Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Law’

Redacted Mar-A-Lago Affidavit Confirms Biden’s DOJ Fished For A Crime To Pin On Trump


BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | AUGUST 29, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/redacted-mar-a-lago-affidavit-confirms-bidens-doj-fished-for-a-crime-to-pin-on-trump-2657957240.html/

Donald Trump getting into a plane

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

The search warrant affidavit unsealed on Friday confirms the Department of Justice used a bait-and-switch tactic to justify the FBI’s unprecedented raid on former President Donald Trump’s home. The unredacted portions of the affidavit further expose the Biden administration’s manipulative and tenuous basis for the search and its reliance on inapplicable federal criminal code provisions to justify the targeting of a political enemy. 

At noon on Friday, the search warrant affidavit used by the DOJ to obtain a warrant to raid Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home hit the public court docket, albeit with heavy redactions. While sparse, the unredacted portions of the affidavit nonetheless proved significant, especially when read in conjunction with the previously unsealed search warrant and the leaks to the compliant media cartel.

“The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records,” the affidavit opened, before noting that “the investigation began as a result of a referral the United States National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) sent to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on February 9, 2022.”

The affidavit then summarized the background of the NARA referral, explaining that “on February 9, 2022, the Special Agent in Charge of NARA’s Office of Inspector General sent a referral via email to the DOJ.” The referral explained that the NARA’s White House Liaison Division director had reviewed 15 boxes NARA had retrieved from Mar-a-Lago including “newspapers, magazines, printed news articles, photos, miscellaneous print-outs, notes, presidential correspondence, personal and post-presidential records, and ‘a lot of classified records.’” “Of most significant,” the search warrant affidavit explained, was that “highly classified records were unfoldered, intermixed with other records, and otherwise unproperly [sic] identified.”

While the next nearly eight pages of the search warrant affidavit remained redacted, the disclosures that followed exposed the affidavit’s focus on “classified records” as a sham. “On or about May 6, 2021, NARA made a request for the missing PRA records and continued to make requests until approximately late December 2021 when NARA was informed twelve boxes were found and ready for retrieval at the [Mar-a-Lago],” the affidavit continued, with the abbreviation “PRA” previously noted to stand for the Presidential Records Act.

As I explained previously, to fully comprehend the Biden administration’s weaponizing of the DOJ and FBI, it is necessary to understand the Presidential Records Act, the concept of “presidential records,” and the NARA’s role, and the search warrant affidavit’s references to those concepts confirm that point. In short:

“The Presidential Records Act provides that documents created or received by the president or his immediate staff, such as memos, letters, notes, emails, and other written communications, related to a president’s official duties, constitute ‘presidential records’ and must be preserved. The act further declares that the United States shall retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records.’ And at the conclusion of a president’s term in office, the ‘Archivist of the United States’ ‘assumes responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records.’”

The Presidential Records Act, however, expressly excludes specific documents from the definition of “presidential records,” including any documentary materials that are “official records of an agency,” “personal records,” or “extra copies of documents produced only for convenience of reference, when such copies are clearly so identified.” The federal statute further defines “personal records” as “diaries, journals, or personal notes ‘not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business’” or “materials relating to private political associations” or “relating exclusively to the President’s own election to the office of the Presidency.”

The public (understandably) may wish to sidestep the minutia of the mandates of the Presidential Records Act, but three top-line takeaways prove imperative to understanding the scandal of the Mar-a-Lago search. First, the Presidential Records Act is not a criminal statute, and violations of that federal law do not constitute a crime. Second, the Presidential Records Act does not reach broad swathes of documents retained by a former president, including “official records of an agency,” “personal records,” and convenience copies of presidential records. And third, the courts have refused to question a former president’s conclusion that a record constitutes a “personal record” and not a “presidential record.”

Two additional legal points require expansion for the populace to fully grasp the outrageous overreach of the DOJ, which was further exposed in the partially unsealed affidavit. The first legal principle of note concerns a president’s power to declassify documents. As Trump’s attorney stressed in a May 2022 letter to the DOJ, which the government released along with the redacted version of the search warrant affidavit, “a president has absolute authority to declassify documents.”

“Under the U.S. Constitution, the President is vested with the highest level of authority when it comes to the classification and declassification of documents,” Trump’s lawyer Evan Corcoran explained in his correspondence with the DOJ. Citing both the Constitution and Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 527 (1988), wherein the United States Supreme Court wrote, “the President’s authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security … flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant,” Corcoran countered the DOJ’s attempt to frame NARA’s discovery of documents marked “classified” as warranting a criminal investigation.

Trump’s lawyer stressed a second significant legal principle in the same letter, writing that “presidential actions involving classified documents are not subject to criminal sanction.” Then, after noting that “any attempt to impose criminal liability on a President or former President that involves his actions with respect to documents marked classified would implicate grave constitutional separation-of-powers issues,” Corcoran wrote: “Beyond that, the primary criminal statute that governs the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material does not apply to the President.” 

The attorney for the former president then quoted the statute that criminalizes the removal, possession, or retention of classified materials before stressing that “an element of this offense, which the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, is that the accused is ‘an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States.’” “The President is none of these,” Trump’s attorney continued, before concluding, “thus, the statute does not apply to acts by a President.”

Corcoran closed his letter by reminding the DOJ of its obligation “to be candid in representations made to judges,” and requested that a copy of the lawyer’s letter be provided “to any judicial officer who is asked to rule on any motion pertaining to this investigation, or on any application made in connection with any investigative request concerning this investigation,” as well as “any grand jury considering evidence in connection with this matter, or any grand jury asked to issue a subpoena for testimony or documents in connection with this matter.” 

The search warrant affidavit referenced Corcoran’s letter and provided a copy to Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who issued the search warrant. The DOJ also informed Reinhart of a Breitbart News article from May 5, 2022, which states that a former Trump administration official, Kash Patel, had characterized as “misleading” reports that documents retrieved by NARA included classified material; Patel alleged that the reporting was misleading because Trump had declassified the materials at issue.

The DOJ informed Reinhart of the above details and thus, in essence, that the government lacked probable cause to search Mar-a-Lago based on a violation of the statute governing the mishandling of classified documents. But what Trump’s legal team did not foresee, and what the search warrant affidavit revealed, was that the DOJ would twist the facts to find other crimes to justify the targeting of Trump. 

The introductory section of the affidavit summarized three other legal theories to justify the search, stating first that “the FBI’s investigation has established that documents bearing classification markings, which appear to contain National Defense Information (NDI), were among the materials” contained in the 15 boxes retrieved by the NARA. Second, the affidavit maintained that there was “probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified NDI or that are Presidential records subject to record retention requirements currently remain at the Mar-a-Lago.” And third, the affidavit claimed there was “also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found at” Mar-a-Lago. Those legal theories track the three statutes cited by the DOJ to justify the search, namely 18 U.S.C. §§ 793(e), 1519, and 2071. 

As I previously explained, none of those criminal code provisions require material to be classified for there to be criminal liability. Rather, Section 793(e), also called the Espionage Act, makes it a crime for a person “having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over” “national defense information” to “willfully” share that information with a “person not entitled to receive it” or to “willfully retain” the national defense information and fail to deliver it to an employee of the United States “entitled to receive it,” if “the possessor has reason to believe [it] could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” 

The unredacted portions of the search warrant affidavit reveal how the DOJ manipulated the facts to fit within the Espionage Act. First, for the Espionage Act to apply, the material must qualify as “national defense information.” To establish probable cause that “national defense information” remained at Mar-a-Lago, the affidavit noted that a review by FBI agents of the 15 boxes retrieved by NARA “identified documents with classification markings in fourteen of the fifteen boxes.” The FBI agent who signed the search warrant affidavit then attested that based on his “training and experience,” he “knows that documents classified at these levels typically contain NDI” or “national defense information.”

What the DOJ did here, then, was this: It highlighted that the documents retrieved by the NARA contained “classification markings” and then used the FBI agent’s expertise to establish that documents that receive a classification marking typically include “national defense information.” That Trump declassified (or may have declassified) the documents is irrelevant under this analysis because the fact that they were ever classified would mean they likely qualified as “national defense information.” 

The DOJ subtly confirmed this point by dropping a footnote that explains that “§ 793(e) does not use the term ‘classified information,’ but rather criminalizes the unlawful retention of ‘information relating to the national defense.’” The footnote continues by noting that Section 793(e) does not define “information related to the national defense,” but adds that courts have construed national defense information “broadly.” 

In other words, the DOJ bent the Espionage Act to fit the facts of Trump’s possession of documents at Mar-a-Lago. The Biden administration couldn’t target Trump for mishandling classified material both because he declassified it and because the statute that criminalizes such mishandling doesn’t reach a president or a former president. So instead, they tried to find a crime to get the man. 

Even then, there is a second problem with the DOJ’s reliance on the Espionage Act: An Espionage Act violation only occurs if the person has “unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over,” the national defense information. But how was Trump’s possession “unauthorized”?

From the unredacted portions of the affidavit, it appears the DOJ maintained that Trump’s possession of the national defense information was “unauthorized” because the documents were “presidential records” wrongly retained by Trump. But “presidential records” do not include agency records, personal records, or convenience copies, and the documents bearing the classification markings likely originated from intelligence community agencies and/or were hard copies printed for convenience, meaning Trump’s possession of those documents would not be “unauthorized” under the Presidential Records Act. 

For the same reason, the DOJ’s reliance on Section 2017, which criminalizes the removal, destruction, or concealing of government records, falters because that criminal provision protects the government’s access to its own records, and merely possessing copies of government records is not enough to constitute a crime. Yet from the search warrant affidavit and the search warrant, it appears the government sought to recover from Trump hard copies of information it already had within its possession, either through various agencies or the electronic copies maintained by the relevant authorities. And it is a stretch for the government to rely on Section 2017 to criminalize Trump’s possession of the records.

Again, what we are seeing is a bending and twisting of the law to find a crime on which to launch the Mar-a-Lago raid. Mishandling of classified materials wouldn’t work, and Trump’s attorney made sure the DOJ knew that, so the creative team working under Attorney General Merrick Garland combed the federal code and found two plausible statutes on which to rely, adding a claim of obstruction of justice to round out the search warrant affidavit. While it is unclear from the affidavit the basis for the government’s obstruction of justice allegation, the affidavit establishes that the other criminal provisions relied upon representing illicit maneuvering to manufacture a crime for the man who was their political enemy.

Americans may shrug when prosecutors use pretext to target known drug dealers or human traffickers, but manipulating the criminal code to find a basis to search the home of a former president and a political enemy represents an appalling weaponization of the criminal justice system. And while large portions of the affidavit remain under seal, the country has seen enough to know that is precisely what the Biden administration did to get Trump.


Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

COMMENTARY


Watch: Police Put in Horrifying Situation as 4-Year-Old Opens Fire While Dad Is Being Arrested

 By Richard Bledsoe | July 22, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-police-put-horrifying-situation-4-year-old-opens-fire-dad-arrested/

Police are often placed in situations where they have to make life-or-death decisions in an instant.

Thanks to the attitudes of the establishment media, the results of those consequential choices usually only get publicized if police can be blamed for making the wrong call.

However, now dramatic body cam footage was released where police successfully handled a dangerous situation in which a 4-year-old boy used his father’s gun to open fire on the officers. They were able to disarm the child before anyone got hurt.

Multiple versions of the body cam recordings were shared in a YouTube video. Watch:

ABC4 in Utah linked highlights from the videos and summarized the events that took place on February 21. The police were summoned when “employees reported that a man brandished a gun in the drive-thru after his order was incorrect.”

Sadaat Johnson, 27, was in the McDonald’s drive-thru with two children in the car, a 4-year-old and a 3-year-old.

Johnson did not comply with police instructions, and the situation escalated until officers were forced to pull Johnson from the vehicle.

The video does not show what happened next in the car. While the police were making the arrest of Johnson, the 4-year-old boy picked up the gun. An officer saw the weapon and shouted “Gun!”

Should kids be taught to be respectful to the police?Yes No

Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

ABC4 reported, “The officer used his hand to sweep the gun away and the gun went off, hitting the upper part of the McDonald’s building. The officer then yelled at the person inside of the car to drop the gun, and after looking inside the car, realized that it was a small child.”

The children can be heard crying as they exit the car. The officers ask “Are you all right, kid?” and try to reassure them: “It’s okay, it’s okay.”

The discharge may have been accidental. However as reported in the New York Post, “The investigation showed that Johnson then ‘told the child to shoot at the police,’ authorities said. It was not clear exactly when he gave the order and it was not caught in the bodycam clip.”

“The boy — who was taken into protective custody — said he shot at the cops because ‘he wanted his daddy back,’ according to court records obtained by ABC4.”

Johnson also explained to the authorities “this wasn’t the first time his 4-year-old child had gotten his hands on a gun.”

Johnson ended up pleading guilty to two third-degree felonies, child abuse or neglect and aggravated assault. Johnson was sentenced to 120 days in jail, three years of probation and courses on anger management and parenting. He can no longer own guns.

A huge contributing factor to this near-disaster was Johnson’s disrespect and disregard for the police. This attitude leads to more danger in police interactions, despite the absurd progressive activist campaign to defund the police based on claims that it’s police presence that starts the problems.

This is not to say law enforcement does not need some reform. But it needs to be reform that puts police back into serving and protecting communities, rather than abusing citizens on behalf of the political class.

Police should also question even their own self-serving agendas. The Utah body cam footage was in stark contrast to footage from the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas. There, the cams caught almost 400 law enforcement personnel unable to handle a lone shooter for almost an hour, while kids died.

In the Utah case though, it is a testament to God’s mercy and the police that no one was killed or injured through the careless abuse of firearms. There could have been causalities of officers, kids or both.

The trouble was caused due to a series of bad decisions and actions by Sadaat Johnson, as much as some want to blame the gun or the cops instead.

Richard Bledsoe

Contributor, Commentary

Richard Bledsoe is an author and internationally exhibiting artist. His writings on culture and politics have been featured in The Masculinist, Instapundit and American Thinker. You can view more of his work at Remodernamerica.com.

Kayee Griswold Op-ed: You Know What Would Deter More Shootings Than Red Flag Laws? Executing Mass Killers Quickly


COMMENTARY BY: KYLEE GRISWOLD | JULY 07, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/07/you-know-what-would-deter-more-shootings-than-red-flag-laws-executing-mass-killers-quickly/

executing by gallows

If politicians are serious that they’re sick of ‘living with this carnage,’ the Highland Park shooter should be executed immediately.

Author Kylee Griswold profile

KYLEE GRISWOLD

VISIT ON TWITTER@KYLEEZEMPEL

MORE ARTICLES

The usual suspects are at it again, and I’m not talking about isolated, mentally ill young men. I’m talking about the politically motivated talking heads who don’t even wait until bodies are cold after tragic mass shootings to spout off about the need for red flag laws, “assault weapons” bans, and “universal background checks” because — you’ve heard this one before — “Why are we willing to live with this carnage?”

After the mass shooting in a wealthy Chicago suburb over the holiday weekend that left seven dead and dozens more wounded in one of the most gun-controlled areas of one of the most gun-controlled states in the country, local State’s Attorney Eric Rinehart did exactly that. He touted the state’s “strong” red flag law and insisted on the need to “ban assault weapons in Illinois and beyond.” Vice President Kamala Harris likewise made an unscheduled visit to the community to call for more gun control, however incoherently. And the typical Twitter blue checks all had something to say.

Meanwhile, as the armchair class prattles on about how our first freedoms are an existential threat, the face and name of the 21-year-old alleged shooter are plastered all over every news channel as he sits remorseless in jail facing a slew of charges that will probably amount to life in prison at worst. The upper echelons of chattering politicos will accomplish nothing but celebritizing murderous cowards — but hey, anything to signal virtue, pick up a few progressive voters, and pad their pockets with a little extra donor cash.

You know how we know they aren’t accomplishing anything? Because the reforms Rinehart called for are both already on the books in Highland Park where the shooting occurred. Despite a local so-called assault weapons ban plus red flag laws and a state with some of the strictest gun-control laws in America, many people died. If the latest shooting taught us anything about guns, it’s that even tightly restricting them doesn’t deter killers.

It’s time for a new approach, and this case presents the perfect set of circumstances to justify it. The Highland Park shooter should be executed, and he should be executed quickly.

There would be nothing “just” about criminal justice if we dispensed with due process, but it’s not much more than a formality that we use the word “alleged” to describe this particular shooter. Not only have authorities confirmed that the male suspect dressed as a woman to conceal his identity, hide his face tattoos, and blend into the frantic crowd. Not only were these facts captured on video, with a witness apparently watching the suspect wrap his firearm in a red blanket before ditching it. Not only has he had multiple run-ins with local law enforcement that were ultimately relayed to state police in a report identifying him as a “clear and present danger,” plus an incident wherein police confiscated 16 knives, a dagger, and a sword from him after he threatened to “kill everyone” in his house.

But he also already told police he’s the shooter. And if his confession of guilt weren’t enough, he also admitted that he almost attacked another July Fourth celebration in Madison, Wisconsin, but decided against it because he just hadn’t had enough time to plan out a murderous scheme.

There’s a more effective deterrent to this carnage than catapulting mass murderers into the limelight by detailing every step of their grisly crimes or featuring their faces on the cover of Rolling Stone. There’s a better way than making impassioned speeches about gun violence, but then helping to bail out violent rioters and advocating for low bail that enables offenders to violently mow down women and children with a vehicle. It’s time to be honest about the fact that bans on AR-15s and red flag laws, in addition to stomping out due process and being ripe for political weaponization, simply don’t work to deter crime. Illinois tried that experiment. It failed.

There are a handful of things that become apparent about deterrence, but here’s a pretty basic idea: Swiftness and certainty are more important than severity. Of course, if punishment must be proportional for justice to truly be just, then execution is warranted in cases of mass murder, the perpetrators of which cannot die enough deaths to make up for the many they stole.

But it isn’t the mere execution of a known mass murderer that deters other disturbed individuals from shooting up jubilant innocents. The reality of taxpayer-funded eons on death row wouldn’t appear to have any concrete deterrent effect, much like lengthy incarceration. But what about a visual representation of this chilling message: You will be caught, and you will be put to death — soon. Certainty and swiftness accomplished.

We’ve watched the inverse cycle play out before. A young man goes on a gruesome killing spree. Everyone learns his face and name during wall-to-wall coverage of his acts, including the alienated who get inspired to pursue their own moments of infamy. He’s charged with crimes, and politicians pounce for their own personal benefit. And then — nothing. The perpetrator gets whisked away to some facility to await trial for ungodly amounts of time, and that’s the last we hear of it. If we get any updates on his fate (which is intended to deter others but fails on account of its slowness and uncertainty), those are afforded a fraction of the attention by the media and are likely to be buried by coverage of the next catastrophe.

It’s time to end this cycle. If politicians are serious that they’re sick of “living with this carnage,” the Highland Park shooter should be tried and convicted on the basis of his confession and executed immediately. Perhaps instead of inspiring another coward to pick up a gun, it will inspire them to think again.


Kylee Griswold 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, religion, and the media. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Good Government Groups Ask State Officials to Stop Biden’s Federal Takeover of Elections


Reported BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY | JULY 07, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/07/good-government-groups-ask-state-officials-to-stop-bidens-federal-takeover-of-elections//

Joe Biden

Governors and other state officials don’t have to stand idly by as the Biden administration plots a federal takeover of elections. That’s the message being sent by the heads of two good government groups in a new memo to state officials.

“The Biden administration wants to use federal government resources for political, get-out-the-vote purposes, and it’s up to strong leaders in state and local government to stop them,” wrote Russ Vought of the Center for Renewing America and Tarren Bragdon of the Foundation for Government Accountability. “We strongly urge those in positions of power to stop President Biden’s power grab and act soon.”

Biden issued an executive order on March 7, 2021, directing all 600 federal agencies to submit a plan to the White House to increase voter registration and turnout. Many agencies subsequently developed a plan to turn federal facilities, particularly those that deliver federal benefits, into voter registration agencies.

For example, Housing and Urban Development is trying to turn assisted housing centers into get-out-the-vote hubs. Health and Human Services is doing the same with its public health centers. Even as labor problems are out of control, the Department of Labor is turning its American Job Centers into voter registration agencies.

The agencies are allowed to work with voting groups approved by left-wing partisans in the White House, reminiscent of the Zuckerbucks plot to destabilize the 2020 election by running get-out-the-vote operations in the Democrat areas of swing states.

It’s a “backdoor approach that’s designed to ensure Democratic victories at the polls in 2022 and beyond,” Vought and Bragdon wrote.

The two recommend that state officials take action to prevent Biden’s plot. Since the National Voting Rights Act provides states the authority to designate voter registration agencies beyond those already required by federal law, the federal government cannot designate additional agencies without a change to federal law enacted by Congress.

So when federal agencies send “guidance” memorandums to state agencies about turning federal benefit centers into voter registration agencies, Vought and Bragdon recommend state officials contact those agencies and “order them not to implement that guidance because it is illegal at worst and unethical and partisan at best.”

Further, they remind states that they can issue a gubernatorial executive order or the legislature can pass a law or resolution prohibiting state agencies from applying to become voter registration agencies.    

“With increasing brazenness, President Biden is taking advantage of a loyal federal bureaucracy to wield the power and influence of the federal government to influence elections by increasing Democratic voter registration and turnout,” write Bragdon and Vought. They say the actions are particularly troubling given recent lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice against conservative efforts to fortify election integrity and make it more difficult to cheat.


Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College. A Fox News contributor, she is a regular member of the Fox News All-Stars panel on “Special Report with Bret Baier.” Her work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, the Guardian, the Washington Post, CNN, National Review, GetReligion, Ricochet, Christianity Today, Federal Times, Radio & Records, and many other publications. Mollie was a 2004 recipient of a Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship at The Fund for American Studies and a 2014 Lincoln Fellow of the Claremont Institute. She is the co-author of Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. She is the author of “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections.” Reach her at mzhemingway@thefederalist.com

Author Mollie Hemingway profile

MOLLIE HEMINGWAY

VISIT ON TWITTER@MZHEMINGWAY

MORE ARTICLES

FBI Lies and Entrapment Result in Probation Sentence for Former Republican Congressman


REPORTED BY: THOMAS J. NASH AND JOSEPH COSBY | JUNE 29, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/29/fbi-lies-and-entrapment-result-in-probation-sentence-for-former-republican-congressman/

congressman walks out of courthouse with wife

The FBI and the DOJ are guilty of doing exactly the things with which they charged Rep. Jeff Fortenberry. 

Author Thomas J. Nash and Joseph Cosby profile

THOMAS J. NASH AND JOSEPH COSBY

MORE ARTICLES

Former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Nebraska, has been sentenced to probation for lying to the federal government. But the only things we know for certain are that the FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) lied to entrap Fortenberry, and used two men who broke campaign finance laws to betray the congressman in his zeal to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

A Los Angeles jury convicted Fortenberry in March on three felony counts of lying to the FBI and scheming to cover it up. The congressman faced a maximum sentence of 15 years — five years for each count. The prosecution had sought a six-month prison sentence. Tuesday, however, U.S. District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. sentenced the former congressman to two years of probation, as well as a $25,000 fine and 320 hours of community service.

In handing down his sentence, Blumenfeld said that everyone, including the prosecution witnesses, attests that Fortenberry is “a man of exceptional character.” Fortenberry and his defense team are appealing the convictions.

Under 18 U.S.C. §1001, it is a federal crime to tell a government official or agency a “material” lie. That means a lie that, if the government were to believe it, would have the tendency of affecting an official’s or agency’s course of conduct. Ironically, the FBI and the DOJ are guilty of doing exactly the things with which they charged Fortenberry. 

Would I Lie to You?

The case stems from a February 2016 fundraiser in Los Angeles in which Fortenberry participated. Toufic Baaklini, a U.S. citizen, Maronite Catholic, and advocate for Christians in the Middle East, used the fundraiser to channel the money of a Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire, Gilbert Chagoury, to Fortenberry’s campaign. Campaign donations from foreign nationals are illegal.

Baaklini, then a long-time friend of the congressman, testified at Fortenberry’s trial that he knew such conduit donations were illegal, but he misled Fortenberry by having $30,000 of Chagoury’s money divided among a number of people at the fundraiser so no red flags would be raised regarding the contributions.

Dr. Elias Ayoub, another Maronite Catholic who helped organize the L.A. fundraiser, also admitted in court that he has made a number of illegal campaign contributions using Chagoury’s money, including to U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-California, and Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah. In addition, both Baaklini and Ayoub testified that Fortenberry didn’t know the contributions had come from Chagoury, and Baaklini testified that Fortenberry raised that very issue early in the fundraising process.

As KOLN-TV in Lincoln, Nebraska, reported this past March, Baaklini made a stark admission in court to John Littrell, Fortenberry’s lawyer, saying he didn’t want Fortenberry to know about the illegal nature of the contributions, even when the congressman specifically asked if there was anything wrong with the fundraiser.

“You lied to protect him, didn’t you?” Littrell asked Baaklini. Baaklini replied yes.

So why isn’t Baaklini facing possible prison time, as well as Ayoub? Because the FBI and the DOJ wanted a bigger fish—a sitting U.S. congressman—and used Baaklini and Ayoub as witnesses at Fortenberry’s trial.

A Man of Good Character

In serving Nebraska’s first congressional district since January 2005, Fortenberry has distinguished himself as a man of integrity in both his personal and professional life. In sworn testimony, U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-California, a liberal Democrat and Chaldean Catholic who has worked with Fortenberry on aiding Christians in the Middle East, affirmed her Republican colleague’s character.

“I think he brings honor to what he does because of the individual he is,” Eshoo said. “He’s faith-filled, he’s honest. His word is always good, and I can’t say that about all members of Congress, and you find out the hard way.” Eshoo added that Fortenberry had a reputation of being a rule-follower.

Also, Fortenberry had been regularly targeted by opponents in his reelection campaigns, including because of his defense of the unborn and women harmed by abortion, yet he easily won reelection term after term. So, if Fortenberry is known by Democratic colleagues as being honest, and he directly asked Baaklini if the 2016 fundraiser in L.A. was tainted and was told everything was fine, how did the government make their case against the congressman?

Anatomy of an Abusive Prosecution

Even though the DOJ had zero evidence that Fortenberry had committed any crime, they had Ayoub tape a June 2018 conversation with the congressman. After the call, Fortenberry was concerned enough to tell his wife, his chief of staff, and his lawyer that he had renewed concerns about the 2016 fundraiser.

Then, in March 2019, the FBI came to Fortenberry’s home in Nebraska and deliberately lied to him and his wife, saying they were there for a national security issuenot a criminal matter. That lie disarmed Fortenberry, striking him as believable because of his service on a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee whose work deals with U.S. foreign relations.

The FBI agents also quizzed Fortenberry on various matters, and later said Fortenberry lied about not knowing Ayoub. In fact, the congressman didn’t recognize a 10-year-old photo of Ayoub, as it showed him with dyed-black hair and black eyebrows, whereas, Ayoub, now 77, has silver hair and silver eyebrows.

An FBI agent did ask Fortenberry whether he knew that lying to a federal agent was a crime. The congressman responded that he did. His recollections of his unbeknownst-taped conversation with Ayoub the previous June were sketchy, not because he lied, but because of faulty recall and Fortenberry’s tendency to multi-task during fundraising calls, as his wife Celeste testified, because he didn’t enjoy doing them.

In the process, Fortenberry missed Ayoub’s point that Chagoury had likely contributed to the 2016 fundraiser. His failure to recall that was another instance, the DOJ argued, which showed the congressman’s intent to deceive, as well as Fortenberry’s assertion on the same call that he’d be interested in doing another fundraiser with Ayoub.

In a July 2019 interview in Washington, D.C., the FBI also lied to Fortenberry and his attorney, Trey Gowdy, the former Republican congressman from South Carolina. Gowdy specifically asked the FBI agents whether Fortenberry was a target of their investigation. They said he wasn’t.

That wasn’t true, and the FBI and DOJ cobbled together a case, saying that Fortenberry had not only lied but had deliberately tried to deceive the FBI. Part of making their case was that Fortenberry’s former lawyer testified she couldn’t recall the contents of her June 2018 conversation with Fortenberry, but she said she would’ve definitely remembered had he mentioned anything about possible illegal donations.

A Stickler for the Law Who Also Deliberately Deceives?

Never mind that this same attorney testified that Fortenberry was in the habit of calling her a lot—a virtue that affirms Eshoo’s assessment that Fortenberry is committed to adhering to the law. Nevertheless, based on the attorney’s testimony, the DOJ argued that Fortenberry had further willfully withheld self-incriminating evidence about the fundraiser, even though, again, Baaklini had testified that the congressman had directly asked whether the contributions were illegal early in the process and he—Baaklini—had lied to Fortenberry in saying they weren’t.

In addition, Fortenberry’s alleged crimes took place while he was on the phone in his Nebraska home. Nevertheless, because the prosecution argued his actions had relevance to their investigation in California, they succeeded in changing the legal venue to Los Angeles, a well-known leftist region where seating a jury unfavorable to the congressman was much more likely than in Nebraska, Fortenberry’s congressional home.

The venue issue is a likely ground for Fortenberry’s appeal, as is the argument that Fortenberry didn’t materially lie to the FBI.

Lying Is Okay if the Government Does It

Meanwhile, the government’s conduct in this case is very disturbing. An FBI agent admitted at the March trial that he had lied to Fortenberry at his home in March 2019, but he said that is part of the FBI’s normal tactics to extract the truth.

However, the DOJ and the FBI, both agencies of the executive branch of the U.S. government that includes the president as chief executive, had no substantive basis to pursue a criminal investigation of Fortenberry, a sitting congressman who had a sterling reputation for integrity. Instead, even though they knew that Baaklini and Ayoub had clearly violated the law, and despite Baaklini’s admission that the congressman had directly asked him whether the L.A. fundraiser was tainted, they pursued Fortenberry.

In short, they went on a legal fishing expedition to concoct a case against the congressman. Fortenberry’s failure to be attentive during his fundraising calls, and errors in his recall, are evidence of personal imperfections. But they are certainly not the basis of a legitimate criminal prosecution, let alone convictions.

A Disturbing Legal Precedent

Our federal government, based on a system of checks and balances that the founders established almost 250 years ago, presumes that the respective branches—executive, legislative, and judicial—will conduct themselves with integrity in interacting with each other. When trust is undermined, our system of government is jeopardized. By abusively wielding power to intimidate a legislator, the FBI and DOJ threaten that delicate balance. 

Unhealthy competition between the branches will consume them and devour any chance that public officials will rise above petty bickering and destructive partisanship to cooperate in the best interests of the country. By enlisting the judiciary to turn that threat of prison into a potential reality, the FBI and DOJ have turned the system on its head.  What the founders intended as an aggressive but civil competition is now in danger of becoming a deadly serious game which menaces the civil liberties and freedoms of those who dare to undertake public service.

This episode should be especially disconcerting to all faithful Catholics and other Christians concerned about their place in a society that is increasingly hostile to religion. Indeed, Fortenberry ended up a prosecutorial target precisely because of his work defending the right of Middle Eastern Christians to live and practice their faith. Christians especially must answer the call, and stand up against this most troubling evolution in the DOJ and FBI’s battle with Congress.


Tom Nash is a journalist, theologian, and author who has served the Catholic Church for more than 30 years, including as a theology advisor at the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN). Joseph Cosby is a seasoned attorney with more than 30 years of experience litigating cases in federal court. He practices law in Washington, D.C.

MARGOT CLEVELAND Op-ed: Why the Right Should Root for Biden to Pick the Most Insane Supreme Court Nominee


COMMENTARY BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | FEBRUARY 01, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/01/why-the-right-should-root-for-biden-to-pick-the-most-insane-supreme-court-nominee/

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer

With Thursday’s official announcement by Justice Stephen Breyer of his impending retirement, conservatives are strategizing on the best approach to prevent confirmation of a leftist activist justice. Instead, Republicans should be praying that President Biden nominates the looniest, most far-left lawyer possible for a slot on the high court. Why? Because history has proven that a far-left justice will be no worse than a moderately liberal justice in the casting of Supreme Court votes, meaning there is no downside to a far-left pick, while the upside potential is huge, given that it is Biden appointing the new justice and not a Republican president: Thank you very much, Never Trumpers.

While over the last four decades justices appointed by Republican presidents have demonstrated a penchant to “grow” in office or have proven more moderate or pragmatic than proclaimed during confirmation, the same is not true for Democrat-appointed justices, who vote in near-perfect lockstep over their careers.

Then there are the Republican-appointed justices who do not abandon their judicial philosophy, but conclude that a faithful application of originalism requires them to vote with the leftist wing of the court. Justice Neil Gorsuch provides a perfect example of this phenomenon, providing the fifth vote in several cases in the criminal context, and before him the now-late Justice Anton Scalia.

Conversely, in close or contentious cases, Democrat-appointed justices represent a block geared toward progressive policy outcomes.” It matters whether these justices are perceived as center-left or hard-left: The desired liberal outcome dictates the decision. So, fighting for a less leftist justice serves no purpose. On the other hand, there are many positives to the conservative cause if Biden nominates a far-left candidate to the Supreme Court. With midterm elections later this year, Biden naming an extremist to the high court positions Republicans perfectly to talk about the importance of elections—and specifically control of the Senate. The nomination of a far-left candidate will also provide an opportunity during the confirmation process for Republicans to highlight the recent public revelations of the Democratic Party’s true far-left goals. President Biden has already showcased the party’s obsession with identity politics by promising the country his nominee would be a black woman, so men and whites need not apply.

Further, if Republicans maintain decorum and respect during the process, and focus on the nominee’s judicial philosophy and policy, they can score points with a public disgusted by the left’s disgraceful treatment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and his family. And the more leftist Biden’s candidate, the more restrained Republicans will appear by comparison. Moreover, the further left the candidate, the more justified a “no” vote will be for swing-state Republicans, allowing them to vote against the nomination based on principle, and thereby avoid the obstructionist label. Likewise, moderate Republicans or Republican senators in purple or blue states could justify a “yes” vote based on their view that a president is entitled to his nomination.

The more extreme Biden’s candidate, the more this position will inure to Republicans’ benefit when a supposedly far-right candidate finds himself or herself nominated to the Supreme Court by a future Republican president. The same moderate Republicans can point to their vote for Biden’s extremist justice as proof of the consistency of their position that a president is entitled to his nominee, or if they are kicked out of office over their vote for Biden’s nominee, a stronger senator could be in that office. And should Democrat senators en mass vote against a future Republican nominee, the hypocrisy charge will strike more squarely the more extreme Biden’s leftist nominee is.

It is also not just the fight that will benefit the conservative cause: Elevation of a far-left justice to the Supreme Court will advance originalism more than if Biden were to replace Breyer with a milquetoast moderate. That premise may seem counterintuitive because we think of “moderates” in the context of politics and not precedent.

For a Supreme Court decision to be “precedential,” five justices must agree with both the outcome and the analysis. Were Biden to appoint a so-called “moderate,” her vote would tally with the far-left wing of the high court and her reasoning would likely be mainstream enough to, at times, shift Justice John Roberts or Justice Brett Kavanaugh to join with the other two leftist justices to create a majority opinion that binds lower courts.

Conversely, a far-left justice will also vote with Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan but may drag her sister justices too far to the left to entice any so-called moderate justices to join in the decision. Then, either the leftist side will lose, or the outcome will favor the leftist position, but the Supreme Court’s decision will be fractured, with several of the justices writing separately, resulting in no binding precedent and only dicta.

Of course, originalism would benefit more from the appointment of an originalist justice, but that is not an option now, as President Biden is our president and Breyer submitted his resignation effective upon confirmation of his successor. So the choice is between Justice Breyer and another liberal justice or a far-left one. Stalling in the hope of obtaining a more palatable liberal will leave us with Justice Breyer and the need to delay an appointment for three years.

Conservatism would be better served by using Biden’s appointment to remind the public that elections have consequences. The loonier left his nominee is, the better that point can be made.


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.


Law Firms That Raced To Defend Terrorists In Gitmo Leave Jan. 6 Defendants Out To Dry


Reported By Allison Schuster | OCTOBER 26, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/26/law-firms-that-raced-to-defend-terrorists-in-gitmo-leave-j6-defendants-out-to-dry/

Photo Buzzfeed

At least 50 high-powered law firms that went out of their way to defend foreign terrorists in Guantanamo Bay free of charge are nowhere to be found as hundreds of American citizens languish in prison for charges related to entering the U.S. Capitol building during the January 6 riot.

When foreign terrorists, including the accused mastermind who helped plan the 9/11 attack, were being held in the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp, law firms from across the country volunteered to represent them pro bono. Now, nearly 600 Americans face an intense legal battle over their participation in the events of January 6, and these same firms are leaving them defenseless. Not one of the legal firms that assisted Gitmo terrorists have helped any of those charged with ties to January 6.

In 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union went so far as to create an entire group of lawyers ready to defend Gitmo detainees under the John Adams Project, to show their dedication to ensuring all have a top-notch defense.

John Adams, whose patriotism was proven in his instrumental legal role in helping found the American republic, defended British soldiers after the Boston Massacre in an American courtroom. Although undoubtedly a revolutionary hero, Adams felt convicted that the judicial system cannot be just if everyone doesn’t receive a quality defense. With popular opinion so staunchly against the soldiers, Adams risked his reputation to uphold this principle.

Attorney Steve Schaefer explained to me that a strong legal defense for all accused of crimes is necessary, as it is the only way to reveal the truth of what occurred before the court. If the facts don’t come to light, the American justice system is in jeopardy, as people are at the will of an arbitrary power. Schaefer said, that causes Americans to lose trust in the American experiment, so the importance of quality representation prior to adjudication in court can’t be overstated.

“It’s indispensable to have to have a strong advocacy on behalf of criminal defendants — even if the allegations are unsavory — because our entire process hinges on a protection of the citizen and that the government has to meet the highest burden, which is beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to convict them of a crime,” Schaefer said.

Without a strong criminal defense, the government can take away individual rights without a clear demonstration of the guilt of the accused. The firms who trumpeted the right to a strong defense for everyone charged in the American legal system when it came to Guantanamo Bay are well aware of the need for a competent defense for citizens today, yet they have not allocated any resources to an equal defense for some accused of crimes.

The law firm Wilmer and Hale told The New York Times in 2008 that establishing a proper defense for Gitmo detainees “was about as important as anything we could take on.”

Despite widespread allegations of prosecutorial zealotry and differing standards of prosecution for the January 6 rioters compared to the thousands of rioters across the nation in 2020 who besieged the White House, federal courthouses, police precincts, national symbols, and small businesses, no similar defense fund or coordination has been provided for those charged in the January 6 riot.

Julie Kelly, a reporter covering dozens of January 6 defendants since their cases began, said the majority of those who have been charged have no prior experience navigating the legal system. Few have been charged with any crime before in their lives and now must rely on government-provided public defenders because they can’t afford anyone else.

“We have a Gitmo in Washington D.C.,” Kelly told me. “We have a prison that has been used solely to house and detain men arrested and charged — not convicted, just charged with offenses — related to January 6.”

Some of the nonviolent defendants were so misinformed by the FBI that they thought they were being questioned to help them find violent offenders, all while the FBI was gathering evidence against those being questioned, she said.

“These people are being treated in court as domestic terrorists. Dozens of them are held under pre-trial detention orders, which means they don’t even have a chance to make bail,” Kelly noted. “They are considered too dangerous to be let out of jail, awaiting trials which won’t start until the middle of next year at the earliest.”

Capitol rioter Paul Hodgkins’ prosecutor referred to him as a domestic terrorist in his sentencing, and FBI Director Christopher Wray has designated January 6 an act of domestic terrorism. Many who didn’t even know they were doing anything wrong, entering the Capitol as police opened doors for them, face detrimental charges threatening to turn them into convicted felons, revoking their right to vote and to own a gun for the rest of their lives.

While corporate media and other establishment institutions have long encouraged pro-bono legal representation of those held at Gitmo, they have discouraged it for those charged in the January 6 riot. Media and political figures argue those charged in the riot were violent insurrectionists seeking to overthrow the government. However, not a single person at the riot has been charged with inciting insurrection. They have instead been charged with obstruction of an official proceeding, which is the felony charge that the government is adding to mostly misdemeanor cases of trespassing.

The vast majority of those charged with ties to January 6 carried no weapons, harmed no one, vandalized nothing, and stole nothing, according to Kelly. Most walked through the capitol against no resistance at 2:40 p.m., took a selfie, and were out by 3 p.m. These defendants are also being tried in front of a jury in Washington, D.C., a city where more than 92 percent of the voters voted to elect Joe Biden last November.

Civil liberties advocates say the treatment of January 6 defendants reveals an alarming threat to American jurisprudence. Some blame intimidation from well-funded leftist groups for the lack of a competent defense. Lawyers who do exert effort in providing such a defense have been harrassed.

According to NPR, attorney Nabeel Kibria represented one of the first defendants in the investigation to plead guilty, after which point Kibria began facing attacks and death threats 48 hours after her client’s plea deal “from people … who you would think were on a whole different spectrum than what the Bustles [a married couple on trial] are in terms of political ideology or the people of the January 6 riots.”

Firms that consider themselves advocates for the least among us fail to uphold their convictions by abandoning people like Hodgkins. The system of justice that exists in this country, outlined in the Constitution in no uncertain terms, requires a strong defense.

“It is extremely frustrating and heartbreaking to see the Beltway’s legal and judicial system so heavily stacked against these people who have no means to defend themselves,” Kelly said. “And you have no lawyers on the right willing to step up and take these cases either pro bono, or even low bono, to help these people.”

One thing is clear: Those on the left put a lot of work into defending Afghan terrorists a decade ago, touting the need for providing a quality legal defense to those who were least likely to have quality, willing representation. Now, in the hour of need for Americans charged with much lesser crimes than mass murder, the same firms remain silent.

Allison Schuster is a research assistant for Hillsdale College in DC and a 2021 Hillsdale graduate, as well as a former intern for The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter @allisonshoestor.

COMMENTARY: State Residents Rip Back Power from Governor, Enact Two Constitutional Amendments to Keep COVID Power Grab from Ever Happening Again


Demonstrators rally outside the Pennsylvania Capitol Building to protest the continued closure of businesses due to the coronavirus pandemic on May 15, 2020, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.Demonstrators rally outside the Pennsylvania Capitol Building to protest the continued closure of businesses due to the coronavirus pandemic on May 15, 2020, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. (Mark Makela / Getty Images)

Commentary by Elizabeth Stauffer| May 20, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/state-residents-rip-back-power-governor-enact-two-constitutional-amendments-keep-covid-power-grab-ever-happening/

In one of the first signs that American citizens are cognizant of the country’s dangerous descent into a one-party rule, residents of Pennsylvania sent a powerful message to those responsible on Tuesday: Stop!

The pandemic provided governors, mayors and other local leaders with extraordinary opportunities to expand their influence over the citizens in their states. Nowhere were these emergency powers more egregiously abused than in states, cities and towns governed by Democrats. By all measures, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf was one of the worst offenders.

WHYY-TV reported that two constitutional amendments passed statewide referenda that will provide the state’s General Assembly with “more power to block emergency declarations.”

The amendment to Article III, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution grants the legislature the ability to “terminate the Governor’s Covid-19 disaster emergency declaration without presenting it to the Governor for his approval.”

Prior to this amendment, measures passed by both the state House and Senate required the approval of the governor. Needless to say, all of the Republican-controlled legislature’s attempts to end or minimize Wolf’s orders ended in vetoes which required a two-thirds vote in both chambers to override. With the passage of this resolution, a simple majority vote in the state House and the Senate is all that is necessary. Veto power is no longer available to the governor.

Under the old law, the governor had the authority to issue an emergency order which would remain in effect for 90 days, at which point he or she could either renew it or end it. The new amendment stipulates that a “disaster emergency declaration will expire automatically after 21 days, regardless of the severity of the emergency, unless the General Assembly takes action to extend the disaster emergency.”

WHYY noted that a COVID-19 emergency order is currently in effect and is set to expire on Memorial Day. If Wolf chooses to renew it, a simple majority vote in the state House and Senate could end it in 21 days.

Democrats are reportedly worried that the legislature will act “to cancel COVID-19 emergency declarations without considering public health or consulting with the Governor’s office.”

State House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff and Speaker Bryan Cutler, both Republicans, sought to reassure them in a joint statement which said, “We stand ready to reasonably and responsibly manage Pennsylvania through this ongoing global pandemic, the scourge of opioid addiction, and other long-term challenges that may come to face this Commonwealth.”

State Republican lawmakers Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward and Senate President Jake Corman were more direct. In a joint statement, they wrote, “This decision by the people is not about taking power away from any one branch of government. It’s about re-establishing the balance of power between three equal branches of government as guaranteed by the constitution.”

Gov. Wolf, unsurprisingly, vehemently opposed these amendments. According to The Morning Call, the governor said in January that “Republicans were injecting partisan politics into emergency disaster response in a ‘thinly veiled power grab.’ Just last week, he warned that the provisions were a threat to a functioning society that must respond to increasingly complicated disasters.”

A thinly veiled power grab? I’m practically speechless. What stunning hypocrisy coming from a man who used the COVID-19 pandemic to trample all over his constituents’ rights by shutting down businesses, halting participation in high school sports, closing schools and mandating mask-wearing outside the home.

Anyway, the governor held a news conference on Wednesday in Pottstown, Pennsylvania. He said he’d spoken to leaders of both parties in the legislature to discuss “a path forward,” the Morning Call reported.

“We’re starting that conversation. You can’t just flick a switch and make the change,” he told reporters. “But the voters have spoken, and we’re going to do what I think the voters expect us to do and make the best of it.”

WHYY reported the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency expressed its disappointment with the election results in a statement which read, “The constitutional amendments have the potential to politicize future disasters and their management. PEMA always stands ready to respond to any situation but we’re extremely disappointed that our efforts, and the efforts of our other state agencies, could be constrained by partisan politics, which has no place in emergency response efforts.”

The passage of these amendments was a victory for those with whom the principles of liberty and freedom still have meaning. In an email provided to The Western Journal, Commonwealth Foundation President and CEO Charles Mitchell reacted to the passage of these amendments with tremendous joy and relief. He called Tuesday a “momentous day in the history of Pennsylvania and the United States” and wrote that “voters have defended some of our most important founding principles, including the separation of powers between branches of government and the fundamental importance of each citizen’s liberty.”

Many governors “saw their emergency powers laws as a vehicle for them to act in contradiction to their own state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution for as long as they’d like.” Most of us would agree with that statement.

Mitchell quoted James Madison in Federalist Paper No. 51: “But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist encroachments of the others … it may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”

“Two hundred and thirty-three years after Madison wrote that statement, voters in Pennsylvania reaffirmed its truth,” Mitchell concluded.

May Pennsylvania voters be the first of many states in the nation to impose restrictions on a governor’s authority under an emergency disaster declaration.

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

Elizabeth Stauffer, Contributor, Commentary

Elizabeth is a contract writer at The Western Journal. Her articles have appeared on many conservative websites including RedState, Newsmax, The Federalist, Bongino.com, HotAir, Instapundit, MSN and RealClearPolitics. Please visit Elizabeth’s new conservative blog: TheAmericanCrisis.org

@StaufferVaughn

Ted Cruz Slams Racist MSNBC Host, Poses the 1 Question People Have Been Asking


Reported by Landon Mion | May 12, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/ted-cruz-slams-racist-msnbc-host-poses-1-question-people-asking/

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas responded to MSNBC host Joy Reid’s racist remarks against him by questioning why the network permitted her to get away with it and saying that comments of the like were leading Hispanics to turn their back on the Democratic Party.

On Tuesday, Reid discussed the Texas senator with guests Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla of California and NAACP legal counsel Janai Nelson, and made a reference to the movie “Django Unchained” — comparing Cruz to a traitorous house slave in the film for not supporting the For the People Act, which aims at altering voting processes across the country.

Cruz’s rebuttal was swift, calling out the host of the MSNBC segment “The Reid Out” for “using overt racial slurs” to make assumptions concerning how Hispanic-Americans should vote.

“I appreciate MSNBC lecturing me on how people of ‘my race’ are supposed to vote,” Cruz tweeted on Wednesday. “This arrogant condescension is a big reason Hispanic voters are moving right in large numbers.

“Also, why is MSNBC ok with their hosts using overt racial slurs (‘Stephen from Django’)?”

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=WestJournalism&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1392501208875683845&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fted-cruz-slams-racist-msnbc-host-poses-1-question-people-asking%2F&sessionId=6e43aa6771fcfead5347c9048446eb527afbcd73&siteScreenName=WestJournalism&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550px

Cruz called the For the People Act, officially known as House Resolution 1, “Jim Crow 2.0” — a reference to President Joe Biden’s remarks about Georgia’s new voting law, which the president called “Jim Crow in the 21st Century.”

“Jim Crow laws were bigoted, racist, and disenfranchised millions of people,” Cruz said in a Tuesday tweet. “Those laws were drafted by Democrats and implemented by Democrats to keep Democrats in power. Today, Democrats are doing it again. The Corrupt Politicians Act is Jim Crow 2.0.”

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=WestJournalism&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1392149167712219138&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fted-cruz-slams-racist-msnbc-host-poses-1-question-people-asking%2F&sessionId=6e43aa6771fcfead5347c9048446eb527afbcd73&siteScreenName=WestJournalism&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550px

Reid was highly critical of Cruz and the GOP after his comment, alleging that the Republican Party was attempting voter suppression in his state of Texas.

“Ted Cruz says a lot of stupid things,” Reid said Tuesday. “He does a lot of stupid things. But I personally — as a person of color, as a black person — am beyond offended that he would dare use the word ‘Jim Crow’ when his party is literally a ‘Jim Crow’ party at this point, trying to suppress the votes of people, including in his home state.”

She later called Cruz “Stephen from Django Unchained.”

http://”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=WestJournalism&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1392266135798702084&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fted-cruz-slams-racist-msnbc-host-poses-1-question-people-asking%2F&sessionId=6e43aa6771fcfead5347c9048446eb527afbcd73&siteScreenName=WestJournalism&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550pxRelated:

Reid continued with attacks on the Texas senator, saying that he “could give a d**n about Jim Crow,” and that he has “never raised once concern ever in his entire life … about Jim Crow or racism or discrimination.”

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

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=WestJournalism&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-3&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1392261600472612870&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fted-cruz-slams-racist-msnbc-host-poses-1-question-people-asking%2F&sessionId=6e43aa6771fcfead5347c9048446eb527afbcd73&siteScreenName=WestJournalism&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550px

Reid suggested Cruz was a traitor to Hispanics and defended HR 1, saying that if it fails to pass, America may never see free and fair elections again.

Republicans, however, have said that the act threatens election integrity and the rights of states.

“The legislation would strip states of their constitutional authority to run elections and allow the federal government to decree what’s best,” Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia said in a Fox News Op-Ed.

“It would ban voter ID laws, which maintain the integrity of elections in my state and a majority of others … To put it simply: states don’t need Washington, D.C., to strip them of their authority and impose burdensome requirements to fix problems that do not exist,” Moore said.

Reid has made racist comments about Republicans in the past. She has made an “Uncle Tom” reference, alluding to the Harriet Beecher Stowe novel, about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, whom she called “Uncle Clarence.” She has also called Republican Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina the token black person in the Republican Party.

A Short History Of Democrats’ Vicious Tactics For Controlling The Judiciary


Reported by Frank Scaturro DECEMBER 4, 2020

As the courts have become hyper-politicized over the past few decades, the judicial nomination process has deteriorated. With this presidential term drawing to a close, we should note the new depths of obstruction that have become a part of the Senate Democrats’ playbook these past four years.

Origins of Obstruction

Matters were already bad when a Democratic Senate rejected Robert Bork for the Supreme Court in 1987 with such notorious vilification that “bork” was added to the dictionary as a verb denoting such unfair and harsh tactics. Four years later came personal vilification for Clarence Thomas before he squeaked by the Senate on a 52–48 vote.

Thomas nonetheless made it through a Democratic Senate that had not entirely shaken a long tradition of bipartisanship on judicial nominations. In fact, from the government’s establishment in 1789 through 2000, 97 percent of Senate-approved judges faced no recorded opposition, and 96 percent were confirmed by voice vote or unanimous consent as opposed to roll-call votes.

Recorded votes tended to be lopsided. When President Bill Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer to the Supreme Court, instead of Republicans retaliating for past treatment, the nominees were confirmed respectively by margins of 96–3 and 87–9. This was despite a number of known controversial positions Ginsburg had taken during her career that Republicans chose not to highlight.

During George W. Bush’s administration, Democrats engaged in wholesale filibusters of circuit court nominees, a tactic that resulted in the defeat of several. Previously, only one judicial nomination fell apart after coming up short on a vote on cloture — the procedure by which senators, with a supermajority vote, could end debate and force a confirmation vote. That was the fate of Justice Abe Fortas, whom Lyndon B. Johnson tried to elevate to chief justice in 1968.

Whether Fortas could garner the simple majority of senators required for confirmation was unclear. His unusual case included bipartisan opposition and ethical questions — he actually resigned from the Supreme Court the following year — and did not leave even the most strident opponents of Bork and Thomas with a sense that they had the filibuster in their procedural toolbox.

In 2005, early in Bush’s second term, Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist proposed to change the supermajority requirement for cloture on nominations (then at 60 votes) to a simple majority, an idea known as the “nuclear option,” which would have effectively ended judicial filibusters. Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid threatened to retaliate with an unprecedented level of obstructionism that would freeze most Senate business. This scenario did not play out after a compromise, engineered by the “Gang of 14,” derailed any change to cloture.

Eight years later, however, Reid was majority leader, and with the shoe on the other foot, he orchestrated by parliamentary maneuver the very rule change that had once evoked his threats of senatorial Armageddon, essentially ending the filibuster for all nominations other than for the Supreme Court in 2013.

Unprecedented Partisanship During the Trump Era

Gorsuch Filibuster

That exception for filibusters on Supreme Court nominations was quickly put to the test after Donald Trump became president in 2017 and Democrats launched a filibuster of the new president’s first judicial nominee to reach the floor, Neil Gorsuch. Thanks to Reid’s handiwork in 2013, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell garnered support for adding Supreme Court nominations to the others that were subject to simple majorities to invoke cloture.

Abuse of Cloture Motions

Although Democrats were in the minority in the Senate throughout Trump’s term, they used the tools in their arsenal more than any Senate minority before them. While the simple majority threshold made it easier than before to invoke cloture, even when a cloture motion succeeded, a confirmation vote was not immediate but subject to a limit of 30 hours of further consideration.

That time notoriously went by with little-to-no actual debate on the nomination at issue, but of course, actual deliberation was not the goal. By forcing votes on cloture, Democrats could take up more of the Senate’s time and make it that much more difficult to process nominations, not to mention other business.

This the Democratic minority did indiscriminately. All three of Trump’s Supreme Court nominees — Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — were subjected to cloture votes. Adding Samuel Alito (a George W. Bush appointee) to those three, four of the six sitting Republican-appointed justices have faced cloture votes, in contrast to all four of the justices nominated by Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Senate Democrats have also regularly forced cloture votes for even noncontroversial nominees to circuit courts, district courts, and even the non-life-tenured courts of federal claims. Eight district court nominees who had previously been nominated by Obama before Trump renominated them were subjected to cloture votes despite a lack of meaningful opposition; five of them received between 95 and 100 votes for confirmation and zero against, and another was confirmed by a voice vote.

It was only after the cloture rule was broadened in 1949, during Harry Truman’s presidency, to cover any pending matter that nominations could be subject to a cloture motion. Since then, there were a total of 136 cloture votes on judicial nominees through the end of the Obama administration. Trump’s nominees have considerably more than that entire total, at 192 and counting.

The Disintegration of Bipartisanship

The bipartisanship that used to attend most judicial nominations is also falling apart. According to the Heritage Foundation, more confirmed judges received more than 30 percent opposition votes during the Trump administration than during all previous administrations combined, from George Washington to Obama. Moreover, the majority of negative votes cast against judicial nominees in American history were against Trump nominees.

The three Trump-appointed Supreme Court justices were confirmed with almost total Democratic opposition. Only three Democrats voted to confirm Gorsuch, one to confirm Kavanaugh, and none to confirm Barrett, making her the first Supreme Court nominee to be confirmed without any votes from a major minority party since 1869.

In Kavanaugh’s case, Democrats employed kitchen-sink tactics of obstruction that included repeated interruptions during his hearings and deluging him with more written questions for the record than the combined number of such questions to prior Supreme Court nominees in American history. All other tactics were eclipsed by the disgraceful last-minute attempt to destroy Kavanaugh, when Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual-assault allegation, after being buried for six weeks by ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, was sprung on the committee after the initial hearings, a desperate tactic that flouted the process for handling sensitive matters.

Weaponization of the Blue Slip

On top of everything else, Democrats tried, in the words of long-serving Senate Judiciary Committee member (and former chairman) Orrin Hatch, to “weaponize the blue slip” tradition for circuit and district courts. That was the courtesy established in approximately 1917 in which a nominee’s home-state senators receive blue pieces of paper on which they could express their views about the nomination to the committee. It was a tradition (as opposed to a rule) intended to encourage pre-nomination consultation, but Democrats during this administration routinely withheld positive blue slips, especially for circuit nominees, as a workaround in the absence of a true filibuster.

“Today, Democrats are trying to turn the blue-slip process into a de facto filibuster,” Hatch charged in 2017. “They want a single senator to be able to do in the Judiciary Committee what it once took 41 senators to do on the Senate floor.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley, who chaired the committee during the first two years of the Trump administration, noted that only two of 19 Judiciary Committee chairmen who served over the span of a century treated the blue slip as a strict veto that would preclude a hearing in the absence of two positive blue slips, and he was not going to allow Democratic obstructionism to prevent him from proceeding with hearings for circuit nominees. Still, the blue slip has impeded the advancement of district court nominations through committee, and many trial court judgeships in states with Democratic senators remain vacant due to the withholding of blue slips or the threat of doing so.

It is thanks to current Republican leadership in the Senate and specifically the Judiciary Committee that so many nominees have been processed and made their way to confirmation. As the repeated operation of the 30-hour rule took its toll on nominations, McConnell garnered a majority to reduce the post-cloture clock to two hours for district court nominations.

To date, the Senate has confirmed 229 Article III (life-tenured) judges nominated by Trump. That total includes 53 circuit court judges, which ranks second among all four-year presidential terms to that of Jimmy Carter, who, boosted by the creation of 35 new seats on the courts of appeals in 1978, holds the record at 56. For several months this year, there was no room for Trump to increase his appointments to the courts of appeals because every vacancy had been filled.

Historical Support for Lame-Duck Confirmations

There are now two more appellate nominees, Thomas L. Kirsch II for Barrett’s former seat on the Seventh Circuit and Raúl M. Arias-Marxuach to fill the First Circuit vacancy created by the death of Juan Torruella on Oct. 26. There is no reason they cannot be confirmed before Inauguration Day. Kirsch already had his hearing before the Judiciary Committee, as have 11 pending nominees to district or federal claims courts.

While any nomination that is not processed by Jan. 3, the end of the current congressional term and beginning of the next, is automatically returned to the president, it can be resubmitted and processed without the need for a new hearing. There is ample precedent for lame-duck judicial confirmations, from John Adams’ appointment of John Marshall as chief justice after his re-election defeat, to Carter’s appointment of Breyer to the First Circuit after his loss to Ronald Reagan.

There is an unmistakable dissonance between Joe Biden’s calls for national unity and his party’s judicial obstructionism over the past four years. As a Judiciary Committee chairman, Biden helped to lay much of the groundwork for this sorry state of affairs. For his Democratic successors in the Senate, obstructionism is an ongoing project that seems to find no limit.

Consider the exception that proved the rule: When leftist interest groups criticized Feinstein after she praised Graham’s handling of Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination hearings and gave the chairman a hug — never mind that every Democrat voted against the nominee — Feinstein’s party compelled her to step down as the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat. Is there any level of malevolence toward judicial nominations that would satisfy today’s Democratic leadership?

Frank Scaturro served as counsel for the Constitution on the staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee between 2005 and 2009, in which capacity he worked on the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court and Neil Gorsuch to the Tenth Circuit. He is the author of, among other titles, “The Supreme Court’s Retreat from Reconstruction” (Greenwood Press, 2000). Follow him on Twitter at @FrankScaturro.

Partisans Cheating By Ignoring Election Law Is A Problem As Big As Vote Fraud


Reported by Margot Cleveland NOVEMBER 13, 2020

Fraud represents only one aspect of concern over the results from last week’s election. Of equal import when judging the legitimacy of the next president of the United States is whether states complied with the election rules established by their legislatures. These are not questions of mere “technical errors,” but raise significant constitutional concerns.

On Wednesday, Jim Geraghty of National Review tweeted his “Morning Jolt” summary of post-election lawsuits. “The Trump campaign,” Geraghty stressed, “conceded in oral arguments they were not contending fraud or improper influence, merely technical errors,” he wrote of a recent election case. Geraghty’s article, linked in his tweet, continued: “It is one thing to fume on Twitter that there is a sinister effort to steal an election; it is another thing to assert that sweeping claim in a court of law, before a judge, under penalty of perjury and/or disbarment.”

Not to pick on Geraghty, whom I respect immensely, but he is conflating two separate issues: fraud and violations of the election code. Those are two distinct problems, yet there has been little analysis of the latter, which over the next several weeks might prove more significant.

There are multiple allegations of fraud, such as the middle-of-the-night arrival of unsecured ballots in Detroit or the dead man voting in Nevada. Then there’s the even more devastating suggestion that votes for Donald Trump were swapped to Joe Biden via vulnerable computer systems. Frankly, this idea strikes me as unbelievable, but then again, so did the idea that the FBI would obtain illegal secret court warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, and we know how that turned out.

Election Code Violations Might as Well Be ‘Fraud’

Violations of the election code, however, are a different matter, and unfortunately, sometimes the public views election officials’ bending of the rules as a harmless ignoring of technicalities. As the attorney in the Montgomery County Board of Elections case noted after “conceding” he was not alleging fraud: “The election code is technical.”

That makes technical violations constitutionally significant because Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 grants state legislatures the ultimate authority to appoint the electors who choose the president: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.”

In Bush v. Gore, former Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist stressed the significance of this constitutional provision in a concurrence joined by Justice Clarence Thomas and former Justice Antonin Scalia. As Rehnquist wrote, that clause “convey[s] the broadest power of determination” and “leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method” of appointment of electors. Furthermore, “a significant departure from the legislative scheme for appointing Presidential electors presents a federal constitutional question.”

The three concurring justices in Bush v. Gore concluded that the Florida Supreme Court’s order directing election officials to count improperly marked ballots was a “significant departure from the legislative scheme,” and “in a Presidential election the clearly expressed intent of the legislature must prevail.” Accordingly, those justices would have declared the Florida recount unconstitutional under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2.

While the concurrence in Bush v. Gore failed to garner support by a majority of the justices, the Supreme Court’s composition has changed dramatically since then, and the reasoning of this concurrence provides a strong basis to view deviations from the technicalities of the election code as unconstitutional. As Rehnquist stressed, “[I]n a Presidential election the clearly expressed intent of the legislature must prevail.”

So, if the legislative branch mandates voter signatures, or verification of signatures, or internal secrecy sleeves, or counting only in the presences of poll-watchers from each party, it is no answer to say it is a technicality and not fraud at issue. The state legislatures, through the election code, define the validity of votes, and allowing state officials or courts to read those provisions out of the law raises serious questions under Article 2 of the Constitution.

Ignoring the Election Code Denies Equal Protection

Allowing state officials to fudge on the mandates of the election code raises a second significant constitutional issue, this one under the Equal Protection Clause, which served as the basis for the majority opinion in Bush v. Gore. The majority in Bush v. Gore held that the varying standards violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, reasoning: “The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.”

When state officials ignore the technicalities of the election code, however, it virtually guarantees voters will be denied equal treatment. The proof is in Pennsylvania. There, for instance, even though the election code prohibited inspecting ballots before Election Day, some county officials — those in larger counties with access to mail-sorting machines that could weigh ballots — weighed the ballots to determine if the voter failed to include the required inner secrecy sleeve.

Then those officials, again contrary to the election code, provided information to representatives of the Democratic Party so they could identify the voters whose ballots would be canceled. Voters whose election officials abided by the technicalities of the election code, however, did not receive that notice nor the opportunity to “cure” their ballot.

Now thanks to the unprecedented push toward mail-in voting over the last year, we are seeing this same pattern repeat itself throughout the country. Some election officials bent (or broke) the rules the legislative branch had set, while others followed the letter of the law. As a result, voters in different counties in the same state were treated disparately and on an arbitrary basis. Unlike the situation in Bush v. Gore, however, it is not the state courts altering the plain language of the election code, but secretaries of state or local election officials.

The majority in Bush v. Gore recognized the rightful place of election officials to interpret and apply the rules established by the legislative branch. This difference provides some leeway to states, which through interpretative guidance tweak the technicalities of the election code. But as in other areas of the law, such interpretations must be reasonable and must not violate the clearly expressed intent of the legislature.

The Supreme Court will likely decide where that line will be drawn in the coming days.

Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty member and adjunct instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Why President Trump Has A Strong Supreme Court Case To Contest Pennsylvania


Reported by Matt Beebe By  13, 2020

As arguments about voter fraud have escalated across the country, it’s time to recognize that despite what an unmitigated disaster widespread expansion of absentee balloting has been, concerns about its abuse aren’t the most important argument in the ongoing fight over the legitimacy of this election. Sure, the media and Big Tech’s widespread white-washing and censoring of very real voter fraud concerns are damaging to the social fabric in existential ways, just as ignoring norms (and in some cases laws) requiring transparency destroys public trust and confidence in the outcome.

The Pennsylvania lawsuit isn’t yet proof that election-altering fraud occurred, although it does present compelling evidence that if proved shatters the media narrative on election security. A closer look at the allegations of direct fraud weighed against the likelihood of proving that enough occurred to alter the outcome — on a shortened timeline — reveals a daunting task for the president’s legal team.

President Trump’s lawyers, however, aren’t making the same argument as your uncle on Facebook; they’re playing for keeps. Some Republicans have been content to publicly call for the “process to play out” while privately predicting losses or maybe a few favorable rulings on some esoteric technicalities. But the president is not tired of winning yet.

Shortly after the filing, Jenna Ellis, a senior legal adviser to the Trump campaign, put it succinctly: “Pennsylvania is irredeemably compromised.”

The thrust of their legal argument doesn’t hinge on the numbers of fraudulent ballots cast, but on the inconsistent and illegal application of Pennsylvania election law, which dilutes legally cast votes — so-called disparate treatment, from which the U.S. Constitution is supposed to protect us.

The other key legal argument is that those changes in the election law, which were implemented by an unelected appointee of Pennsylvania’s executive branch, namely Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar, were an impermissible usurpation of the legislature’s prerogative even if Pennsylvania’s judicial branch approved them.

Bush v. Gore Already Wrestled with These Concerns

Underlying the president’s legal argument is the recognition that the Pennsylvania legislature implemented an imperfect regime that rationally valued security of the election as more important than avoiding disenfranchising any voters. Even amid a pandemic, the Pennsylvania legislature understood that their expansion of ballot-by-mail increased risks to election security, and thus sought to mitigate that as best they could. It was partisan state courts that unilaterally overrode those determinations in the middle of a presidential campaign in an unconstitutional way.

The discussion about what types of fraud, and how much, is important because it goes to the very heart of election integrity, and our system cannot stand without trust in the outcome. That argument, however, won’t decide the Pennsylvania case from a legal standpoint. It will come down to whether a ministerial appointee of Pennsylvania’s executive branch can work with Pennsylvania’s judicial branch to subvert the expressed will of the legislature, and hastily put in place an election process wherein citizens who chose to vote differently had their votes disparately treated.

Recall that in 2000, the legal argument that eventually carried the day was equal-protection grounds; by implementing different methods for recounts and different scrutiny for different counties, voters were receiving unequal treatment. The Supreme Court held 7-2 that “Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work.”

Twenty years is a long time as far as the public attention span goes, and most have allowed the “selected not elected” mantra to pervade our consciousness. Contra the prevailing narrative, however, Justices William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas framed their decision as one of judicial restraint that saw a key part of the court’s role was in protecting the Florida legislature from impermissible interference by the Florida courts:

In most cases, comity and respect for federalism compel us to defer to the decisions of state courts on issues of state law. That practice reflects our understanding that the decisions of state courts are definitive pronouncements of the will of the States as sovereigns. Of course, in ordinary cases, the distribution of powers among the branches of a State’s government raises no questions of federal constitutional law, subject to the requirement that the government be republican in character. But there are a few exceptional cases in which the Constitution imposes a duty or confers a power on a particular branch of a State’s government. This is one of them. … Thus, the text of the election law itself, and not just its interpretation by the courts of the States, takes on independent significance.

A significant departure from the legislative scheme for appointing Presidential electors presents a federal constitutional question.

If we are to respect the legislature’s Article II powers, therefore, we must ensure that postelection state-court actions do not frustrate the legislative desire to attain the ‘safe harbor’ provided by §5. (Rehnquist concurring, but writing separately; Citations and dicta omitted)

Admittedly, this “Article II view” was a more expansive view on why the ongoing Florida recount was suspect than the Supreme Court ultimately held, but clearly, at least three justices believed that the courts — even state courts, which usually receive great deference to interpreting state law — don’t have a right to tweak the express will of the state legislature about presidential electors.

To be sure, the equal-protection claims also present differently, so they aren’t a slam-dunk here, and the Rehnquist concurrence isn’t controlling precedent (two of the three justices who signed on to the opinion are no longer on the court), so it might not carry the day.

Three of the young lawyers on the Bush team advocating this view of the law in 2000 have received pretty notable promotions since that time, however, and three other guys likely to have a say have signaled their belief in exactly this interpretation, stating recently, “The provisions of the Federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures, not state courts, the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature simply by claiming that a state constitutional provision gave the courts the authority to make whatever rules it thought appropriate for the conduct of a fair election.”

It’s anyone’s guess how the Supreme Court would rule if it gets to that point, but when three current justices (Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch) have signaled they’re sympathetic to the basic legal argument, and three other justices (John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett) were part of the team that advanced very similar legal arguments in Bush v. Gore, the president and his team must like their chances.

The Changes Disproportionately Helped Biden

Pundits and some Trump supporters have engaged in navel-gazing and resigned themselves to the line of reasoning that “maybe Trump shouldn’t have down-talked absentee voting.” We know in addition to increased risk of fraud, however, voters who cast absentee ballots have historically had a significantly greater likelihood of being disenfranchised than in-person voters.

For Trump to push his supporters to vote in ways that were more likely to count isn’t irrational. It instead raises the question of why former Vice President Joe Biden wasn’t concerned with his voters being disenfranchised if they voted absentee, given the historical risks.

Both the potential for fraud and increased probability of disenfranchising voters sound intuitively like things we should fix, but the Pennsylvania legislature didn’t. They saw fit to keep the bar high to offset the risk of fraud and associated effects to public confidence in the election that unrestricted mail balloting would cause.

There’s a rational basis for that, and the entire saga has played out nationally. With the non-legislative changes, absentee voters were significantly less likely to be disenfranchised than before — indeed, Boockvar’s unilateral changes in Pennsylvania removed nearly every barrier the duly elected state legislature had put in place.

This created an environment where the constitutional guarantee of one person, one vote was tilted significantly in the direction of a voting modality (mail balloting versus in-person balloting). Not only was this ripe for greater abuse, but that tilting of the playing field disproportionately benefited the voters of one presidential candidate. Making this even more obvious are new revelations that show how the larger Democratic strongholds were equipped to quickly pre-sort potentially invalid ballots, and Democratic operatives were gearing up to capitalize on the eventual changes to the statutory pre-canvass period before Boockvar’s office even announced them.

What if the Supreme Court Invalidates a State’s Election

For conservatives, an intellectual challenge now presents itself: If you were OK with the Supreme Court stopping the Florida recount in 2000, you need to prepare yourself to be comfortable with the same court invalidating the Pennsylvania electors. Indeed, you should want them to, whether or not there was underlying direct fraud sufficient enough to affect the outcome. Alternatively, you should start working on your tortuous rationale for why, on constitutional grounds, what was legitimate in 2000 is not legitimate in 2020.

Whether you’re persuaded by the equal protection reasoning in the Bush v. Gore holding or in the minority’s separate concurrence emphasizing the plenary powers of the Pennsylvania legislature under Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, if the case makes it to the Supreme Court it won’t hinge on some threshold level of fraud that tipped the scales against Trump, nor will it be about the raw power of a conservative court to hand the election to Trump (which will certainly be the media narrative if it gets to that point). It will be, and always has been, about the rule of law.

Where the actual fraud becomes important — an actual measure of it, and whether it delivered an illegitimate win to Biden — is in how the Pennsylvania legislature, and potentially Congress, should react to the Court prohibiting the certification of the November election with respect to presidential electors. There is nothing wrong or abhorrent to our constitutional system if the elected representatives of the citizens of Pennsylvania are required to weigh in and clean this up on behalf of their voters. They need to be prepared to make their case to their voters if the predominant media narrative remains that the fraud wasn’t significant enough to affect the election outcome in Pennsylvania.

Regardless of how the Pennsylvania case gets resolved, it won’t change the overall outcome on its own. The 20 electoral votes wouldn’t be enough to swing the election to Trump if existing media projections for Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan stay in Biden’s column. If any of those changes, whether through ongoing canvassing efforts or other simultaneous legal challenges — such as the president’s filing Wednesday in Michigan making similar constitutional claims — well, Katy, bar the door.

Our way of government is strong enough to endure this. The only way through is through.

For nearly twenty years, Matt Beebe served as a countermeasures engineer in the Air Force and a contractor in the intelligence community before launching an IT and computer security firm in San Antonio, Texas. He is active in Texas politics and can be found on Twitter @theMattBeebe.

Trump appointments blitz a ‘shock wave’ to liberal 9th Circuit


Reported by Madison Dibble | February 24, 2020 12:41 PM

President Trump and the Republican-controlled Senate have taken the reliably liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and tilted it to the Right. The 9th Circuit is the largest circuit court, covering many of the West Coast states, including California, Hawaii, and Arizona. The court just received its 10th judge from the Trump administration, effectively changing the court’s liberal makeup into a more ideologically diverse lineup. In just three years, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Trump joined forces to place more justices to lifetime appointments on the 9th Circuit than President Barack Obama did in his eight years in office.

One judge from the circuit said the rapid influx of Trump appointees had been jarring, telling the Los Angeles Times, “Ten new people at once sends a shock wave through the system.”

Many of Trump’s appointments have been praised by their peers on the 9th Circuit, but others appear to be rattled. For instance, Judge Daniel Collins has been criticized for his “combative” objections to other judges on the circuit.

“Collins has definitely bulldozed his way around here already in a short time,” one judge from the 9th Circuit said. “Either he doesn’t care or doesn’t realize that he has offended half the court already.”

Democratic-appointed judges still hold a slight majority in the circuit, with 16 appointees compared with 13 Republican appointees, but 9th Circuit Judge Milan Smith Jr., an appointee of George W. Bush, said Trump’s judicial picks were about to take over.

“Trump has effectively flipped the circuit,” Smith said. “You will see a sea change in the 9th Circuit on day-to-day decisions.”

Democratic appointees have controlled the 9th Circuit Court since 1978, when federal law changed to add 10 seats to the court, allowing President Jimmy Carter to select every judge to fill the openings. President Ronald Reagan got only three nominations on the circuit, and appointees from President Bill Clinton and Obama built out the rest of the former liberal stronghold.

Because the court was reliably liberal, it was often the go-to court to challenge Trump’s policies, often forcing a review from the Supreme Court. In the early days of Trump’s presidency, the 9th Circuit struck down his “travel ban” from several Muslim-majority countries and deemed many of his immigration policies unconstitutional. The Supreme Court overturned many of the rulings from the 9th Circuit. Still, delays caused by the lower courts can hinder the president’s policies from moving forward when he wants them to begin.

In total, Trump has appointed 51 circuit court judges to lifetime appointments alongside the two justices he landed on the Supreme Court. McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, has joked that his motto while leading the GOP majority in the Senate is to “leave no vacancy behind.”

Nadler Announces House Committee Investigation Underway After Mueller Report Shows No Collusion


Reported By Jack Davis | Published March 25, 2019 at 7:38pm

House Democrats are not letting the conclusions of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report impede them from further investigations of President Donald Trump. “We’re going to move forward with our investigations of obstruction of justice, abuses of power, corruption, to defend the rule of law, which is our job,” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said Sunday, according to Bloomberg.

Nadler insisted his wide-ranging probe, which he has already begun, is not a rehash of the Mueller report.

“It’s a broader mandate than the special prosecutor had,” he said.

Mueller was initially charged with investigating allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in 2016. As noted by Attorney General William Barr in a note to Congress, those allegations have been proven false.

“The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election,” Barr said in a letter to Congress.

But Nadler is now digging into the gray area in the Mueller report — whether Trump obstructed justice.

Barr’s letter said the report “leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’”

Nadler said that he wants to put Barr in the hot seat to determine how Barr decided not to pursue an obstruction case against Trump.

“Attorney General Barr, who auditioned for his role with a memo saying that it was almost impossible for any president to commit obstruction, made a decision in under 48 hours,” Nadler said Sunday, according to CBS.

He referenced a 2018 memo Barr wrote that said “Mueller’s obstruction theory is fatally misconceived” and based “on a novel and insupportable reading of the law.”

Mueller said Barr needs to better explain himself.

“Given what Barr found on obstruction of justice, I think all of us should be very concerned about the even-handedness,” Nadler said Monday. “The American public needs to know how exactly did he conclude there is no obstruction of justice.”

Nadler issued a statement co-authored with fellow Democrats House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff of California and House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland that gave Barr a zinger for not charging Trump.

“It is unacceptable that, after Special Counsel Mueller spent 22 months meticulously uncovering this evidence, Attorney General Barr made a decision not to charge the President in under 48 hours. The Attorney General did so without even interviewing the President. His unsolicited, open memorandum to the Department of Justice, suggesting that the obstruction investigation was ‘fatally misconceived,’ calls into question his objectivity on this point in particular,”the statement said.

The three Democrats maligned Barr’s impartiality.

“The only information the Congress and the American people have received regarding this investigation is the Attorney General’s own work product,” the chairmen said.

“The Special Counsel’s Report should be allowed to speak for itself, and Congress must have the opportunity to evaluate the underlying evidence,” the statement said.

It is unclear yet whether the full Mueller report will ever be released. Both Trump and his Democratic critics, however, have said it should be released in full.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

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.

LifeNews.com Report for Monday, January 14, 2019


LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Monday, January 14, 2019

Having problems reading this email? To read the news, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
Judge Forces Little Sisters of the Poor and Christian Groups to Fund Abortions
Pro-Life Advocate Brutally Assaulted for Telling Man “Jesus Loves You”
Andrew Cuomo’s Bill Allowing Abortion Up to Birth Could Make being Pro-Life a Crime
Poll: 70% of Millennials Support Abortion Limits, Only 7% Back Democrats’ Pro-Abortion Platform

More Pro-Life News
Youngest Black Legislator in America is 19 and Pro-Life
35 Senators File Bill to Permanently Ban Taxpayer Funding of Abortions
Trailer Released for New Roe v. Wade Movie: The Story of What Really Happened
Pro-Life Vice President Mike Pence to Address 37th Annual March for Life Rose Dinner
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

Judge Forces Little Sisters of the Poor and Christian Groups
to Fund Abortions

A group of charitable nuns will be forced pay for drugs that may cause abortions in their employee health plans as a result of a federal judge’s ruling Sunday.Click to Read at LifeNews.com


MORE PRO-LIFE NEWS FROM TODAY

Amazing Video Shows Unborn Baby in First Trimester Moving Her Arms and Legs

Documents Show Botched Abortions Injuring Multiple Women at Clinic Where Planned Parenthood CEO Worked

Pro-Abortion Blog Claims Killing Babies in Abortions “Improves Children’s Lives”

NPR Hypes Movie Glorifying Pro-Abortion “Pop Culture Icon” Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Skips Fact Checking

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Kentucky Legislators Want to Overturn Roe, File Bill to Ban Abortions on Babies With Beating Hearts

Sacrilegious Show “Call the Midwife” Has Woman Aborting Her Baby Surrounded by Nuns

 

YouTube Deletes Pro-Life Video Exposing Planned Parenthood, Calls it “Hate Speech”

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2019 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

Jerome Corsi Files Criminal Complaint Against Mueller Team


Reported By Randy DeSoto | December 3, 2018 at 12:00pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/jerome-corsi-files-criminal-complaint-mueller-team/Jerome Corsi

In this Oct. 7, 2008, file photo, Jerome Corsi, right, arrives at the immigration department in Nairobi, Kenya. (AP Photo)

Conservative author Jerome Corsi filed a “criminal and ethics” complaint against special counsel Robert Mueller on Monday, alleging his team threatened prosecution if Corsi refused to provide false testimony against Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Fox News reported the 78-page complaint, filed with the Department of Justice and the DOJ’s inspector general, stated “Dr. Corsi has been criminally threatened and coerced to tell a lie and call it the truth.”

The filing also calls for the removal of Mueller and his prosecutors for their misconduct.

“Special Counsel Mueller and his prosecutorial staff should respectfully be removed from his office and their practice of the law and a new Special Counsel appointed who respects and will obey common and accepted norms of professional ethics and the law and who will promptly conclude the so-called Russian collusion investigation which had been illegally and criminally spinning out of control,” the document reads.

According to his complaint, Mueller’s team wanted Corsi to testify to acting as a liaison between Trump campaign associate Roger Stone and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange regarding the release of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee. The filing reads that Mueller’s office “knowingly and deceitfully threatening to charge Dr. Corsi with an alleged false statement,” unless he gives them “false testimony” against Trump and others.

Corsi announced last week on multiple media outlets that he would not sign Mueller’s agreement calling for him to plead guilty to one count of perjury.

“They can put me in prison the rest of my life. I am not going to sign a lie,” the 72-year-old told CNN.

According to a court filing by Mueller’s team, Corsi wrote in a short email to Stone in July 2016, “Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I’m back. 2nd in Oct. Impact planned to be very damaging.”

“Time to let more than (Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta) to be exposed as in bed w enemy if they are not ready to drop HRC (Hillary Rodham Clinton),” “The Obama Nation” author added. “That appears to be the game hackers are now about.”

Corsi explained to Fox News host Tucker Carlson last week that he had fully cooperated with Mueller’s investigators, turning over his computer and cellphone, but he initially forgot about the email, until it was brought to his attention. He amended his statement to Mueller’s team in September, which they accepted without complaint, but prosecutors changed their tune after they determined, he “could not give them what they wanted,” according to Corsi.

“They do this what I call a perjury trap,” Corsi told Carlson. “They ask you a question. They have material they won’t show you. You’ve forgotten about. They say, ‘You’ve just lied,’ because this email you’ve forgotten about 2016 proves your current memory is wrong. It’s a memory test.”

In a statement on Monday, his attorney Larry Klayman charged Mueller with “effectively seeking to overthrow a duly elected president” through coercing false testimony.

“This rogue government tyranny perpetrated by a Special Counsel and his prosecutorial staff, which is designed to effectively overthrow a duly elected president by coercing and extorting false testimony from Dr. Corsi and others, cannot be permitted in a civilized society,” he said.

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz argued last week that Mueller’s probe is creating crimes rather than uncovering past ones, and that the “devastating” report against Trump he will write will be based on people “who have lied.”

“Virtually all of his indictments and pleas come from people who he got to lie in front of investigators by setting perjury traps for them,” Dershowitz told Fox News host Sean Hannity. He added, “(A)nd the other ones have to do with financial dealings unrelated to the president. Where’s the beef? Where’s the crime?”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary
More Info Recent Posts

Randy DeSoto is a graduate of West Point and Regent University School of Law. He is the author of the book “We Hold These Truths” and screenwriter of the political documentary “I Want Your Money.”

12 Times Florida County’s Elections Supervisor Has Been ‘Incompetent and Possibly Criminal’



Authored By Luke Rosiak | November 9, 2018 at 9:55am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/12-times-florida-countys-elections-supervisor-has-been-incompetent-and-possibly-criminal/

Broward County Elections Supervisor

Dr. Brenda Snipes, Broward County Supervisor of Elections, left, looks on with an unidentified elections official during a canvassing board meeting on November 10, 2018 in Lauderhill, Florida. Three close midtern election races for governor, senator, and agriculture commissioner are expected to be recounted in Florida. (Photo by Joe Skipper / Getty Images)

As both parties scrutinize the vote count in Florida’s Broward County, with the state’s gubernatorial and senatorial races closing in on a tie, Sen. Marco Rubio said the county’s elections office has a history of malfeasance.

“This is at a minimum a pattern of incompetence. Voters deserve better,” the Florida Republican said Thursday on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

“This is not even a partisan thing. This is a county that apparently cannot even count votes as well as a county that just got wiped out by a hurricane.”

The state’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott filed a lawsuit Thursday against Broward election supervisor Brenda Snipes for allegedly refusing to tell them about votes she has not yet counted. The vote totals Snipes tabulated two days after the election would have readers believe that more people cast votes for agricultural commissioner than for U.S. Senator.

Additionally, lawyer Marc Elias of Perkins Coie — who hired Fusion GPS for the Democratic National Committee to investigate Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election — has been hired to litigate a recount on behalf of Democrats.

The Republican National Committee also pointed out 12 times news stories using its own headlines where Snipes has “been outright incompetent and possibly criminal”:

1 — Illegally destroying ballots (Sun Sentinel, May 14, 2018)

2 — Absentee ballots that never arrived (Miami Herald, November 6, 2018)

3 — Fellow Democrats accused her precinct of individual and systemic breakdowns that made it difficult for voters to cast regular ballots (Miami Herald, November 4, 2014)

4 — Posted election results half an hour before polls closed – a very clear violation of election law. (Miami Herald, November 2, 2018)

5 — Sued for leaving amendments off of ballots (Miami Herald, October 20, 2016)

6 — Claiming to not have the money to notify voters when their absentee ballot expired (Sun Sentinel, November 8, 2018)

7 — Having official staffers campaign on official time (Broward Beat, July 20, 2016)

8 — Problems printing mail ballots (Miami Herald, November 2, 2018)

9 — Accusations of ballot stuffing (Heritage, August 1, 2017)

10 — Voters receiving ballots with duplicate pages (Miami Herald, November 2, 2018)

11 — Slow results and piles of ballots that cropped up way after Election Day (The Capitolist, November 8, 2018)

12 — Opening ballots in private, breaking Florida law (Politico, August 13, 2018)

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Founded by Tucker Carlson, a 25-year veteran of print and broadcast media, and Neil Patel, former chief policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, The Daily Caller News Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit providing original investigative reporting from a team of professional reporters that operates for the public benefit.

Ford Polygraph Results Released. Did They Just Blow a Huge Hole in Her Story?



Reported By Benjamin Arie | September 26, 2018 at

3:37pm

The narrative that liberals have hung their hopes on to stop Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is falling apart. There are now so many holes in the story, it’s incredible Democrats are still running with it.

Christine Blasey Ford is the woman who accused Kavanaugh of drunkenly groping her at a party way back when he was 17 years old, but she has been largely unable to produce solid evidence or witnesses to back up her serious claims.

One of the only points in her favor was that she took a “lie detector” polygraph test, which was widely reported by the media as supporting her story by showing that she wasn’t lying.

That is, until now. On Wednesday, the actual details from that polygraph were released to the public — and they make her already-flimsy story seem downright unbelievable.

The biggest problem with the so-called “lie detector” results are that the examiner never actually asked questions about Kavanaugh during the polygraph test.

Bizarrely, the person conducting the polygraph — who was a third-party examiner and not a law enforcement official — had Ford scribble down her nearly 40-year-old memory of the drunken party, and then asked her two vague questions.

Those two questions were: “Is any part of your statement false?” and “Did you make up any part of your statement?”

This is absolutely important to understand: Again, the polygraph test didn’t actually ask the main accuser any questions about Kavanaugh. His name was never brought up by the interviewer. Instead, Ford was simply asked if she believed her own hand-written statement.

It gets even more strange, as nowhere in that written statement does the name “Kavanaugh” appear, either.

And, to make matters worse, the statement from Ford that she was then asked about by the polygraph examiner directly contradicts different versions of the alleged event that the accuser has also given.

“Ford’s polygraph letter contradicts letter she sent to Feinstein,” pointed out Charles C. W. Cooke, the editor of The National Review.

“Polygraph letter says ‘4 boys and a couple of girls’ were at party. Letter to Feinstein says ‘me and four others,’” he continued. “No way to reconcile the two — irrespective of whether she’s counting herself in polygraph letter.”

It’s important to remember that fundamental facts such as how many people witnessed the alleged incident and what their genders were have been up in the air already. Even journalists from the left-leaning Washington Post are seemingly unable to keep the details straight.

“July 30 (to Dianne Feinstein): It was me and four other people. August 7 (to polygraph examiner): There were four boys and a couple of girls. September 16 (to Washington Post reporter): There were three boys and one girl,” The Federalist co-founder Sean Davis posted to Twitter, summarizing the inconsistencies.

Here’s another huge point: The fact that Ford “passed” the polygraph based on a statement that she later herself contradicted while telling the story to other people shows how unreliable this “evidence” truly is.

Contrary to how it’s shown in the movies, a polygraph can’t actually determine if a person is lying or not. All it can do is indicate how calm or stressed somebody is compared to a baseline. It can be used to indicate deception, but a completely delusional person can also “pass” a polygraph.

In other words, Ford may believe that something happened at a party four decades ago, and she may be confident that some version of her story is true, but the vagueness and unscientific nature of this process proves absolutely nothing. The problems with this accuser’s story don’t stop there. Buried in the release of the weak polygraph results was the fact that Ford was in Maryland — on the other side of the country from her home in California — to take that test.

But the supposed reason she couldn’t appear to testify in front of the Senate and answer questions about her accusations was that she’s afraid of confined spaces, which means she won’t travel by plane.

“The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington … which means she may need to drive across the country,” reported Politico just five days ago. “Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane.”

Yet the letter from Ford to Senator Feinstein made no mention of this difficulty, and casually mentioned that she planned to be back in California from the East Coast in less than three day’s time. It takes at least 42 hours of nonstop driving to go from Maryland, where the polygraph was administered, to Palo Alto, California, where Ford lives and teaches at a university.

This borders on being humanly impossible: Anybody who has done long road trips knows that a realistic daily limit is about ten hours of driving a day before exhaustion sets in. USA Today has recommended that people set aside between four and six days to do this arduous drive.

When none of the details add up or pass even the most basic sniff test, something is wrong.

This entire ordeal looks increasingly like a slimy and desperate effort to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation at any cost. But the truth always has a way of coming out, and it doesn’t even need a polygraph.

HERE IS THE POLYGRAPH REPORT:

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Benjamin Arie has been a political junkie since the hotly contested 2000 election. Ben settled on journalism after realizing he could get paid to rant. He cut his teeth on car accidents and house fires as a small-town reporter in Michigan before becoming a full-time political writer.


Viral Photo of Caged Children Actually from Obama Era, Nothing To Do with Trump



disclaimerReported By Jack Davis | May 28, 2018 at 7:05am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/viral-photo-of-caged-children-actually-from-obama-era-nothing-to-do-with-trump/

Activists attacked the Trump administration Sunday for its treatment of children who were detained at the border, based upon a picture that showed children sleeping in a cage. There was only one flaw in the tweets that called the treatment “inhumane” and laid it at the door of President Donald Trump.

The image was from an Arizona newspaper report from 2014, during the second term of former President Barack Obama, The Daily Caller reported.

Former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau began the avalanche of tweets with a since-deleted comment.

“This is happening right now, and the only debate that matters is how we force our government to get these kids back to their families as fast as humanly possible,” Favreau wrote. He added a link to the image, which was part of an Arizona Republic photo gallery from 2014.

A series of tweets followed as many used the outdated image and applied it as though it was current.

“Children of immigrants are being held in cages, like dogs, at ICE detention centers, sleeping on the floor. It’s an abomination,” Shaun King tweeted.

Others followed.

tweet02atweet02b

Context for the picture was provided by Fox News, which noted that the picture was taken at a time when immigration officials had detained more than 1,000 children who illegally crossed America’s Southern Border. Controversy over the image reflects the debate over immigration policy that separates children from their parents.

Trump has called for changing that policy as part of broad-based immigration policy reform.

trumptweet

Even after the true origin of the picture was revealed, few of those who tweeted it clarified that the picture was from Obama’s days in the White House.

One who did was Jake Silverstein, editor in chief of the New York Times Magazine.

tweet04

“Correction: this link, which was going around this morning, is from 2014. Still disturbing, of course, but only indirectly related to current situation. My bad (and a good reminder not to RT things while distracted w family on the weekend),” he tweeted.

please likeand share and leave a comment

Mueller’s Boundaries


Drawn and Posted by Chip Bok | May 9, 2018   

Federal Judge T.S. Ellis said on Friday that Robert Mueller has exceeded his boundaries. He also gave the Justice Department two weeks to come up with an unredacted copy of Deputy AG Rosenstein’s memos authorizing the special counsel. So far the Justice Department has kept most of the memo explaining the boundaries of Mueller’s investigation under<!– AddThis Advanced Settings above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>

<!– AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>” data-title=”Mueller’s Boundaries”>

URL of the original posting site: http://bokbluster.com/2018/05/09/boundaries/

http://bokbluster.com/2018/05/09/boundaries/

Federal Judge T.S. Ellis said on Friday that Robert Mueller has exceeded his boundaries.

He also gave the Justice Department two weeks to come up with an unredacted copy of Deputy AG Rosenstein’s memos authorizing the special counsel. So far the Justice Department has kept most of the memo explaining the boundaries of Mueller’s investigation under wraps.

Boundaries

The Daily Caller thinks this could be a nightmare for Mueller.

Or not so much says Judge Napolitano.

Fed-Up AZ Supreme Court Hits Dreamers with Costly Bad News in Blowout Ruling


Reported By Ben Marquis | April 10, 2018 at 12:39pm

URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/az-supreme-court-hits-dreamers/

Former President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program created something of a legal limbo for a select class of illegal immigrants, shielding them from deportation without granting them legal status. Now, some of the program’s enrollees could quite literally be paying for that uncertainty.

According to The Washington Times, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that DACA recipients, also known as “dreamers,” are not eligible for the in-state tuition rates that some state colleges and universities were offering them, and instead will have to pay out-of-state rates.

That 7-0 decision upheld an earlier 3-0 state court of appeals ruling against the Maricopa Community Colleges, who had decided on their own volition to extend in-state tuition rates to DACA recipients. The ruling applies to all state colleges and public universities in Arizona.

The appeals court had ruled that both federal and state law granted that sort of decision-making power to the state’s political branches, and not the colleges or universities. At the heart of the decision was a 2006 law passed by voters known as Proposition 300, which declared that illegal immigrants were not eligible to receive state benefits, including in-state tuition rates.

“While people can disagree what the law should be, I hope we all can agree that the attorney general must enforce the law as it is, not as we want it to be,” stated Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. 

The Arizona Republic reported that an estimated 2,000 DACA recipients are currently enrolled in community colleges or state universities at in-state tuition rates, and could now find themselves being compelled to pay nearly three times as much for out-of-state rates if they wish to remain in school.

As might be expected, advocates for DACA recipients are incensed by the court’s ruling. They have claimed the decision essentially blocks access to education for dreamers by making it “impossible” for them to afford, especially when considering these particular illegal immigrants aren’t eligible for any sort of state or federal financial assistance because of their lack of legal status.

But based on a clear reading of the 2006 law, those dreamers should never have received the lower in-state tuition rates from colleges in the first place.

As Brnovich stated, “It’s about time someone held (the colleges) accountable, and that’s my job. My role as AG is to make sure you’re following the law.”

Though Brnovich did express some sympathy for the plight of the dreamers, he nevertheless pointed out that the law is the law. “What makes this country unique and great … is because the rule of law means something,” the attorney general said.

However, the Arizona Daily Sun reported that some college-aged dreamers may not ultimately find themselves having to pay the substantially higher out-of-state tuition rates thanks to something of a middle-ground solution worked out by the state university system’s Board of Regents.

That policy, put in place years ago by Regent Jay Heiler, “sets charges at 150 percent of the in-state rate for any student who graduated from an Arizona high school after attending school” in the state for at least three years, the Sun reported.

While that policy could very well be challenged through litigation, Heiler and others believe it will survive because the special rate would actually cover the costs of tuition, meaning state taxpayers would not be subsidizing or offering a “benefit” to illegal immigrants.

The Republic noted that the Arizona supreme court has only released a three-page order at this point, and won’t make the full opinion explaining the ruling public until May 14.

Whatever one may think about the state law or this court ruling, one thing that’s patently obvious is that the hap-hazard manner by which Obama devised and implemented the DACA program has once again hurt those individuals it purported to help by leaving them in a legal limbo.

The only way to truly solve the problems created by DACA is for Congress to finally agree on a permanent solution to the legal status question for DACA recipients, as President Donald Trump has repeatedly called on legislators to do.

WH Considers Using Obscure Law To Gut Omnibus Bill, Democrats Helpless To Stop


Reported By Scott Kelnhofer | April 4, 2018 at 9:29am

URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/wh-considers-using-obscure-law-to-gut-omnibus-bill-democrats-helpless-to-stop/

Conservatives who were angry with President Donald Trump and Republicans with some of the expenditures approved as part of the recently signed omnibus spending bill may soon be in a slightly better mood.

Joseph Lawler of the Washington Examiner reports congressional conservatives want Trump to use the 1974 Impoundment Act to rescind some spending authorized by the $1.3 trillion government appropriations bill, and White House officials are reportedly considering doing so.

The measure referred to by the Examiner is officially known as the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. For the most part, the act established the Congressional Budget Office and gave Congress more control over the budget process.

The Impoundment Control Act allows the president to ask Congress to rescind funds that have been allocated in the budget. Congress is not required to vote on the request, but if they do agree to vote, a simple majority in both chambers is all that is needed to approve cuts the president requests.

Congress has 45 days to approve any or all rescission requests from the president.

A congressional Republican aide told the Examiner that conservatives have been lobbying for Trump to use the Impoundment Act.

“It’s a good opportunity to take advantage of a law passed decades ago and that hasn’t been used recently,” the aide said.

A spokesman for House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., confirmed to The Washington Post that McCarthy’s office is working with the Trump administration on the idea. White House legislative director Marc Short also confirmed the president is looking into requesting cuts to the budget.

“The administration is certainly looking at a rescission package, and the president takes seriously his promise to be fiscally responsible.”

The Impoundment Control Act was put in place in 1974 in response to President Richard Nixon’s practice of withholding funds for programs he opposed. Instead, the act requires any requests to withhold funding to go through Congress.

The Impoundment Control Act is considered obscure because it hasn’t been used often in recent years. The Examiner report says it was never used by Presidents Barack Obama or George W. Bush, but was used frequently during the administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

After signing the omnibus spending bill that he originally threatened to veto, Trump called on Congress to give him line-item veto authority on spending bills. However, the Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that such authority was unconstitutional.

These measures could pass with just a majority vote, meaning Democrats could do nothing to stop them — unless, of course, they can convince enough Republicans not to support the president’s wishes. Considering the slim 51-to-49 majority Republicans hold in the Senate, it wouldn’t take many left-leaning Republicans to foil the president’s plans.But a chance to rescind some of the budget programs gives conservatives reason for hope — and if Republicans throw away that chance, it will make conservatives angry all over again.

Democratic Rep Details Her Gun Confiscation Law


Reported by |

Rep Debbie Dingell, the wife of former Rep John Dingell, has announced that she is busy writing a gun confiscation bill. She claims that the bill would include due process, but that’s impossible.

The only way you satisfy both would be to have a court appearance before the guns are confiscated. That’s not what this bill does. This bill confiscates the guns first. Since she says she’s modeling it after the Indiana law, that means you have fourteen days to go to court and show that there was a reason to confiscate the guns in the first place. 

I could be wrong but get the wrong cop or judge and you can lose a constitutional right.

Also, in my humble opinion, you would be reversing due process. If they took you to court first, then the burden of proof is on them but if you have to go to court to get your guns back, the burden of proof then shifts to you. It also makes you vulnerable to vengeful relatives and neighbors. Your brother or your sister could call the police and falsely claim you threatened them with your gun. How could you possibly prove you didn’t. It’s their word against yours and you have the burden of proof.

From Breitbart

The Salt Lake Tribune summed up the Indiana law, “In Indiana, law enforcement can confiscate weapons without a judge’s order. The gun owner must ask the court to get the weapons returned.”

Extreme Risk Protection Orders have proved a popular gun control response to the February 14 Parkland school shooting. However, it is difficult to believe such orders would have prevented that attack.

On February 23, 2018, Breitbart News reported, “The family with which [Cruz] was staying repeatedly called the police on him in November 2017 but refused to file charges when sheriff’s deputies arrived.

member of the family with which Cruz was staying explained away Cruz’s erratic behavior by saying he ‘had been suffering significantly from the loss of his mother’ earlier in the month.” 

I think we can all agree that crazy and extremely violent people do not need to have guns, but on the other hand, I don’t want someone innocent to have to face accusations that he or she can’t win. Maybe they could amend the bill to mete out mandatory jail sentences for making a knowingly false claim?

Huck’s Response to Emotional Anti-Gun Marchers Is Best We’ve Heard So Far


Reported By Benjamin Arie | March 25, 2018 at 2:56pm

URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/watch-hucks-response-emotional/

Mike Huckabee is well known for his calm, warm approach to politics and life — and the former pastor and Arkansas governor just became the voice of reason during the “March For Our Lives” protests.

While appearing on “Fox and Friends,” the politician-turned-commentator addressed the recent demonstrations that are supposedly about stopping violence, but have become essentially anti-Second Amendment rallies where law-abiding gun owners are vilified for the actions of one criminal.

“I salute these students for their passion and their energy, and for their interest in helping to shape public policy,” Huckabee began, extending an olive branch to the young people protesting. “But I would say this to them: Emotion is a terrible substitute for truth.“  March 25, 2018

“It is a terrible substitute for facts,” Huck continued. “And they’ve been used, by believing that if they just ban a certain type of firearm, that things are going to be better.”

That wasn’t just the former governor’s opinion. A vast amount of evidence backs up the view that the left’s “solutions” — many of which have already been tried — would do nothing to actually stop criminals.

“Here’s the facts: Five times more people are killed in America by knives… than they are by rifles,” Huckabee explained.

The most recent FBI data shows that in 2016, there were 374 murders committed using rifles in the entire United States. That includes so-called “assault rifles.” However, a stunning 1,604 murders were committed using “knives or cutting weapons.”

Even hands, fists, and feet were used to kill more often than rifles: Criminals committed 656 murders using just their body.

“It’s also true that over 86 percent of the 20,000 police chiefs and sheriffs in America do not support repealing concealed carry, but rather rather support (gun ownership),” Mike Huckabee went on. “And they don’t support more gun control methods.” 

There’s a good reason for that: As concealed carry has become more common in America, the country has become more safe.

As we’ve previously reported, there was an amazing 215 percent increase in concealed carry permits between 2007 and 2015. During the same time period, there was a 14 percent decrease in the murder rate. In fact, violent crime has been cut in half since about 1990, yet the media constantly acts as if violence is spiraling out of control.

Mike Huckabee’s primary point is so good, it must be repeated: “Emotion is a terrible substitute for truth.” 

The left and the mainstream media seem to be purposely burying facts or even outright lying about statistics in order to promote an agenda.

American schools are actually some of the safest places in the country. Contrary to the narrative, mass shootings in schools have not be dramatically increasing in recent years. Students have a higher probability of being killed riding their bikes or walking to school than by a school shooter.

Huck’s line about emotion over truth is an apt summary of not only the current push against lawful gun ownership, but also almost all of liberalism. One of the hallmarks of being responsible adults is using logic and critical thinking over fear-based reaction and hysteria.

The next time you see a news headline or hear a statement from a protester, ask yourself: “Is this based on reasoned logic and truth, or all emotion?”  That’s an incredibly useful tool to decide which side of an issue to stand on… and in today’s world, detecting the truth is more important than ever.

Law Prof. Booted after Praising ‘Work Ethic, Respect for Authority, and Sexual Temperance’


Reported By Randy DeSoto | March 22, 2018 at 5:24pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/law-prof-booted-after-praising-work-ethic-respect-for-authority-and-sexual-temperance/

A professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School has been removed from her primary teaching duties after making observations about the academic disparity black and white students on campus.

The controversy for Prof. Amy Wax began last August when she co-wrote an op-ed for the Philadelphia Inquirer titled, “Paying the price for the breakdown in the country’s bourgeois culture.”

“That culture laid out the script we all were supposed to follow: Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness,” she wrote. 

Wax continued, “Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime.”

The professor contended these values reigned supreme among people from different backgrounds and abilities in America until the mid-1960s. Wax conceded that the country of course was not perfect, but there was a nod to these values being good among the vast majority. However, by the late 1960s, this culture began to wane with the growth of the welfare state and the breakdown of the pro-marriage norm. The pathologies of poverty, crime, and addiction followed as more and more grew up in broken homes.

“All cultures are not equal,” Wax wrote. “Or at least they are not equal in preparing people to be productive in an advanced economy.” 

She concluded arguing for a return to bourgeois norms, which still exist in segments of society. To achieve this end, Wax wrote that will require the arbiters of culture in academia, the media and Hollywood “to relinquish multicultural grievance polemics and the preening pretense of defending the downtrodden” and re-embrace what was good in the American ethic.

A group of 54 Penn students and alumni responded to her piece with a column in the school’s newspaper — The Daily Pennsylvanian — describing her arguments as “steeped in anti-blackness” and called for school administrators to investigate Wax’s advocacy of “white supremacy.”

Weeks later, in Sept. 2017, Wax participated in a podcast with Brown University professor Glenn Loury titled, “The Downside of Social Uplift.” Among the topics they discussed was the “mismatch hypothesis” of affirmative action in relation to law schools, which is based on data published in a 2005 Stanford Law Review article. The hypothesis holds that affirmative action does more harm than good, by admitting students in schools for which they are not prepared.

During her interview, Wax said her own experience as a professor of first year civil procedure students at Ivy League Penn bore out the findings of the study.

“Here’s a very inconvenient fact, Glenn: I don’t think I’ve ever seen a black student graduate in the top quarter of the class, and rarely, rarely, in the top half,” Wax stated. “I can think of one or two students who scored in the top half of my required first-year course.”

“When Wax’s video surfaced earlier this month, it sparked outrage among student groups and faculty members, many of whom called her statements racist,” The Washington Post reported. A petition was circulated calling on law school Dean Ted Ruger to discipline her.

Amy Wax insinuated demonstrably false and deeply offensive claims about black law students and alumni,” Nick Hall, a third-year law student and president of the school’s Black Law Students Association, told Philadelphia Magazine.

Ruger acquiesced to those demanding discipline of the tenured faculty member announcing Wax had been removed from teaching the mandatory civil procedure course, but would still teach electives.

The dean stated Wax spoke “disparagingly and inaccurately” about the performance of black students.

“Black students have graduated in the top of the class at Penn Law,” Ruger told the Daily Pennsylvanian. “And contrary to any suggestion otherwise, black students at Penn Law are extremely successful, both inside and outside the classroom, in the job market, and in their careers.”

Wax stood her ground amid the controversy commenting to the paper in an email, “I would emphasize that student performance is a matter of fact, not opinion. It is what it is.”

Loury came to Wax’s defense in a lengthy Facebook post, noting that no data from Penn contradicting his colleague’s claim has been forthcoming.

With Indictments of Russians, the Groundwork Is in Place to Criminally Charge Hillary


Authored By Erin Coates | February 20, 2018 at 3:42pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/indictments-russians-groundwork-place-criminally-charge-hillary/

The indictments of Russian nationals for meddling with the election could “make the Clinton Campaign a potential target,” according to a California lawyer.

In an opinion piece for Law & Crime, Robert Barnes said that Robert Mueller indicted of 13 Russians and three Russian companies because they did not register as foreign agents or record financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commissions.

They were foreign citizens; they tried to influence an election; and they neither registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act nor reported their funding to the Federal Elections Commission,” he wrote. 

Under this claim, there are three things that “make the Clinton Campaign a potential target,” according to Barnes.

The first one is that they knew Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous Russia-Trump dossier, was a foreign citizen.

According to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s press conference on the indictments, the Russians “used stolen or fictitious American identities, fraudulent bank accounts and false identification documents” to hide their activities.

The next potentially criminating thing is that the Clinton campaign “knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election.” 

Similarly, the indictments showed that twelve defendants worked for a company called Internet Research Agency, LLC, based in St. Petersburg. It reportedly operated through Russian shell companies.

“It employed hundreds of people in its online operations, ranging from creators of fictitious personas, to technical and administrative support personnel, with an annual budget of millions of dollars,” Rosenstein said.

Lastly, the Clinton campaign “knew, and facilitated, Steele” not registering as a foreign agent or reporting that he was being funded by the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commissions. He instead disguised the payments as a “legal expense.”

Steele himself, based on Mueller’s theory, is a criminal under the same guidelines as the Russian indictments. He is a foreign citizen, was paid to influence an election, and never registered as a foreign agent or listed his expenditures. 

The Clinton campaign is not the only potential target under Mueller’s theory. The DNC, Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS could also be targeted for indictment, according to Barnes. However, Barnes said not to expect an indictment of any of these people or organizations.

“Mueller chose his targets because he knows they will never appear in court, never contest the charges, and cannot be arrested or extradited as Russian citizens,” he wrote. 

Barnes is a California-based trial attorney who focuses on Constitutional, criminal and civil rights law.

Here Is The List Of Attackers The FBI Was Warned About But Still Failed To Stop


Authored By Becky Loggia | February 17, 2018 at 9:14am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/list-attackers-fbi-warned-still-failed-stop/

“I’m going to be a professional school shooter.” These were the words written by 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz months before he opened fire in a Parkland, Florida high school Wednesday.

Grieving family and friends are now reeling in the aftermath of the tragedy as reports state the FBI was aware of Cruz’s erratic and hostile behavior before it truly surfaced.

Last fall, YouTube vlogger Ben Bennight, 36, noticed the alarming declaration from Cruz had been left on one of his videos and sought out FBI officials, taking a screenshot of the comment before removing it from the video entirely.

According to BuzzFeed News, officials responded “immediatelyand requested an in-person interview with Bennight the next day.

“They came to my office the next morning and asked me if I knew anything about the person,” Bennight told BuzzFeed News. “I didn’t. They took a copy of the screenshot and that was the last I heard from them.”

However, as more is uncovered about the FBI’s mishaps in handling persons of interest — such as Cruz — a list has been compiled by Grabien News that suggests the Valentine’s Day shooting isn’t the only one they’ve been tipped off about.

This is the current list:

1. Boston. According to reports, the FBI and U.S. law enforcement were sent, via Russia, a warning about bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The FBI allegedly interviewed the suspect and let him go, even opting against investigating him later after a second warning swept through the department from Russian officials. The bombing left three dead and 16 injured.

2. Fort Hood. In a string of emails sent to the FBI, soldier Nidal Hasan openly admitted that he wanted his fellow soldiers dead in order to protect the Taliban. Officials failed to intervene, leading to a tragedy that resulted in the death of 31 Americans.

3. NYC Bomber. Third on this list is NYC bomber Ahmad Khan Rahami, whose own father alerted officials of the radicalization of his son. After a brief interview, Rahami was cleared by FBI officials, though he eventually injured 31 people between New Jersey and New York.

4. Pulse Nightclub. In yet another attack on American soil, 49 people were killed and another 53 wounded after Omar Mateen opened fire through its doors. Despite a 10-month investigation of the would-be shooter — during which he admitted to lying to officials — the FBI decided against taking further action. 

5. Garland, Texas. In a recent report from CBS, the FBI had an undercover agent traveling with Islamists Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi for intel on a pending attack during a “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas. Not only did officials know of a pending attack, but have refused to comment on why their agent didn’t intervene when the attack took place. Though a security officer was shot, the attackers were killed before they could harm any others.

7. 9/11. In a report by FBI agent Coleen Rowley, allegations were made stating that the FBI mishandled leads within its Minneapolis office during the investigation into the alleged 9/11 mastermind Zacarias Moussaoui. Rowley chronicles the early aftermath of the attack on the Twin Towers as she and other agents scoured through pre-attack events concerning Moussaoui’s investigation.

“Everyone’s first question was ‘Why?—Why would an FBI agent(s) deliberately sabotage a case?’” Rowley wrote. “I know I shouldn’t be flippant about this, but jokes were actually made that the key FBI HQ personnel had to be spies or moles like Robert Hanssen who were actually working for Osama Bin Laden to have so undercut Minneapolis’s effort.”

“I feel that certain facts, including the following, have, up to now, been omitted, downplayed, glossed over and/or mis-characterized,” Rowley said. “In an effort to avoid or minimize personal and/or institutional embarrassment on the part of the FBI and/or perhaps even for improper political reasons.” 

An honorable mention may also be had with the South Carolina massacre at the hands of Dylann Roof, who was allegedly cleared by the FBI to buy firearms. Then-director of the FBI James Comey admitted that it was merely an error in the background check system that eventually allowed Roof to kill nine parishioners in cold blood.

“We are all sick this happened,” Comey said of the mishaps that enmeshed his department with the fatal shooting — and that of too many others.

Professional School Shooter


Drawn and Commentary by Chip Bok | February 17, 2018

professional school shooter

A Wall Street Journal story says the FBI failed to follow up on a tip that Nikolas Cruz was a dangerous threat to others.

On Jan. 5, the FBI received a call on a tip line from a person close to Nikolas Cruz, the 19-year-old charged in this week’s shooting, the bureau said in a statement on Friday. The caller provided information on “Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior and disturbing social-media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting,” the FBI said.

The FBI said the information should have been assessed as a possible “threat to life” but “no further investigation was conducted.”

Professional School Shooter

BuzzFeed reports that last September a Mississippi bail bondsman named Ben Bennight tipped the FBI to a disturbing YouTube post by a Nikolas Cruz. The post said “I’m going to be a professional school shooter.” The FBI followed up with a visit to Bennight’s office but he had no further information. At a press conference after the shooting the Bureau said it “could not uncover any details from the account.”

Florida Governor Rick Scott called for FBI Director Christopher Ray to step down.

New California Bill: Waiters Will Serve 6 Months In Prison For Handing Out ‘Unsolicited’ Straws


Reported By Caterine DeCicco | January 25, 2018 at 1:24pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/new-californian-bill-waiters-will-serve-6-months-prison-handing-unsolicited-straws/

A California lawmaker has introduced a new bill that would make it illegal to distribute single-use straws to consumers at restaurants unless specifically requested.

Ian Calderon, the Democratic majority leader in California’s lower house, brought forth Assembly Bill 1884, citing environmental protection as a reason to discourage the use of “single use straws,” typically distributed with soft drinks, smoothies, and coffee, which are then disposed of after being used.

We need to create awareness around the issue of one-time use plastic straws and its detrimental effects on our landfills, waterways, and oceans,” Calderon stated in a media release

“AB 1884 is not a ban on plastic straws,” he added. “It is a small step towards curbing our reliance on these convenience products, which will hopefully contribute to a change in consumer attitudes and usage.”

Assembly Bill 1884 aims to update the California Retail Food Code.

The bill notes that the current code “… establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities, as defined, and requires local health agencies to enforce these provisions.”

As the law currently stands, punishment for violating the Retail Food Code ranges from paying a fine between $25 – $1,000 or jail time. 

“Existing law requires, except as otherwise provided, a person who violates any provision of the code to be guilty of a misdemeanor with each offense punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $1,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not exceeding 6 months, or by both.”

If passed, the law would modify the code to mark the provision of “single-use plastic straws to consumers unless requested by the consumer,” as a crime.

According to CNN, Americans dispose of 500 million plastic straws each day.

“Conservatively, you can guess that Americans will use on average two plastic straws a day, so 500 million is an accurate estimate. But I challenge you to start paying attention to the straws you get in your iced coffee, smoothies, soda, and cocktails,” said Adrian Grenier of the non-profit Lonely Whale to CNN.

“When I’m in New York or LA the number of plastic straws I receive is often closer to 10 a day,” Grenier added.

Disposable straws are made from fossil fuels, and according to the cable news outlet are rarely recycled due to their small size and the fact that they’re made from several different types of plastic. Straws and stirrers rank at number nine in the top 10 marine debris items, according to The Ocean Conservancy. Eliminating the use of plastic straws has been a growing movement for some time.  The “Be Straw Free Campaign” was introduced by Milo Cress in 2011 when he was just 9 years old.

“I noticed that whenever I ordered a drink at a restaurant, it would usually come with a straw in it, and I don’t usually need a straw,” he told CNN.

“This seemed like a huge waste,” Cress continued. “Straws are made of oil, a precious and finite resource. Is making single-use plastic straws, which will be used for a matter of minutes before being tossed away, really what we want to do with this resource?”

Then a resident of Burlington, Vermont, the young activist asked establishments in his hometown to make straws and option for customers –  and many complied. While some like Calderon, support changing legislation to modify people’s behavior, others believe that simply offering other options is a better alternative.

Besides not using a straw, reusable straws made from materials such as glass, steel, copper, and bamboo, are becoming popular.

Cress seemed to agree that encouraging consumers to make different choices is a more effective way to make a change.

“I am not out to ban straws,” he told CNN. “I think it’s much more effective to encourage people to make the choice not to use them. Voluntary participation encourages people to spread the word. Forcing people to do things is not always the most effective way to make a change.”

Another Email From My Inbox


You Won’t Believe Some of the New California LAWS!! 

Update today from Jeff Stone, Republican state senator on the further progressive destruction of California.
(Jeff Stone is an American politician currently serving in the California State Senate.   He is a Republican representing the 28th district, encompassing parts of Riverside County.)


Hello my friends,

Friday will be the end of this legislative year.  Here are some of the highlights of this session:

1.  SB-1: increases your gas taxes by approximately 20 Cents (Nov. 1, 2017) and your vehicle license fees by an average of $100 (Jan. 1, 2018).
2.  Passed Cap N Trade tax which will increase gas 0.63 to 0.93 cents a gallon change, and the taxes that go with it.

3.  Proposed increase on a new tax every residence will pay for tap water in the State!

4.  A $3.46B parks bond to pay for parks in “disadvantaged communities”, meaning Los Angeles.  The debt service will be over $200 million a year.  The good news is some money goes to help fix the Salton Sea which should have always been a State responsibility!

5.  Law to release any lifer (murder, rape, child molestation, etc.) who is 60 years old and has already spent 25 years in prison! Charles Manson qualifies today and the Melendez brothers, that murdered their parents, could be released in about 12 years. What about victims?

6.  A new $10 charge on all residents living in a mobile home parks to address living condition enforcement in those parks?  Why does the left embrace these regressive taxes on the poor?

7.  We picked an official dinosaur of the State of California.  Really?  Yes!

8.  Blackmail Tesla to either unionize with the United Auto Workers Union or forfeit State incentives to buy their electric cars!  Just another Union Grab!

9.  Reduce from a felony to a misdemeanor the purposeful intent to transmit the AIDS virus to a unknowing partner.

10.  Give preferential treatment to prisoners convicted of serious crimes that are less than 25 years old because their brains are not mature enough to understand right from wrong.  Whaaat?  If the brains of our kids don’t mature until 25, why do we allow them to vote?

11.  A bill to require our true sex be omitted from drivers licenses?  Whaaat?

12.  Free legal services for illegal immigrants.

13.  Establish safe “injection zones” run by government to oversee people injecting heroin!  You have to be kidding me?  Yep, it passed!

Enough good news for today.

FEC Complaint: Clinton Campaign, DNC Violated Campaign Finance Law With Dossier Payments


Reported By Jack Davis | October 25, 2017 at 5:01pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/fec-complaint-clinton-campaign-dnc-violated-campaign-finance-law-dossier-payments/?

Former Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee broke the law in the way they handled their effort to dig up dirt on President Donald Trump, according to a complaint filed Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission.

On Tuesday, it was revealed that the Clinton campaign and the DNC funded development of a now-discredited dossier that claimed to document misbehavior by Trump while in Russia and also claimed Trump had close connections with Russian officials.

Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained the firm Fusion GPS to conduct the research into Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, to do the work.

Perkins Coie, the firm for which Elias works, was paid $12.4 million to represent the Clinton campaign and the DNC during the 2016 campaign.

The complaint from the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center said that by paying the firm of Perkins Coie to fund development of the dossier while not saying that’s what it was doing, the campaign and DNC broke the law.

The Clinton and campaign and the DNC “failed to accurately disclose the purpose and recipient of payments for the dossier of research alleging connections between then-candidate Donald Trump and Russia, effectively hiding these payments from public scrutiny, contrary to the requirements of federal law,” the Center said on its website.

According to FEC reports, Clinton’s campaign reported 37 payments to the law firm and reported each disbursement as “Legal Services.”

The DNC reported 345 payments to Perkins Coie during the election cycle and marked the payments as “legal and compliance consulting,” “administrative fees,” “data services subscription” and others.

“The purpose of at least some portion of the payments to Perkins Coie was not for legal services; instead, those payments were intended to fund opposition research,” the complaint said. “This false reporting clearly failed the Commission’s requirements for disclosing the purpose of a disbursement.”

The CLC said the campaign and DNC tried to end run the rules.

“By filing misleading reports, the DNC and Clinton campaign undermined the vital public information role of campaign disclosures,” said Adav Noti, senior director of trial litigation and strategy at CLC. “Voters need campaign disclosure laws to be enforced so they can hold candidates accountable for how they raise and spend money.

“The FEC must investigate this apparent violation and take appropriate action,” Noti added.

“Questions about who paid for this dossier are the subject of intense public interest, and this is precisely the information that FEC reports are supposed to provide,” said Brendan Fischer, director of federal and FEC reform at CLC.

“Payments by a campaign or party committee to an opposition research firm are legal, as long as those payments are accurately disclosed,” he said. “But describing payments for opposition research as ‘legal services’ is entirely misleading and subverts the reporting requirements.”

Writing on LawNewz, Rachel Stockman said there is a fine line separating legal fro illegal activities.

“It is legal under current campaign finance law for the Hillary Clinton campaign to commission an opposition research company to dig up dirt on Donald Trump,” she wrote. “What is not legal, according to campaign legal experts, is for the campaign to pay a law firm who then hires other to perform campaign related activities without reporting the purpose of the expenditures.”

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Monday, October 2, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Mother Wishes She’d Had an Abortion, Says She Hates Her Son and Wants Him to Die in His Sleep

• Over 100,000 Americans Take to the Streets to Tell People “Abortion Kills Children”
• 40 Days for Life Pro-Life Prayer Campaign Saves 26 Babies From Abortion, So Far
. By 20 Weeks, Unborn Babies Have “All the Physical Structures Necessary” to Feel Pain During Abortions

More Pro-Life News
• Why is Banning Late-Term Abortions on Babies After 20 Weeks So Controversial?
• CBS Executive “Not Sympathetic” for Las Vegas Shooting Victims Because “Country Music Fans are Republicans”

• Ohio Abortions Hit 40-Year Record Low as More Babies are Saved From Abortion
• Planned Parenthood Loses Bid to Stop Waiting Period Before It Can Kill Babies in Abortions
• Abortion Clinic That Killed This Women in a Botched Legal Abortion Injures Another Woman
• Brain Cancer Patient Given 6 Months to Live Planned to Kill Himself in an Assisted Suicide. That Was 2 Years Ago
• Cosmo Can’t Handle the Truth, Wants People to Stop Using the Phrase Late-Term Abortion
• Catholic Bishop: Governor Rauner Lied to Me, He Promised Not to Force Taxpayers to Fund Abortions
• ISIS Terrorists Rape and Impregnate Teen Girls and Force Them to Have Multiple Abortions
• Abortion Activists Want Unlimited Abortions Throughout Pregnancy: “We’re Not Looking for a Little Bit of Abortion”
• Even Partial Repeal of 8th Amendment in Ireland Would Allow Killing Unborn Babies in Abortions

Please support our Fall fundraising campaign. Please donate to LifeNews here.

Mother Wishes She’d Had an Abortion, Says She Hates Her Son and Wants Him to Die in His Sleep
A mother’s shocking admission about wishing her toddler would die in his sleep caught the attention of several media outlets and online forum moderators this week.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Over 100,000 Americans Take to the Streets to Tell People “Abortion Kills Children”
Standing on busy sidewalks and town squares across the country, more than 100,000 Americans urged their communities to recognize the value of unborn babies’ lives.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

40 Days for Life Pro-Life Prayer Campaign Saves 26 Babies From Abortion, So Far
During 40 Days for Life, we actually look forward to Mondays! That’s the day we share the great news of lives saved from abortion.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

By 20 Weeks, Unborn Babies Have “All the Physical Structures Necessary” to Feel Pain During Abortions
On Tuesday, the members of the House of Representatives will assemble in the U.S. Capitol Building to cast their votes yea or nay on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act–H.R. 36.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Why is Banning Late-Term Abortions on Babies After 20 Weeks So Controversial?
Despite the public outcry against abuse of children once they are born, many members of society turn a blind eye to the violence that children suffer at the hands of abortionists.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

CBS Executive “Not Sympathetic” for Las Vegas Shooting Victims Because “Country Music Fans are Republicans”
Will Ricciardella at the Daily Caller reports the senior counsel for strategic transactions at CBS named Hayley Geftman-Gold spewed on Facebook.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Ohio Abortions Hit 40-Year Record Low as More Babies are Saved From Abortion
On Friday, the Ohio Department of Health released the 2016 Ohio Abortion Report, revealing a decrease in the number of abortions last year.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood Loses Bid to Stop Waiting Period Before It Can Kill Babies in Abortions
The abortion chain Planned Parenthood lost a legal challenge to Iowa’s 72-hour waiting period law Monday when a judge upheld the law.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

ISIS Terrorists Rape and Impregnate Teen Girls and Force Them to Have Multiple Abortions

Abortion Activists Want Unlimited Abortions Throughout Pregnancy: “We’re Not Looking for a Little Bit of Abortion”

Even Partial Repeal of 8th Amendment in Ireland Would Allow Killing Unborn Babies in Abortions

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Thursday, September 28, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Ruth Bader Ginsburg: People Voted for Donald Trump Over Hillary Clinton Because They’re Sexist

• NFL Players Protest Racism, But What About the 270 Black Babies Planned Parenthood Kills Every Day?
• Illinois Governor Signs Bill to Force Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Through All 9 Months of Pregnancy
. Judge Lets Abortion Clinics Deny Women Ultrasound of Their Baby Before Abortion

More Pro-Life News
• Cecile Richards: Pro-Lifers “Who Mischaracterize Planned Parenthood Have Never Had to Worry About Being Pregnant”
• MSNBC Host Claims Conservative Is Ignorant of the Constitution for Saying Rights Come from God

• Congressman: “Abortionists Decapitate, Dismember and Chemically Poison Babies to Death Every Day”
• Abortion Activist: We Need to “Normalize” Killing Babies in Abortions
• Alabama Democrat Senate Candidate Doug Jones: Rights for an Unborn Baby Don’t Begin Until Birth
• Congressional Resolution Slams Assisted Suicide: “It Puts the Most Vulnerable of Our Society at Risk”
• She Had an Abortion to Save Her Career: “I Don’t Regret the Decision”
• If Legalized Abortion is So Safe, Explain These Women Who Died in Botched Abortions
• Abortion Supporters Claim Abortions are Unsafe. Their Solution? Kill More Babies in Abortions
• Pro-Life Congressman Steve Scalise Returns for the First Time Since a Liberal Activist Shot Him
• Planned Parenthood Said Pro-Lifers Would “Go Back to Their Normal Lives” Once Abortion Clinic Opened. 10 Years Later…
• Court Allows Arkansas to Limit the Dangerous Abortion Pill That Kills Unborn Babies

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: People Voted for Donald Trump Over Hillary Clinton Because They’re Sexist
One of the common themes on Hillary Clinton’s blame list for losing the 2016 election is the sexist nature of the American electorate.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


NFL Players Protest Racism, But What About the 270 Black Babies Planned Parenthood Kills Every Day?
Finally! NFL players across the country took a knee to protest the systemic racism and unjustified deaths that have plagued black communities for decades.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Illinois Governor Signs Bill to Force Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Through All 9 Months of Pregnancy
Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner today signed a bill to keep abortion on demand up to birth legal and establish the Land of Lincoln as a “safe haven” for women seeking abortions.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Judge Lets Abortion Clinics Deny Women Ultrasound of Their Baby Before Abortion
Kentucky abortion facilities will not have to provide women with basic information prior to an abortion after a federal judge struck down a state informed consent law Wednesday.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Cecile Richards: Pro-Lifers “Who Mischaracterize Planned Parenthood Have Never Had to Worry About Being Pregnant”
According to the head of America’s largest abortion provider, women understand Planned Parenthood. But she’s forgetting a few numbers in her calculation.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

MSNBC Host Claims Conservative Is Ignorant of the Constitution for Saying Rights Come from God
Chuck Todd thought he had caught Roy Moore in a hot mic moment and sought to expose his ignorance of the Constitution.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com.

Abortion Activist: We Need to “Normalize” Killing Babies in Abortions
Abortion activists have been tacking the word “care” next to abortion lately as if the word will make the killing of unborn babies seem less horrible.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Pro-Life Congressman Steve Scalise Returns for the First Time Since a Liberal Activist Shot Him

Planned Parenthood Said Pro-Lifers Would “Go Back to Their Normal Lives” Once Abortion Clinic Opened. 10 Years Later…

Court Allows Arkansas to Limit the Dangerous Abortion Pill That Kills Unborn Babies

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Wednesday, September 27, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• President Donald Trump Will Sign Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks

• What if the NFL Players Were Protesting Abortion Instead?
• Abortion Activists: No, Unborn Babies Don’t Feel Pain in Dismemberment Abortions
. Congressman Slams Painful Late-Term Abortions: “What About the Humanity of the Unborn?”

More Pro-Life News
• Only Seven Countries in the World Allow Abortions After 5 Months, Including the U.S.
• Liberals Reject Woman to Head Committee on Women Simply Because She’s Pro-Life

• Children’s Minister Aggressively Pushes to Legalize Abortions Killing Children
• As Babies Die in Abortion, Law School Will Hold Symposium on the “Rights of Nature”
• Doctors Caught Doing Illegal Sex-Selection Abortions, But No Action Taken
• Abortion Clinic That Killed Woman in Botched Abortion Wants to Avoid Health and Safety Standards
• Biggest 40 Days for Life Pro-Life Prayer Campaign Ever Begins in 375 U.S. Cities and 24 Countries
• Pro-Life Judge Roy Moore Defeats Luther Strange as Republicans Voice Their Displeasure With Congress
• MP Plans to Exploit Bill Combating Domestic Violence to Ban Pro-Life Vigils
• Pro-Life Advocate Ends 10-Day Hunger Strike After Politicians Refuse to Watch Video of an Abortion
• Liberals Hijack Miss America Pageant, If You’re a Pro-Life Conservative You Probably Won’t Win
• Indiana Will Appeal Ruling Overturning Ban on Abortions of Babies With Down Syndrome

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

President Donald Trump Will Sign Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks
A bill proposing to ban late-term abortions is a “high priority” for President Donald Trump, according to one pro-life leader who met with him recently.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


What if the NFL Players Were Protesting Abortion Instead?
NFL players across the country are refusing to stand and put their hand on their heart during the national anthem.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Abortion Activists: No, Unborn Babies Don’t Feel Pain in Dismemberment Abortions
Of all the indefensible claims made by abortionists, there are some that apparently even they can’t bring themselves to take seriously — or argue in court.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Congressman Slams Painful Late-Term Abortions: “What About the Humanity of the Unborn?”
One U.S. politician is challenging the media to accurately report on a bill he hopes will show the “humanity of the unborn.”

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Only Seven Countries in the World Allow Abortions After 5 Months, Including the U.S.
While Senate Republicans may as well have embarked on a suicide mission after this week’s health care debacle, House conservatives are doing all they can to salvage the party’s reputation.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Liberals Reject Woman to Head Committee on Women Simply Because She’s Pro-Life
Canadian Liberal MPs walked out of a meeting Tuesday in protest of a pro-life woman who was nominated to lead a committee on women’s issues.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Children’s Minister Aggressively Pushes to Legalize Abortions Killing Children
Ireland’s Children’s Minister has been pushing aggressively to strip unborn children of their right to life – the opposite of what her title suggests.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com.

As Babies Die in Abortion, Law School Will Hold Symposium on the “Rights of Nature”
The movement to grant “nature” human type rights continues with insufficient pushback.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Pro-Life Advocate Ends 10-Day Hunger Strike After Politicians Refuse to Watch Video of an Abortion

Liberals Hijack Miss America Pageant, If You’re a Pro-Life Conservative You Probably Won’t Win

Indiana Will Appeal Ruling Overturning Ban on Abortions of Babies With Down Syndrome

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Tuesday, September 26, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Senate Pulls Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood as John McCain, Rand Paul and Susan Collins Oppose It

• Cecile Richards Celebrates Defeat of Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood: “It Would Have Caused Suffering”
• Hillary Clinton: Any Woman Who Voted for Donald Trump “Disrespected Themselves”
. Trump Admin Defunds Planned Parenthood: Abortion Biz Loses Millions to Push Obamacare

More Pro-Life News
• Catholic Church Leader: “All Other Rights” Flow From the Right to Life
• Man in So-Called “Persistent Vegetative State” for 15 Years Shows Signs of Consciousness

• Woman Cut Pregnant Mom’s Throat So She Couldn’t Scream While She Cut Out Her Baby From Her Womb
• Former Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic Managers Tell Pro-Lifers to Pray and End Abortion
• Ireland Will Vote Next Year on Legalizing Abortion, Overturning Law Saying Unborn Baby Has a Right to Life
• Planned Parenthood Defends Doing Dismemberment Abortions as One of the “Safest” Abortion Procedures
• Rape Survivors Who Rejected Abortion Forced to Move Event After Abortion Activists Threaten Violence
• Buddhist, Muslim and Christian Religious Leaders United to Oppose Legalizing Abortion in Sri Lanka
• 3,800 Babies Will Die in Abortions if Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner Signs Bill for Taxpayer Funding
• Abortion Practitioners Often Suffer From Mental Disorders. Here are Some Examples

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Senate Pulls Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood as John McCain, Rand Paul and Susan Collins Oppose It
Senate Republicans have officially pulled the plug on the reconciliation bill that would defund Planned Parenthood and repeal portions of Obamacare.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Cecile Richards Celebrates Defeat of Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood: “It Would Have Caused Suffering”
Cecile Richards today celebrated the defeat of the bill to defund Planned Parenthood.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Hillary Clinton: Any Woman Who Voted for Donald Trump “Disrespected Themselves”
Hillary Clinton suggested last week that husbands pressured their wives to vote for her opponent in the 2016 election.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Trump Admin Defunds Planned Parenthood: Abortion Biz Loses Millions to Push Obamacare
President Donald Trump’s administration has been cutting off various streams of taxpayer funding to the abortion chain Planned Parenthood.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Catholic Church Leader: “All Other Rights” Flow From the Right to Life
A Catholic Church leader urged the United Nations on Monday to recognize that the right to life is the most fundamental of all human rights.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Man in So-Called “Persistent Vegetative State” for 15 Years Shows Signs of Consciousness
A 35-year-old man who had been in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) for 15 years has shown signs of consciousness after receiving a pioneering therapy involving nerve stimulation.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Woman Cut Pregnant Mom’s Throat So She Couldn’t Scream While She Cut Out Her Baby From Her Womb
Two years ago, a New York woman who was nearly 9-months pregnant died after a childhood friend cut her unborn baby from her womb in an attempt to pass the infant off as her own.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com.

Former Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic Managers Tell Pro-Lifers to Pray and End Abortion
I want to share words of encouragement from two former Planned Parenthood managers in this brand-new video!.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Pro-Life Student Leader: “Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Speak for This Generation. This Generation is Pro-Life”

Abortion Practitioners Often Suffer From Mental Disorders. Here are Some Examples

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Monday, September 25, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Republican Susan Collins Will Vote No on Defunding Planned Parenthood, Likely Killing the Bill

• Judge Strikes Down Indiana Ban on Abortions of Babies With Down Syndrome
• Methodist, Catholic, Presbyterian and Church of Christ Groups Tell Senate to Fund Planned Parenthood
. Mother in Coma Heard Everything, Including How Doctors Shut Off Her Life Support and Said She’d Die

More Pro-Life News
• House Will Vote on Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks
• “Catholics for Choice” Launches Campaign to Force Americans to Fund Abortions

• Perez Hilton Says Kylie Jenner Should Kill Her Baby in an Abortion
• WATCH: Abortion Activists Shout Down Woman Sharing How She Regrets Her Abortion
• What Jimmy Kimmel May Not Know About The Healthcare Bill
• Woman Dies After Husband Pressures Her to Abort Four Girl Babies Hoping for a Son
• Illinois’ Governor May Sign Bill to Make Taxpayers Fund Abortions Through All 9 Months of Pregnancy
• Sidewalk Counselors Save 8 of 11 Babies From Abortion in One Afternoon at Planned Parenthood
• Planned Parenthood Wins Battle to Continue Killing Babies With Down Syndrome in Abortions
• Pro-Life Student Leader: “Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Speak for This Generation. This Generation is Pro-Life”

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Judge Strikes Down Indiana Ban on Abortions of Babies With Down Syndrome
A federal judge struck down an Indiana law on Friday that protected unborn babies from discrimination based on their sex, race or abilities.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Methodist, Catholic, Presbyterian and Church of Christ Groups Tell Senate to Fund Planned Parenthood
More than a dozen religious groups joined national organizations this week in opposing a U.S. Senate bill to defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Mother in Coma Heard Everything, Including How Doctors Shut Off Her Life Support and Said She’d Die
Three little words changed an Arizona family’s entire outlook as they stood at their mother’s deathbed.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

House Will Vote on Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks
The House of Representatives will vote in the coming days on a pro-life bill that bans abortions from after 20-weeks of pregnancy up to the day of birth.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Perez Hilton Says Kylie Jenner Should Kill Her Baby in an Abortion
What Perez Hilton did to Kylie Jenner and her unborn baby over the weekend serves as a strong example of just how often women are pressured to abort their unborn babies.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

WATCH: Abortion Activists Shout Down Woman Sharing How She Regrets Her Abortion
In their never-ending quest to normalize and de-stigmatize abortion, leftists may want to do a bit more listening than their fellow combatants, who spent the better part of 10 minutes trying to drown out a woman sharing her own abortion story .

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com.

What Jimmy Kimmel May Not Know About The Healthcare Bill
Every time that a new health care reform bill is introduced, it causes panic.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Pro-Life Student Leader: “Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Speak for This Generation. This Generation is Pro-Life”

Comedy Central Show “Broad City” Celebrates Abortion, Depicts Pro-Lifer Holding “Jesus Hates You” Sign

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

McCain Health Care Bill Kills


By Chip Bok of http://bokbluster.com/2017/09/23/mccain-health-care-bill-kills/ | September 23, 2017

McCain

Senator McCain sided with Jimmy Kimmel in shooting down best bud Lindsey Graham on Friday. He announced he would vote “no” on the Graham Cassidy health care reform.

Two McCain Bill Kills

Those in the know think that pretty much kills the bill. And that would make two health bill kills for McCain.

Damn, should have drawn that on the fuselage.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Friday, September 22, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• John McCain Sabotages Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood, No Vote Puts Bill in Jeopardy
• Republican Susan Collins Will Probably Vote Against Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood
. Democrat Senator: Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood is Awful. Also I Haven’t Read It
• In Shocking Vote, British Doctors Endorse Legalizing Unlimited Abortions Up to Birth

More Pro-Life News
• Twitter Censors Pro-Life Groups Ads, Won’t Run Them Unless Its Web Site is Scrubbed of “Sensitive Content”
• Pregnant Teen Banned From Christian School Graduation Gives Birth, Slams Planned Parenthood
• 14-Year-Old Sex Trafficking Victim Was Forced to Have Sex Thousands of Times and Multiple Abortions
• Abortion Activists OK With Killing Kids in Abortions But Don’t Want Kids to Protest Abortion
• Planned Parenthood Worker: “It’s a Baby. There is Legs and There’s Arms and There’s Eyes”
• Canadian Province Will Fund Free Abortions
• Pro-Lifer Will Continue Hunger Strike to Raise Awareness That Abortions Kill Children
• When doctors gave up on Beatrice, her husband fought for her: “He saved my life”
• 650 Doctors Sign Letter Blasting Top OBGYN Who Compared Abortion to Removing Bunions
• Ben Shapiro Eviscerates Jimmy Kimmel’s Health Care Tirades; ‘Egregious’ to Exploit His Son
• Comedy Central Show “Broad City” Celebrates Abortion, Depicts Pro-Lifer Holding “Jesus Hates You” Sign
• Virginia Governor Race Tied as Pro-Life Ed Gillespie Pulls Even With Pro-Abortion Ralph Northam

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

John McCain Sabotages Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood, No Vote Puts Bill in Jeopardy
John McCain will once again sabotage the Senate bill to defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Republican Susan Collins Will Probably Vote Against Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has said that she’s “leaning towards” voting against the Graham-Cassidy healthcare bill.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Democrat Senator: Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood is Awful. Also I Haven’t Read It
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) has been trashing the Graham-Cassidy health care bill all over town.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

In Shocking Vote, British Doctors Endorse Legalizing Unlimited Abortions Up to Birth
In a shocking vote today, the Royal College of Gynecologists (RCOG) voted to endorse legalizing unlimited abortions up to birth.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Twitter Censors Pro-Life Groups Ads, Won’t Run Them Unless Its Web Site is Scrubbed of “Sensitive Content”
Live Action, the youth-centered pro-life organization known for its undercover investigations of Planned Parenthood, has accused Twitter of censoring its ads.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Pregnant Teen Banned From Christian School Graduation Gives Birth, Slams Planned Parenthood
Courageous young mom Maddi Runkles is back after giving birth to her baby boy, Greyson, in August.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

14-Year-Old Sex Trafficking Victim Was Forced to Have Sex Thousands of Times and Multiple Abortions
In a new book, a victim of sex trafficking recounted the horrors of the abuse against herself and the seven unborn children who she was forced to abort.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Abortion Activists OK With Killing Kids in Abortions But Don’t Want Kids to Protest Abortion
Abortion activists will twist and spin any topic to their advantage, including teaching children to stand up for the most vulnerable in today’s society.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Ben Shapiro Eviscerates Jimmy Kimmel’s Health Care Tirades; ‘Egregious’ to Exploit His Son

Comedy Central Show “Broad City” Celebrates Abortion, Depicts Pro-Lifer Holding “Jesus Hates You” Sign

Virginia Governor Race Tied as Pro-Life Ed Gillespie Pulls Even With Pro-Abortion Ralph Northam

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Thursday, September 21, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Judge Rules Doctors Can Starve Disabled Patients to Death Without a Court Order
• Abortion Activist After Watching a Baby Die in an Abortion: It’s Just a “Minimally Invasive Surgery”
. Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood Will Cost the Abortion Biz $400 Million of Your Money
• Baby Dies Two Weeks After Pregnant Mom With Cancer Sacrificed Her Life For Her Child

More Pro-Life News
• Pro-Life Group: If Rand Paul Doesn’t Vote to DeFund Planned Parenthood, He’s “on the Same Side”
• Court Allows Teen Girl to Abort Her Viable 24-Week-Old Unborn Baby
• Abortion Advocates Aggressively Lobby Republican Lisa Murkowski to Vote Against Defunding Planned Parenthood
• Abortionist Busted for Illegal Abortions Commits Suicide in His Jail Cell
• Abortion Clinic That Makes $1.5 Million Killing Babies Has a New Plan to Soften Its Image
• Pregnancy Centers Ask Court to Stop Law Forcing Them to Promote Abortions
• Pastor Runs for Governor on Platform of Banning Abortions
• “Staggering” Number of Women are Buying Dangerous Abortion Pills Online to Kill Their Babies
• Democrats Fall Further Into Debt in August With Abysmal Fundraising Haul
• New Zealand Maori Party: Don’t Vote for Labour Because They Support Euthanasia

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Judge Rules Doctors Can Starve Disabled Patients to Death Without a Court Order
A judge has ruled that Court permission will not be needed to remove food and fluids from severely brain damaged patients, a move which has caused concern among opponents of euthanasia.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Abortion Activist After Watching a Baby Die in an Abortion: It’s Just a “Minimally Invasive Surgery”
Kliff actually watched an abortion being performed. The title is “Watching My First Abortion.”

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood Will Cost the Abortion Biz $400 Million of Your Money
Apart from Barack Obama, Cecile Richards’s group has the most to lose — almost $400 million a year, to be exact.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Baby Dies Two Weeks After Pregnant Mom With Cancer Sacrificed Her Life For Her Child
In yet another heartbreaking turn of events, the baby girl of a Michigan mother who sacrificed her life to save her unborn daughter has died.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Pro-Life Group: If Rand Paul Doesn’t Vote to DeFund Planned Parenthood, He’s “on the Same Side”
A pro-life student organization is not happy that Senator Rand Paul has announced his opposition to the Graham-Cassidy Healthcare bill that would repeal portions of Obamacare and defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Court Allows Teen Girl to Abort Her Viable 24-Week-Old Unborn Baby
Another young victim of rape and her unborn baby will fall victim to a late-term abortion after the Supreme Court of India granted an exception to the country’s 20-week abortion limit Wednesday.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Abortion Advocates Aggressively Lobby Republican Lisa Murkowski to Vote Against Defunding Planned Parenthood
Republican U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski has sided with the abortion chain Planned Parenthood in the past, and abortion activists want it to stay that way.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Abortionist Busted for Illegal Abortions Commits Suicide in His Jail Cell
A man accused of committing illegal underground abortions without a license was found dead at the Clark County Detention Center where he was being held without bond pending trial.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

New Zealand Maori Party: Don’t Vote for Labour Because They Support Euthanasia

Nanny Caught “Violently Flinging a 9-Month-Old Baby Into Her Cot Like a Rag Doll” Faces Murder Charge

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Tuesday, September 19, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• This Republican is Opposing the Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood
• Judge Judy: I Am Not a Feminist Because I Didn’t Have to Sacrifice Family for a Career
. Planned Parenthood Doc Loses License After Doing Abortion on Raped 13-Year-Old, Claims He Didn’t Know Her Age
• Actress Janine Turner Shares Her Pro-Life Position With Middle School Students, Parents Complain

More Pro-Life News
• 74 Babies Have Died From Free Abortions an Abortion Clinic Gave Victims of Hurricane Harvey
• Pro-Abortion Catholic Tim Kaine Cites Bible With Plea to Respect “Different Perspectives”
• Denmark Will Spend $37 Million on Abortion After President Trump Defunds Intl Planned Parenthood
• Senate Must Vote for Graham-Cassidy Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Actress Elisabeth Moss Will Star in New Movie Glorifying a Network of Secret Abortionists
• 13-Year-Old Seeks Permission to Abort Her 22-Week-Old Unborn Baby
• Christian Parents With Five Children Already Welcome Conjoined Twins After Doctors Suggested Abortion
• Think Men Shouldn’t Have an Opinion About Abortion? Consider This
• California Gov. Jerry Brown Compares Trump Supporters to Cave-Dwellers
• Truck Filled With 328,348 Pairs of Baby Socks Will Highlight How Many Abortions Planned Parenthood Does
• Writer Complains Flight Cancellations Mean Fewer Women Will be Able to Abort Their Babies
• Neonatal Professor: Survival Rates of Premature Babies is Improving, 50% Survival Rate at 23 Weeks
• American College of Physicians Opposes Assisted Suicide After Extensive Study
• Pro-Life Ads Expose Radical Position of Pro-Abortion Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

This Republican is Opposing the Senate Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood
A few Republicans may once again sabotage the Senate bill to defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Judge Judy: I Am Not a Feminist Because I Didn’t Have to Sacrifice Family for a Career
Judge Judy Sheindlin does not think in terms of sex when it comes to success, she told TMZ’s Harvey Levin in the premiere episode of his new series “Objectified” on Fox News.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood Doc Loses License After Doing Abortion on Raped 13-Year-Old, Claims He Didn’t Know Her Age
The Kansas Board of Healing Arts has suspended the osteopathic medicine license of Allen S. Palmer, 78, for 90 days.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Actress Janine Turner Shares Her Pro-Life Position With Middle School Students, Parents Complain
Conservative actress Janine Turner upset a group of Texas parents this month after she handed out materials that briefly mentioned her pro-life political position to middle school students.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

74 Babies Have Died From Free Abortions an Abortion Clinic Gave Victims of Hurricane Harvey
Texas abortion activists are patting themselves on the back for aborting 74 unborn babies for free in the wake of Hurricane Harvey.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Pro-Abortion Catholic Tim Kaine Cites Bible With Plea to Respect “Different Perspectives”
I suppose it is only to state the obvious that a writer will gear his argument, his rhetoric, and the volume with which he makes his pitch depending on the audience he is trying to sway.

Cl i ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Denmark Will Spend $37 Million on Abortion After President Trump Defunds Intl Planned Parenthood
Politicians in Denmark have approved a plan to spend 37 million dollars funding abortion after president Donald Trump made a decision in the early days of his presidency to defund the international Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Senate Must Vote for Graham-Cassidy Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
National Right to Life Committee, the nationwide federation of state right-to-life organizations, supports legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.).

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Truck Filled With 328,348 Pairs of Baby Socks Will Highlight How Many Abortions Planned Parenthood Does

Writer Complains Flight Cancellations Mean Fewer Women Will be Able to Abort Their Babies

Neonatal Professor: Survival Rates of Premature Babies is Improving, 50% Survival Rate at 23 Weeks

American College of Physicians Opposes Assisted Suicide After Extensive Study

Pro-Life Ads Expose Radical Position of Pro-Abortion Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Friday, September 14, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Pro-Life Speaker Ben Shapiro Answers Pro-Abortion Student’s Question With an “Epic Takedown”
• Pro-Lifers Arrested Nationwide for Giving Women Alternatives Inside Abortion Clinics and Refusing to Leave
. Abortion Clinic Closes Down That Was Cited by State for 44 Pages of Health Code Violations
• Amazon Deletes Negative Reviews of Hillary Clinton’s New Book

More Pro-Life News
• Top Pro-Life Groups Endorse Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill That Defunds Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Sex Trafficking Victim Forced to Have Abortion: “When I Was Forced to Kill My Baby, I Wanted to Die Too”
• Activist Wants More Women to Brag About Their Abortions to “Humanize” Aborting Babies
• When I Learned My Mother Was Raped at 15 and I Was The Child
• Doctors Declared Jahi McMath “Brain Dead” in 2013, But Recent Evidence Suggests She’s Still Alive
• Pro-Lifer Arrested for Helping Women at Abortion Clinic Find Alternatives Sentenced to Probation
• Man Who Allegedly Attacked His Pregnant Girlfriend and Killed Her Unborn Baby Won’t Go to Prison
• When His Girlfriend Refused an Abortion He Threatened to Cut Her Baby Out of Her Womb and Strangled Her
• Man Got His Mentally Disabled Daughter Pregnant and Tried to Use Abortion to Hide His Crime
• Dismemberment Abortions are Still Legal in Texas Until Another Court Hearing in November
• New Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinics in Missouri May Close Just as Fast as They Open
• Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz Spending Hundreds of Thousands to Elect Ralph Northam in Virginia

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Pro-Life Speaker Ben Shapiro Answers Pro-Abortion Student’s Question With an “Epic Takedown”
Popular conservative author and speaker Ben Shapiro continued to impress his audience Thursday at UC Berkeley when he rapidly refuted a young man’s abortion arguments.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Pro-Lifers Arrested Nationwide for Giving Women Alternatives Inside Abortion Clinics and Refusing to Leave
In three different cities across the United States, pro-lifers simultaneously entered abortion centers to talk to women scheduled for abortions

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Top Pro-Life Groups Endorse Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill That Defunds Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
Two top pro-life groups are backing the Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill that would defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Sex Trafficking Victim Forced to Have Abortion: “When I Was Forced to Kill My Baby, I Wanted to Die Too”
A girl – we’ll call her Jane – was forced into the sex trade then forced to have an abortion by her older “boyfriend.”

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Activist Wants More Women to Brag About Their Abortions to “Humanize” Aborting Babies
In the past few years, abortion activists have succeeded in convincing dozens of mainstream media outlets to publish stories of women who were glad they aborted their unborn babies.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

When I Learned My Mother Was Raped at 15 and I Was The Child
Hello, my name is Claudia Marcela and I’m Colombian. I

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Dismemberment Abortions are Still Legal in Texas Until Another Court Hearing in November

New Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinics in Missouri May Close Just as Fast as They Open

Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz Spending Hundreds of Thousands to Elect Ralph Northam in Virginia

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Thursday, September 14, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Democrat Senator: Let’s Pass “Medicare for All” and Force Americans to Fund Abortions
• Pussycat Dolls Singer Kaya Jones: Hollywood’s Love of Abortion “Shows How Evil Our World Has Become”
. House Votes to Strike Down D.C. Law Legalizing Assisted Suicide
• Abortion Activist Brags About Her Multiple Abortions: “There’s Nothing to Be Ashamed About”

More Pro-Life News
• An Abortion Supporter Raped Me Because I Said I Oppose Abortion in Cases of Rape
• Abortionist Says “I Believe That as an Abortion Provider I Am Doing the Lord’s Work”
• Planned Parenthood Wants to Remove a “Racist” Statute. But What About Its Racist Founder?
• Ten Years After a Botched Legal Abortion Killed Her Daughter, a Mother Still Deals With Heartbreak
• Democrats Don’t Think Pro-Life Christians Should Serve as Judges Anymore
• Woman Deeply Regrets Her Two Abortions and Has Turned to God for Forgiveness
• Hey Hillary, America Rejected You Because You’re a Pro-Abortion Radical
• Dating App OkCupid Lets Users Add Planned Parenthood Badge to Show They Love Abortion
• California Senate Passes Bill to Force Churches and Christian Groups to Employ Abortion Activists
• “Telemed” Abortions Pose Health Risks for Women Despite What Abortion Proponents Claim
• British Government Refuses to Shut Down Abortion Clinics With Thousands of Health and Safety Violations
• Population Control: Indian State Approves Proposal for Two-Child Policy Like China’s

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Democrat Senator: Let’s Pass “Medicare for All” and Force Americans to Fund Abortions
As the idea of universal health care, or “Medicare for All,” gains support among Democrats, a U.S. Senator promised that taxpayer funding for abortions will be included the plan.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Pussycat Dolls Singer Kaya Jones: Hollywood’s Love of Abortion “Shows How Evil Our World Has Become”
As many in Hollywood unabashedly support the abortion industry, one artist is setting herself apart by challenging the narrative.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

House Votes to Strike Down D.C. Law Legalizing Assisted Suicide
Today the House of Representatives voted to strike down a new law in Washington DC that would legalize assisted suicide.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Abortion Activist Brags About Her Multiple Abortions: “There’s Nothing to Be Ashamed About”
Defending multiple abortions is tricky even for militant pro-abortion sites such as rewire.com and for Guttmacher, the abortion industry’s in-house think-tank.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

An Abortion Supporter Raped Me Because I Said I Oppose Abortion in Cases of Rape
I always lived alone with my dad because my mom passed away when I was four years old and nobody in my family ever wanted to take care of me.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Abortionist Says “I Believe That as an Abortion Provider I Am Doing the Lord’s Work”
Local pro-life advocates in Chicago will protest tonight at an event featuring an abortion practitioner who calls himself a Christian abortionist.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Planned Parenthood Wants to Remove a “Racist” Statute. But What About Its Racist Founder?
Planned Parenthood just loves to shout about the evils of racism.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Ten Years After a Botched Legal Abortion Killed Her Daughter, a Mother Still Deals With Heartbreak
This week marks the tenth anniversary of the passing of Laura Hope Smith, who died at the age of twenty-two from a botched abortion on September 13, 2007.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

“Telemed” Abortions Pose Health Risks for Women Despite What Abortion Proponents Claim

British Government Refuses to Shut Down Abortion Clinics With Thousands of Health and Safety Violations

Population Control: Indian State Approves Proposal for Two-Child Policy Like China’s

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Wednesday, September 13, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Al Franken Slammed for Calling Respected Pro-Life Organization a “Hate Group”
• Abortionist Caught With 14 Containers of Aborted Babies in His Car Has His Licensed Suspended
. Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill Would Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Group That Funds Women’s Abortions Calls Aborting Babies “a Social Good”

More Pro-Life News
• He Was Forced to Choose Between Losing His Job or Helping a Woman Get an Abortion
• Abortion Advocates Push “Remote Abortions” Killing a Baby With the Press of a Button
• YWCA Partners With Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Abortion Activists: Quit “Stigmatizing” Women Who Kill Multiple Babies in Abortions
• Planned Parenthood and Satanists Team Up to Promote Abortion
• Joy Behar Tells Hillary She “Went Into Mourning” Over Trump Winning: “Felt Like I Had Lost a Friend”
• Dianne Feinstein’s War on Christian Judges: Pro-Life Catholics Need Not Apply
• Study: The Liberal Media’s Summer of Pummeling Trump, 91% of News Stories Were Negative
• DNA Test Shows Request to Abort a 32-Week-Old Baby Was Based on False Claim
• Canadian Mental Health Association Opposes Euthanizing Mentally Ill Patients

Respect Life Month Resources
20+ Bulletins, 200+ Brochures, 10+ Fundraising bottles,
30+ Pro-Life Magnets, Notecards, Stickers, Banners & Signs.
September Life News Special:

Al Franken Slammed for Calling Respected Pro-Life Organization a “Hate Group”
One of the nation’s most respected champions of religious liberty draws a line at being called a hate group by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Abortionist Caught With 14 Containers of Aborted Babies in His Car Has His Licensed Suspended
Today, the Michigan Board of Medicine suspended the license of “Trunk Abortionist” Michael Arthur Roth for one year and fined him $25,000 for the “unlawful possession of a controlled substance.”

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill Would Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
Members of the US Senate today introduced new legislation that would repeal Obamacare and it also defunds the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Group That Funds Women’s Abortions Calls Aborting Babies “a Social Good”
The Carolina Abortion Fund did not mention any caveats in its tweet. It simply said that abortion – the killing of unborn babies in the womb – is “a social good.”

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

He Was Forced to Choose Between Losing His Job or Helping a Woman Get an Abortion
In August of 2007, Steve Pargman was working at the Department of Social and Health Services in Washington state when he received a request that would force him to choose between his convictions and his job.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Abortion Advocates Push “Remote Abortions” Killing a Baby With the Press of a Button
Mother Jones recently featured an article discussing abortion in the modern era. We are living in a very progressive time.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Abortion Activists: Quit “Stigmatizing” Women Who Kill Multiple Babies in Abortions
On the heels of a new study, the pro-abortion blog Rewire claimed there is nothing “negative” about a woman aborting multiple unborn babies.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

YWCA Partners With Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
The Young Women’s Christian Association has a long history of partnering with the abortion chain Planned Parenthood.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Little Boy Cries When He Learns His Parents Are Having Another Girl, While His Sister Smiles

Canadian Mental Health Association Opposes Euthanizing Mentally Ill Patients

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Tuesday, September 12, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Hillary Clinton: Abortion is “Sacrosanct” and Unlimited Abortion is “Not Negotiable”
• Pro-Abortion Justice Ginsburg: “I Hope I Made This a Place Where People Can Live Without Fear”
. Teen With Down Syndrome Challenges Pro-Abortion Politician: “I Don’t Want to be Aborted, I Want to Be Born”
• Judges Complain: Where Will Women Get Their Abortions if the Last Abortion Clinic is Closed?

More Pro-Life News
• Planned Parenthood Leader Admits Abortion Biz Targets Blacks and Hispanics
• Report: Sex-Ed Programs Show “No Long-Term Difference in Sexual Activity of Pregnancy Rates”
• Premature Baby Born at 22 Weeks and Given 5% Chance to Live Defies the Odds and is Going Home
• This Abortion Clinic Stuffed a Woman in a Car After It Perforated Her Bowel Instead of Calling 911
• High School Teacher Placed on Leave for Asking Students if They’d Had an Abortion
• In Canada, If Your Doctor Thinks Your Death is “Reasonably Foreseeable” He Can Euthanize You
• California House Rejects Pro-Abortion License Plates to Fund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Abortion Activists Use Pope Francis’ Comment Questioning Trump’s Pro-Life Values to Attack Pro-Lifers
• Little Boy Cries When He Learns His Parents Are Having Another Girl, While His Sister Smiles
• Illinois and Hawaii Force Pregnancy Centers and Pro-Life Doctors to Promote Abortions

Hillary Clinton: Abortion is “Sacrosanct” and Unlimited Abortion is “Not Negotiable”
Hillary Clinton’s forthcoming book makes it clear that she is an ardent supporter of unlimited abortion. Clinton calls abortion “sacrosanct” and says there should be no compromise on promoting abortion on demand.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Pro-Abortion Justice Ginsburg: “I Hope I Made This a Place Where People Can Live Without Fear”
Abortion activists have idolized U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for supporting abortion on the highest court in the land.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Teen With Down Syndrome Challenges Pro-Abortion Politician: “I Don’t Want to be Aborted, I Want to Be Born”
A teenager with Down syndrome put German Chancellor Angela Merkel on the spot Monday when she asked about the country’s discriminatory abortion laws.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Judges Complain: Where Will Women Get Their Abortions if the Last Abortion Clinic is Closed?
A court in Ohio is hearing a case regarding an unsafe abortion clinic in Toledo that is unable to protect women who are victimized by botched abortions because it has no transfer agreement with the local hospital to get them prompt care.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood Leader Admits Abortion Biz Targets Blacks and Hispanics
Like a broken clock that’s right twice a day, you can count on Planned Parenthood to tell the truth every now and then.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Report: Sex-Ed Programs Show “No Long-Term Difference in Sexual Activity of Pregnancy Rates”
Last month, the New York Times “The Upshot” blog ran a piece by Aaron Carroll, a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Premature Baby Born at 22 Weeks and Given 5% Chance to Live Defies the Odds and is Going Home
Lawrence looks like a typical newborn preparing to go home from the hospital.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Woman Regrets Her Abortion: “My Child Would Have Been 10 Years Old This Year”
Ten years ago, Maria thought that aborting her unborn baby was her only option for getting out of a very difficult situation.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Little Boy Cries When He Learns His Parents Are Having Another Girl, While His Sister Smiles

Illinois and Hawaii Force Pregnancy Centers and Pro-Life Doctors to Promote Abortions

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Friday, September 8, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• 13-Year-Old Given Permission to Abort Her 32-Week-Old Unborn Baby Gives Birth Instead
• Woman Dies After Second-Trimester Abortion, Congressman Calls for Investigation
. Two Republicans Vote to Fund International Planned Parenthood and Pro-Abortion UNFPA
• Republican Who Voted Against Defunding Planned Parenthood Will Retire

More Pro-Life News
• 18 Members of Congress Ask Trump Admin to Investigate Planned Parenthood Selling Aborted Baby Parts
• National Day of Remembrance on September 9 Helps Us Remember Abortion Kills People
• Church of Satan: Pro-Life Laws Violate Our Religious Freedom to Get Abortions
• Planned Parenthood Abortionist Credits Her Christian Parents With Inspiring Her Career
• Earth to Congress: Failing to Defund Planned Parenthood Is Not an Option
• U.S. Blasts UNFPA for Supporting Decades of Population Control and Forced Abortions in China
• Alveda King Regrets Her Abortion: “They Said It’s a Blob of Tissue and I Was Young and Foolish”
• Abby Johnson Recalls When Planned Parenthood Promoted Free Abortions After Hurricane Katrina
• Mom With Brain Tumor Who Refused Abortion Gives Birth to Baby Girl Named “Life”
• Liberal Petition Asks to Rename Hurricane Irma After Ivanka Trump
• Looking for a Pro-Life Place to Donate to Help Hurricane Harvey Victims? Look No Further
• If Kentucky Can Close an Unsafe Abortion Clinic There Will be No More Abortions There
• Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg Says He is “Completely Opposed” to Abortion

13-Year-Old Given Permission to Abort Her 32-Week-Old Unborn Baby Gives Birth Instead
In a startling turn of events, the baby of a 13-year-old rape survivor who received permission to have a late-term abortion was born alive Friday in India.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Woman Dies After Second-Trimester Abortion, Congressman Calls for Investigation
Rep. Steve Pearce has sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions seeking an investigation and prosecution of the University of New Mexico and its partner, Southwestern Women’s Options.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Two Republicans Vote to Fund International Planned Parenthood and Pro-Abortion UNFPA
The main actions that President Donald Trump has taken that have gone over extremely well with pro-life voters are his decisions to defund the International Planned Parenthood abortion business and to revoke funding for the UNFPA , which supports China’s coercive population control policy.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Republican Who Voted Against Defunding Planned Parenthood Will Retire
A Republican Congressman who voted against legislation to defund the abortion chain Planned Parenthood said this week that he will retire at the end of his term.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

18 Members of Congress Ask Trump Admin to Investigate Planned Parenthood Selling Aborted Baby Parts
Today, 18 members of Congress released a letter urging the U.S. Department of Justice to follow up with an investigation of the December 2016 criminal referrals regarding Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

National Day of Remembrance on September 9 Helps Us Remember Abortion Kills People
The response of the American people to the devastation of Hurricane Harvey last month shows us at our best.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Church of Satan: Pro-Life Laws Violate Our Religious Freedom to Get Abortions
The Satanic Temple is challenging Missouri state abortion regulations in court this fall, arguing that laws requiring that women be provided information about their unborn babies violate their religious freedom.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood Abortionist Credits Her Christian Parents With Inspiring Her Career
Abortionist Raegan McDonald-Mosley said her devout Christian parents inspired her to pursue her career as the chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Liberal Petition Asks to Rename Hurricane Irma After Ivanka Trump

Looking for a Pro-Life Place to Donate to Help Hurricane Harvey Victims? Look No Further

If Kentucky Can Close an Unsafe Abortion Clinic There Will be No More Abortions There

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg Says He is “Completely Opposed” to Abortion

Alabama Court Allows Teen to Have Abortion Despite State Law Requiring Parental Consent

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Thursday, September 7, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• United Methodist Pastor Runs Pro-Abortion Group: “It’s Time for the Religious Left to Rise Up”
• Democrats Trash Judicial Nominee’s Catholic Faith: “Do You Consider Yourself a Catholic? That’s a Concern”
. Judge Rules “Brain Dead” Jahi McMath May Not be Dead After All
• Court Rules There is No Constitutional Right to Assisted Suicide

More Pro-Life News
• Actress Jennifer Lawrence: Hurricanes are “Mother Nature’s Rage” for Voting for Trump
• Tim Tebow’s Mother Pam Tebow Will Headline 2018 March for Life
• Attorneys General in 20 States Want Supreme Court to Lift Ban on New Planned Parenthood Expose’ Videos
• Feminists Applaud Actress Martha Plimpton, Who Bragged About Her “Awesome” Abortion
• Family of Conjoined Twins Attached at the Forehead Desperate For Separation Surgery, But They May Die
• She is an “Abortion Doula” to Provide Mothers Emotional Support While They Kill Their Baby
• Piers Morgan on Abortion: “I’m a Catholic But I Don’t Agree With the Catholic Teaching”
• Teen’s Boyfriend Took Her For Abortion Then Stuffed Her in a Suitcase and Left Her on a Roadside
• Amnesty International is Pushing to Legalize Abortion in Ireland Up to Birth for Any Reason
• Ireland’s 8th Amendment Has Saved at Least 100,000 People From Dying in Abortions
• Almost 10,000 Babies Die in Abortions in Minnesota in 2016 as Abortion Rates Increase

United Methodist Pastor Runs Pro-Abortion Group: “It’s Time for the Religious Left to Rise Up”
The Rev. Millie Horning Peters is pushing back as the United Methodist Church backs away from its pro-abortion past.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Democrats Trash Judicial Nominee’s Catholic Faith: “Do You Consider Yourself a Catholic? That’s a Concern”
Senate Democrats are under fire today for trashing a judicial nominee’s Catholic faith. Senate Democrats grilled one of President Trump’s nominees for a federal court.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Judge Rules “Brain Dead” Jahi McMath May Not be Dead After All
This could be one of the biggest bioethics cases since Terri Schiavo.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Court Rules There is No Constitutional Right to Assisted Suicide
There is no constitutional right to assisted suicide, so the courts keep ruling.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Actress Jennifer Lawrence: Hurricanes are “Mother Nature’s Rage” for Voting for Trump
In an interview with Channel 4, a British public service television network, American actress Jennifer Lawrence blamed the recent hurricanes on Donald Trump’s voters.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Tim Tebow’s Mother Pam Tebow Will Headline 2018 March for Life
Pam Tebow, the mother of Christian sports star Tim Tebow, will headline the 2018 March for Life dinner that precedes the March for Life march and rally.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Attorneys General in 20 States Want Supreme Court to Lift Ban on New Planned Parenthood Expose’ Videos
Attorneys general in 20 states asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to allow the release of undercover footage of abortion activists by pro-life investigator David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Feminists Applaud Actress Martha Plimpton, Who Bragged About Her “Awesome” Abortion
Pro-abortion feminists defended actress Martha Plimpton this week after she joked about the “best” abortion that she ever had.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Ireland’s 8th Amendment Has Saved at Least 100,000 People From Dying in Abortions

Almost 10,000 Babies Die in Abortions in Minnesota in 2016 as Abortion Rates Increase

Mother Teresa’s 5 Lessons for Pro-Life People

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2017 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report


Wednesday, September 6, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit LifeNews.com.

Top Stories
• Planned Parenthood Killed Over 1 Million Babies in Abortions Worldwide in 2016
• Court Allows 13-Year-Old to Abort Her 32-Week-Old Unborn Baby
. Planned Parenthood Abortion Business Closing Another Center
• Pope Francis: “Abortion is the Murder of an Innocent Person”

More Pro-Life News
• Hillary Clinton Blames Bernie Sanders For Losing to Donald Trump
• Abortion Free Kentucky? “There Will be No Abortions in Kentucky if They Win,” Clinic Tells Judge
• Judge Upholds Requirement Forcing California Churches to Pay for Abortions
• Margaret Sanger, the Racist Who Liberal Activists Completely Ignore
• Mother Says People Laugh at Her Disabled Daughter and Say She Should Have Aborted Her
• Foundation Gives Planned Parenthood Abortion Business a “Public Service Award for Essential Services”
• Disabled Man’s Wife Decides It’s in His “Best Interest” to Starve Him to Death
• Woman Profoundly Regrets Aborting Her Baby: “If I Hadn’t Taken That Pill His Name Would be Jude”
• Character on Hulu Show “Difficult People” Flaunts Her Abortions: “I’ve Punched Holes in My Planned Parenthood Card”
• Mother Teresa’s 5 Lessons for Pro-Life People

Planned Parenthood Killed Over 1 Million Babies in Abortions Worldwide in 2016
One of the world’s most extensive and prolific abortion networks has passed a tragic milestone

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.


Court Allows 13-Year-Old to Abort Her 32-Week-Old Unborn Baby
The Supreme Court of India gave a 13-year-old rape survivor permission to abort her late-term, viable unborn baby Wednesday.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood Abortion Business Closing Another Center
The Planned Parenthood abortion business is closing another center, this time in Ohio.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Pope Francis: “Abortion is the Murder of an Innocent Person”
A new book released today contains thoughts and commentary from Pope Francis based on a series of interviews has the leader of the Catholic Church.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Hillary Clinton Blames Bernie Sanders For Losing to Donald Trump
Add Sen. Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton’s laundry list of things to blame for her 2016 election loss.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com

Abortion Free Kentucky? “There Will be No Abortions in Kentucky if They Win,” Clinic Tells Judge
A hearing involving the fate of the last abortion clinic in Kentucky began Wednesday with attorneys for the abortion clinic saying there will be no abortions in Kentucky if the state wins.

Cli ck to Read at LifeNews.com

Looking for an inspiring and motivating speaker for your pro-life event? Don’t have much to spend on a high-priced speaker costing several thousand dollars? Contact LifeNews at news@lifenews.com about having LifeNews Editor Steven Ertelt speak at your event.

Judge Upholds Requirement Forcing California Churches to Pay for Abortions
Churches in California still are being forced to pay for abortions in their health insurance plans after a federal court dismissed a legal challenge by three churches Friday.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Margaret Sanger, the Racist Who Liberal Activists Completely Ignore
Over the last few months, much discussion and even some violence have surrounded the existence of statues and other reminders of the American Civil War.

Click to Read at LifeNews.com.

Doctors Said to Abort Aaliyah Because She Had a 1% Chance to Survive, But She is a Teenager Now

6,672 People Have Been Euthanized in the Netherlands Since Euthanasia Was Legalized in 2002

Mother Teresa’s 5 Lessons for Pro-Life People

 
Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.