blame game can only get a president so far. After voters finish expressing ire at the press for being misled about Biden’s abilities, perhaps they will turn and express sympathy for the old man who so desperately wanted the job. Having run twice before, the party eventually picked him, but not before the gas had run out of his tank.

Joe may have always been a politician, but the man behind the podium now is not the same as the one who ran in 2008, and certainly not the man who ran in 1988. Stripped of his dignity, he has become a caricature of a president, adorned with all of the symbols of the office, but lacking the substance necessary to perform.

Every Trump voter can still name his key issues: closing the border, beating China, restoring American jobs, making America energy independent, and above all, to “Make America Great Again.” Less than a year into his presidency, it’s hard to recall Biden standing strongly for anything in particular, having served more as an official signer of policy goals for leftist special interest groups than for his own agenda.

The truth is that even as his campaign wobbled toward the finish line last year, they were still struggling to coin a definitive slogan. That few can remember the eventual decision speaks to the vacuousness of this man and this presidency.

Joe is in the process of sinking not only himself but also his party in the upcoming midterms and possibly the 2024 election, so the door to retirement is being planned. Perhaps Democrats will at least give him the courtesy of a final national address, a chance to read from the presidential teleprompter one final time. At the end, he can sign off blissfully with, “Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America … end of message.”


Bob Anderson is a partner and CFO of a hotel development company and a former aerospace engineer who worked on the International Space Station and interned in Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) at the Pentagon. He is also a licensed commercial pilot.

Democrats Like Me Are Furious With Our Party For Pushing Gender Insanity


Reported By Kara Dansky | NOVEMBER 16, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/16/democrats-like-me-are-furious-with-our-party-for-pushing-gender-insanity/

It is not an exaggeration to say that the United States is in crisis about the meanings of the words sex and gender. We are all victims of this crisis, but the primary victims are women and girls. Throughout U.S. law, the word sex is being completely redefined to mean “gender identity” or “transgender.” Congress is doing it. The Biden administration is doing it. The federal courts are doing it.

Most Americans have no comprehension of the implications of this, due to no fault of their own. Very few media outlets will permit us to talk about it. Yet feminists have been talking about it for a long time. The Women’s Liberation Front (WoLF) has been talking about it since its founding in 2013 (I served on the board of WoLF from 2016-2020).

Jennifer Bilek talked about it in this publication in her 2018 essay, “Who Are the Rich, White Men Institutionalizing Transgender Ideology?” She continues to talk about it in her outstanding 11th Hour Blog. The Women’s Human Rights Campaign (WHRC) has been talking about it globally since 2019 and in the United States since 2020 by advancing the aims of the Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights, which has been signed by more than 20,000 people and hundreds of organizations (I currently serve as the president of the U.S. chapter).

The mainstream media steadfastly ignores all of this and is engaged in a concerted effort to hide it from Americans. But Americans are waking up, due in large part to the steadfast work of radical feminists or, as some people might say, “TERFs.” The acronym “TERF,” said to mean “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist,” was created by misogynists to demean those of us who fight for the rights, privacy, and safety of women and girls. Many feminists have chosen to reclaim the acronym, arguing that it stands for “Tired of Explaining Reality to Fools” or “Totally Excellent Radical Feminist.”

In October of this year, comedian Dave Chappelle made headlines when he proclaimed that he is “Team TERF” during his Netflix show “The Closer.” The hashtag #TeamTERF immediately started trending on Twitter. Chappelle did this in the context of defending British author J.K. Rowling, who has faced relentless abuse for her defense of women and girls and abuse survivors. If fighting for the rights, privacy, and safety of women and girls makes me a TERF, then so be it.

Many people will be angry with me for publishing in The Federalist because The Federalist is a conservative-leaning publication. I am not a conservative and never have been. I registered to vote as a Democrat in 1990. Since then, the only time I was not a registered Democrat was during a brief period in 2007 when I was registered Green (I re-registered as a Democrat so I could vote in the 2008 Democratic primary and have remained so ever since).

Still, I am grateful to The Federalist for publishing this because no one else will. That’s because U.S. media has been completely corrupted by an industry that is hell-bent on persuading ordinary Americans that there is such a thing as “gender identity” and that some people “are transgender.”

The truth is that “gender identity” does not exist in any real, material sense, and “transgender” is simply a made-up concept that is used to justify all kinds of atrocities, such as convicted male rapists and murderers being housed in women’s prisons with vulnerable women, men being permitted to parade around with erect penises in women’s sections of spas, and men participating in women’s sports. They are being permitted to do all of this on the basis that they have a so-called “female gender identity.”

All of “gender identity” and “transgender” politics is a men’s rights movement intended to objectify women’s bodies and erase us as a class. The entire edifice is a lie. It is left-wing misogyny on steroids.

Democratic Party leadership will not permit discussion about this, anywhere. But I assure readers that there are countless rank and file Democrats who are furious about it. I hear from them every day. Democrats are disgusted that party leadership is promoting the teaching of “gender identity” in schools down to the kindergarten level, celebrating the mutilation of healthy children’s bodies, and cheering on performances of “drag queen story hour” in public libraries.

The Democratic Party of today looks nothing like the Democratic Party that I was proud to be a part of just about all my life. Many Democrats share my despair. If the Republican Party manages to nominate just about anyone who is a decent human being for the presidency in 2024 (hint: “Grab ‘em by the p-ssy” guy is not included in this category), many Democrats will vote Republican.

Gender ideology is one of the reasons Democrats lost House seats in 2020 and one of the reasons Glenn Youngkin won the governor’s race in Virginia this month. I was proud to stand with parents in Loudoun County, and grateful to The Federalist for covering it (that coverage eventually got picked up in the U.K. via The Daily Mail). Gender will be one of the reasons that Democrats will lose more congressional seats in 2022 as well as the presidency in 2024.

I know people who have left the Democratic Party because of gender and become Independents. I know one woman who left the Democratic Party because of gender and registered Republican. I choose to remain a Democrat because I continue to hope the party will reverse course, as unlikely as that appears to be at this time, and have done my best to warn party leadership about what is coming here and here and here.

I am a second-wave feminist and a Democrat. I stand for the rights, privacy, and safety of women and girls. These cannot be protected if sex is redefined incomprehensibly to include so-called “gender identity.”

Feminists have a saying: we cannot protect women and girls on the basis of sex if we cannot say what sex is. My hope is that lawmakers across the political aisle will get a grip and right the wrongs that have been perpetrated in the name of “gender identity.”

Every single human being is either female or male. No one “is transgender.” It’s long past time that lawmakers across the political aisle and members of corporate media said so.

Kara Dansky is a feminist, lawyer, and advocate, and the author of the new book, “The Abolition of Sex: How the ‘Transgender’ Agenda Harms Women and Girls.” She currently serves as the president of the U.S. Chapter of the Women’s Human Rights Campaign. You can find her at www.karadansky.com and @kdansky on Twitter and Facebook.

CNN’s Van Jones, David Axelrod rip fellow Democrats as ‘annoying and offensive,’ ‘out of touch,’ ‘moralizing’ amid big election night loss


Reported by DAVE URBANSKI | November 03, 2021

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/cnn-van-jones-david-axelrod-democrats-annoying-offensive-virginia/

Amid the shocking political turnaround in Virginia that culminated with Republican Glenn Youngkin’s defeat of far-left Democrat Terry McAuliffe for governor Tuesday night, CNN’s Van Jones and David Axelrod reflected on how their own Democratic Party managed to lose so big in a blue state.

‘Annoying and offensive’

Jones surmised that Democrats have been living in a political bubble and not paying attention to voters’ real day-to-day needs — and paid for it at the ballot box.

“I think that the Democrats are coming across in ways that we don’t recognize that are annoying and offensive, and seem out of touch in ways that I don’t think show up in our feeds, when we’re looking at our kind of echo chamber,” Jones said, mimicking someone scrolling through a smartphone. “And I think that this is a message here.”

‘Moralizing’ messages: ‘We will tell you what is right’

Axelrod echoed Jones’ take, adding that Democrats also have come across as preachy to the point that they’re dictating what voters should believe and how they should behave.

He noted that the Democratic Party has “become a more college-educated, urban party in coalition with minority voters, and the messages tend to be moralizing. It’s like, ‘We are going to tell you; we will tell you what is right.’ And no connection to people who work with their hands, people who work with their backs, rural voters, so that’s part of the problem.”

How are folks reacting?

Twitter users responding to Jones’ comments posted on the Republican National Committee Research page couldn’t agree more:

  • “Oh honey, it’s not that they just come across that way, they are,” one commenter said.
  • “Yeah people are tired of all that woke nonsense,” another user offered. “We just want to know what is going on and live as peacefully as we can with one another.”
  • “YA THINK?” another commenter mockingly asked. “What idiot thought it was a good idea to portray concerned parents as ‘domestic terrorists’? ‘Defund the Police’ wasn’t a big enough failure, so Democrats went to war with parents?”
  • “‘Seem out of touch’?” another user wondered. “The fact that they don’t discuss the border crisis, the Afghanistan fiasco, defunding the police, the crime, the failing public schools are all evidence of that. Those problems do not exist to them.”

Democrats To Americans: If You Disagree With Us, You’re An Insurrectionist


Reported By Jonathan S. Tobin | NOVEMBER 1, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/01/according-to-democrats-expressing-political-dissent-makes-you-an-insurrectionist/

Photo Fox5/

For Democrats, Groundhog Day came nearly a month early this year. For them, like the character in the classic Bill Murray comedy, every day is Jan. 6. For them, every challenge to leftist orthodoxy, whether in the form of Biden administration policy or local school boards attempting to impose critical race theory, unreasonable COVID precautions, or transgender policies, is another day of insurrection.

They see insurrectionists everywhere. They see them in the media, where they demand that Fox News be canceled or demonetized because of its Trumpist heresies and refusal to treat a Capitol riot — in which the only person killed was an unarmed protester gunned down in cold blood by a police officer — as a new Civil War. They see them in Congress, where anyone who challenged the 2020 results or resists the Democrats’ bills to ban voter ID laws and make permanent pandemic-based election changes that removed guardrails against cheating are seeking to steal not just the 2020 election but the ones yet to be held in 2022 and 2024. They also see insurrectionists in state capitals, where legislatures that have passed voter integrity bills that seek to prevent future fraud without taking away anyone’s right to vote as not merely advocates of a new “Jim Crow” but the moral equivalent of the Confederates who fired on Fort Sumter to save slavery.

When Everyone Is an Insurrectionist

It also explains why U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland isn’t backing down on his outrageous effort to treat school board protests as an insurrectionist terrorist conspiracy. Despite heated questioning from furious Republican senators last Wednesday, he wouldn’t concede that his directive to the FBI and the rest of the Department of Justice to investigate school board critics around the country was based on a lie. He denied that he was targeting the free speech of parents who have protested decisions by school boards on curricula and other policies. That Garland would stand by the rash directive was all the more curious because the hearing came after the National School Boards Association (NSBA) had apologized for the letter that began this shocking episode.

Garland’s doubling down at the hearing about the need for the government to crack down on opponents does make sense. Or at least it does when placed in the context of his party’s current political obsession.

For nine months the Biden administration, its congressional allies, and its media cheerleaders have treated the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as not merely a disgraceful episode but an “insurrection” and “attempted coup” that represented an ongoing threat to the government rather than just a mob that ran amuck. At this point, it’s clear the Biden team has come to view any dissent from leftist dictums — be they national or local — as not merely unwelcome criticism but the work of Trumpist insurrectionists who must be put down rather than tolerated.

Democrats are determined to go on running against former President Donald Trump and his “deplorable” band of insurrectionists indefinitely. But they have been dismayed by the turn of events in Virginia, where resistance against the radical takeover of the schools by angry parents has transformed the gubernatorial race in what the left assumed was a securely blue state. So it was hardly surprising that the administration would seek to brand those citizens outraged by what was being done to their children as just another outbreak of the same insurrection they have been inveighing against all year.

Cornered by Republican senators, Garland asserted that his memo had not ordered investigations of angry parents as “domestic terrorists.” Yet his memo characterized criticisms of officials at public meetings as “harassment, intimidation and threats of violence.” In it, he stated plainly that Department of Justice would use its authority to “identify,” “discourage” and “prosecute” these alleged threats while maintaining “coordination and partnership with local enforcement.”

Even more disingenuously, he denied that the letter from the NSBA, which had been coordinated with the White House had prompted his directive. It labeled people like a Loudoun County parent whose daughter was allegedly raped by a boy in a girl’s bathroom then covered up by the school district as “domestic terrorists.”

‘Terrorists’ Have No Rights

Garland’s willingness to jump into that mess was predictable. Tellingly, earlier this month even after the truth had come out about the alleged rape and its coverup, Loudoun County Democratic Party Chair Lissa Savaglio called the parents “Republican insurrectionists.”

Republicans asked Garland about why the attempt to intimidate Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema into going along Biden’s spending spree when she was followed, harangued, and filmed in a bathroom wasn’t as worthy of investigation as incidents in which school board members were yelled at. Similarly, the invasion of the Department of the Interior earlier this month by a leftist mob demanding Biden adopt even more radical environmental policies didn’t make it onto his radar screen.

Nor is Garland or the mainstream media willing to admit that the hundreds of Black Lives Matter “mostly peaceful” riots in cities around the nation in the summer of 2020 were far more of a threat to public order and government authority than the misguided people who illegally entered the Capitol on Jan.6. But if we have learned anything in the last year, it should be this: Democrats will never stop talking about the insurrection.

In part, that’s because they actually believe their political foes don’t deserve constitutional rights. As we saw with their reaction to the fatal police shooting of Capitol protester Ashli Babbit and the treatment of those facing prosecution over their illegal behavior on Jan. 6, they believe insurrectionists have no rights, including those that guarantee due process.

Democrats also understand that labeling conservatives as domestic terrorists is key to their political survival as Biden’s presidency unravels in the face of domestic problems like the southern border crisis, the supply chain disaster, and feckless conduct abroad. Running on Biden’s record or defending efforts to impose woke ideology on children isn’t likely to bring them success. That means they will go on labeling anyone who questions their ideological hobby horses as Trumpist “traitors” so long as they think it will help them rally their voters to turn out and preserve their power.

Jonathan S. Tobin is a senior contributor to The Federalist, editor in chief of JNS.org, and a columnist for the New York Post. Follow him on Twitter at @jonathans_tobin.

Democrats Are Using The Same 2020 Election Shenanigans To Overtake Virginia This Year


Reported By Hayden Ludwig | NOVEMBER 1, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/01/democrats-are-using-the-same-2020-election-shenanigans-to-overtake-virginia-this-year/

Virginia’s hotly contested gubernatorial race is just days away, and with Republican Glenn Youngkin and former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe tied in the polls, the professional left isn’t leaving anything to chance. A McAuliffe defeat is largely considered a bellwether for congressional Democrats in the 2022 midterms.

So how do Democrats plan to ensure a McAuliffe win and a subsequent retention of power in the state and U.S. Senate? By using the same tactic they used in the 2020 national contest: profligate mail-in voting and fake grassroots get-out-the-vote efforts funding by philanthropies and wealthy leftists, a strategy revealed through Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s gift to the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL).

And it’s a smart strategy. Joe Biden voters were twice as likely as Donald Trump voters to vote by mail in 2020, for example; and we know the effect of Zuckerberg’s millions on the 2020 election. The Capital Research Center specializes in exposing the activists behind these efforts. Here’s what we’ve discovered about the funding and activists behind them.

Getting Out the Vote for Democrats

Vote Forward is one of the get-out-the-vote (GOTV) groups swamping Virginians with a letter practically begging them to vote early. Here’s my copy:

Vote Forward is ostensibly nonpartisan—until you look at its original website from 2018, which reads “Flip the House Blue: Send letters to unlikely voters.” Elsewhere, the group admits it was founded to send “get-out-the-vote” mailers to “traditionally underrepresented communities,” code for Democrat-leaning constituencies.

The New York Times praised Vote Forward’s goal of boosting Democrat turnout just one week before the 2020 election. An old FAQ states that many of its campaigns “typically target low-propensity voters who we believe are likely to vote for Democrats when they do cast a ballot.”

In 2020, that target was 10 million voters. To make that happen, Vote Forward sued the U.S. Postal Service, accusing Postmaster General Louis DeJoy—a Trump nominee—of “undermin[ing] USPS’s ability to ensure the on-time delivery of mail ballots” in the 2020 election. The details of their settlement remain unclear, but USPS agreed to deliver mail-in ballots in time for Georgia’s January special election, the result of which ultimately handed Democrats control of the U.S. Senate.

Like many organizations that present themselves as more interested in voting than election outcomes, Vote Forward is part of the Left’s Voting Machine: A massive web of interconnected GOTV nonprofits commanding tens of millions of dollars, mostly gifted by ultra-wealthy institutions like the Ford, Gates, and Rockefeller Foundations.

We’ve traced more than $600,000 flowing to Vote Forward from the Hopewell Fund, part of a $731 million “dark money” network run by the consultancy Arabella Advisors in Washington, DC. After studying this network for years, it’s become clear to us that wherever Arabella is involved, one is sure to find the left’s top operatives as well.

For example, Vote Forward’s board includes Ezra Reese, a partner at Perkins Coie and its Marc Elias-led spin-off (the Elias Law Group) “focused on electing Democrats, supporting voting rights, and helping progressives make change”—a fact you won’t find advertised on the “nonpartisan” group’s website. Perkins Coie is the left’s law firm of choice. Elias was general counsel to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and a partisan operative whose past dealings include George Soros-funded efforts to abolish voter ID laws.

A Flood of Mail-In Ballots

In September, I reported on a new wave of 2 million applications for Virginians to register for absentee ballots in 2021. These applications weren’t sent out by state or local elections officials, but by politically active nonprofits: the Voter Participation Center and Center for Voter Information (collectively “the center”). An internal memo details the spots they planned to cover most aggressively, many of which parallel Biden’s performance in 2020.

The center explicitly targeted the “New American Majority,” another code for likely Democratic voters that they define as “young people, people of color and unmarried women.” That bloc contains 73 percent of all unregistered voters nationwide, which is why the left-wing strategists at the Democracy Alliance consider their turnout “central to progressive long-term success.”

The IRS requires all nonprofits be officially nonpartisan in order to be tax exempt. In the center’s case, nonpartisanship comes in the shape of a fig leaf—as liberal journalist Sasha Issenberg explains in his 2012 book, The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns: “Even though the group was officially nonpartisan, for tax purposes, there was no secret that the goal of all its efforts was to generate new votes for Democrats” (emphasis added).

The center sent out 15 million vote-by-mail applications in 2020 and registered 4.6 million new voters. Time credits the center’s partisan registration efforts as central to the “shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election” for Biden. No surprise that the center is heavily funded by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), AFL-CIOSierra ClubLeague of Conservation Voters, and Tides Foundation.

Will Zuck Bucks Continue?

We were among the first to report in-depth on how billionaire Zuckerberg and the little-known Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) spent $350 million to effectively privatize the 2020 election in battleground states, helping turnout for Biden in the name of COVID-19 “relief.”

Overnight, this little nonprofit’s revenues grew by more than 12,000 percent from $2.8 million thanks to Zuckerberg’s cash injection—fueling its “nonpartisan,” “charitable” façade to elections officials and helping Democrat turnout in precisely the spots Biden needed to win the presidency.

Across nine states, our data shows that CTCL’s grants consistently ignored Trump counties in favor of big, Democratic-leaning spots like Philadelphia, Maricopa County, and Houston—all essential to Biden’s victory. In Georgia, for instance, Biden counties were two-and-a-half times more likely to receive CTCL funding than Trump counties.

Virginia received close to $4 million in Zuck Bucks, more than one-third of which went to populous Fairfax County to support in-person early votingand “vote by mail.” Fairfax County was Biden’s biggest vote-haul in the state and is the linchpin to McAuliffe’s strategy.

Nearly $970,000 paid for “temporary staffing support” to bolster Fairfax County’s elections agency. That may sound innocuous, but as CTCL expert William Doyle recently wrote at this site, that funding “supported the infiltration of election offices by paid Democratic Party activists.”

[CTCL] funded self-described ‘vote navigators’ in Wisconsin to ‘assist voters, potentially at their front doors, to answer questions, assist in ballot curing … and witness absentee ballot signatures,’ and a temporary staffing agency affiliated with Stacey Abrams called ‘Happy Faces’ counting the votes amidst the election night chaos in Fulton County, Georgia.

Fairfax County applied for an extension to its CTCL grant in January, but ultimately returned its remaining $187,709 in April, spokesman Brian Worthy told me. To his knowledge, the county has not applied for another grant for the 2021 election. That’s a good start, but to save the integrity of our elections, Zuck Bucks need to be banned. No exceptions.

There’s no faster way to destroy what remaining trust Americans have in their elections than by giving them to the highest bidder. Private funding of elections would take us back to the worst of the 19th century robber barons, when rich political machines won elections by buying public officials and intimidating voters. It also presents opportunities for foreign interests to manipulate our politics and undermine American sovereignty.

It’s unknown how much CTCL money remains in Virginia or if the group has continued to make grants here. Neighboring Fairfax City reports $14,175 in CTCL funds leftover for the 2021 election.

CTCL has been surprisingly mum about the ongoing election considering how loudly it advertised open-ended grants to Georgia counties in January. It’s possible that the dozens of exposés, hundreds of critical news articles, flurry of state Zuck Buck bans, and an inquiry from furious congressional Republicans silenced the leftists running CTCL.

Or maybe not. A recent CTCL statement calls lawsuits against its grants program “frivolous” and its funding “equitable,” particularly in small counties with small elections budgets.

Today’s left has cynically embraced Zuck Bucks out of short-term thinking, believing like NPR that “private money from Facebook’s CEO saved the 2020 election.” That’s a losing hand. Americans can see that the same leftists who’ve now embraced plutocracy were just yesterday crying eat the rich and abolish billionaires.” Close to a dozen states have already banned Zuck Bucks and grassroots groups are leading a national movement to audit the 2020 election and save the country.

Leftists believed the country would overlook their desperate indiscretions, claiming—as CTCL does—that Zuckerberg’s unprecedented spending spree somehow made 2020 “the most secure election in U.S. history.” We’ll know even more in December, when CTCL releases its IRS Form 990 filing to the public. If coming revelations are anything like observers expect, that claim will age about as well as milk.

Hayden Ludwig is an investigative researcher for the Capital Research Center in Washington, DC.

Virginia Democrats Claim ‘Free And Fair’ Election While Rigging It Again


Reported By Stella Morabito | OCTOBER 28, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/28/democrats-claim-free-and-fair-election-in-virginia-while-rigging-it-again/

A lot of roadside signs for Virginia’s Democrat gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe include a special message: “Vote in Free and Fair Elections beginning September 17.” Odd. Shouldn’t “free and fair” go without saying? Why include it on a campaign sign?

This is especially odd since the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors recently asked Virginia’s current governor, Democrat Ralph Northam, to waive the legally required witness signature for absentee ballots, as well as the last four digits of the voter’s Social Security number, both statutory requirements. They asked this about a month after voting began.

For me, the gratuitous addition looks like an attempt to cover up the left’s belief that fair elections are below its paygrade. McAuliffe’s operatives can’t possibly believe it, especially as they work to change and ignore rules in the middle of the game. But they sure want you to believe the electoral changes they enacted for 2021 in Virginia—including expansions of mail-in balloting, conditions for ballot harvesting, no requirement for photo ID, etc.—somehow add up to “free and fair.”

On top of that, the huge ballot drop box in front of Fairfax County is supposed to have 24/7 surveillance, but Director of the Fairfax County Office of Elections Scott Konopasek says the camera feed will never be available to the public.

As Mollie Hemingway’s investigative work in her recent bestseller “Rigged” shows, the 2020 elections added a lot of moving parts to the machinery of election rigging. In addition to inviting fraud, there are now more ways to disguise irregularities and to render election results unverifiable. Such chaos-by-design has been in the works for many years. It reached a tipping point when the oligarchical triad of Big Tech, Big Gov, and Big Media used the Wuhan virus shutdowns to vastly expand mail-in voting while relaxing controls on it during the 2020 presidential election.

Obviously, their first order of business was to prevent President Trump from winning re-election. I imagine the second order of business is to entrench these processes for other elections so that a permanent one-party state can cross all state lines.

At the moment, there seems to be just enough pretense—such as the continued existence of in-person polling places and polling officials who request some form of identification—to create an illusion of propriety. The idea is to keep actual voters clutching their ballots with the same persistent trust as Charlie Brown holding onto Lucy’s football every time she offers him a “free and fair” chance to kick it. McAuliffe, a heavily seasoned Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative, is joined at the hip to all that machinery. Yet Democrats in Virginia are acting as though they’re “nervous” that McAuliffe might lose.

Granted, if we’re operating on a level playing field, he should be nervous. For example, his callous assertion during a debate that parents shouldn’t be involved in what their children are learning in school caused a great backlash among his presumed base. It led to lifelong Democrat voters in Virginia openly campaigning for McAuliffe’s opponent, Glenn Youngkin. So, yes, it looks like McAuliffe should be in deep doo-doo. My guess, however, is that he isn’t really worried about “winning.”

Consider that he actually doubled down on excluding parents from their children’s education. He’s just fine with the idea of the FBI investigating concerned parents as domestic terrorists. He even walked away from a televised interview because he didn’t like the questions. This is the sort of behavior I’d expect from someone who believes he has it all locked up, kind of like the Biden campaign’s extreme confidence despite the candidate’s pathetic low energy and gaffe-prone appearances, of the snoozer of the DNC convention.

So if the McAuliffe campaign feels nervous, it’s likely only over the slight possibility of not generating enough fraud. So it looks like a two-track strategy. First, make sure enough leftist operatives (like that guy in Fairfax County) are taking care of the business of generating unverifiable fraud. Second, keep propping up the illusion of “free and fair.”

Maybe that’s how you get a CYA dog-and-pony show with Stacey Abrams stumping for McAuliffe by warning against voter suppression. Maybe that’s the point of Vice President Kamala Harris’s video to 300 black churches during Sunday morning services to get out the vote for McAuliffe. The in-your-face illegality of Harris’s Souls to the Pollsaction adds to the hubris.

I’ll still mark a ballot on Election Day in Virginia (if I’m not told that I already voted.) Assuming McAuliffe ends up in Richmond again, I’ll expect to see local polling places disappear in Virginia in the future. And I’ll continue to have contempt for fake elections in 2022 and beyond.

Stella Morabito is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Follow Stella on Twitter.

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.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: