Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Senate Judiciary Committee’

GOP says Dems admit ‘guilt’ in Biden health cover-up by boycotting Senate hearing on ‘constitutional scandal’

By Emma Colton Fox News | Published June 18, 2025 2:35pm EDT

Republican lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary Committee admonished Democratic colleagues for boycotting and walking out of a Wednesday morning hearing examining former President Joe Biden‘s health decline while he was in the Oval Office.

“I will note that few of my Democratic colleagues are here today,” Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn said Wednesday. “Thank you to Sen. Welch from Vermont for being here, leaving us with no other option than to take the boycott of this hearing as an admission of guilt for their role in this crisis.‘

“We must not turn away from the search for answers, and it is not an overstatement to say that the future of our country could one day hinge on how we choose to act or not act on this very issue,” Cornyn continued.

The Senate committee held a hearing Wednesday morning dubbed, “Unfit to Serve: How the Biden Cover-up Endangered America and Undermined the Constitution.”

SENATE HEARING ON WHO WAS ‘REALLY RUNNING’ BIDEN WHITE HOUSE KICKS OFF WEDNESDAY

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, railed against Democrats for skipping a Senate hearing on former President Biden's health decline. — Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, railed against Democrats for skipping a Senate hearing on former President Biden’s health decline. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Vermont Democrat Sen. Peter Welch and Illinois Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin did attend the start of the hearing, with Durbin abruptly walking out after describing the hearing as a distraction and accusing Republican colleagues of being “asleep at the wheel” with other legal issues within the Trump administration due to their focus on Biden.

“In the last week alone, several events have demanded this committee’s immediate attention,” Durbin said Wednesday. “The horrific assassination in Minnesota, the treatment of our colleague Sen. Padilla by federal agents in Los Angeles, and President Trump’s unprecedented deployment of the U.S. military in Los Angeles.‘

“We should hear without delay from Attorney General Bondi and FBI Director Patel about what they are doing to address the unacceptable political violence in our country, including threats to Article III judges and justices, as well as members of Congress,” Durbin said. “And we need to hear from the Homeland Security Secretary Noem about the treatment of our colleague, Sen. Padilla, and this administration’s mass deportation campaign against immigrants.”

Welch also left the hearing after declaring it would not benefit his constituents.

EX-WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS TO TESTIFY ON WHO ‘REALLY RAN THE COUNTRY’ DURING BIDEN ERA

There are 10 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, including lawmakers such as Sens. Klobuchar of Minnesota, Cory Booker of New Jersey, and Adam Schiff of California. The press secretary for Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats directed Fox Digital to Durbin’s initial participation in the hearing and his remarks when asked about GOP lawmakers arguing Democrats’ boycott of the hearing was an admission of guilt.

Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz seethed that Democrats and the media “lied” and covered up Biden’s health decline, while slamming Democrats for their lack of participation.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, slammed Democrats for boycotting a Senate Judiciary hearing on President Biden's health decline. — Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, slammed Democrats for boycotting a Senate Judiciary hearing on President Biden’s health decline. (Ben Curtis/The Associated Press)

“Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a d— about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years,” Cruz said at the hearing. “They knew. Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was mentally not competent to do the job. The White House press secretary, she knew, when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again. And they’re not here because they can’t defend themselves. It wasn’t a surprise, for four years, the White House hid President Biden from Republican senators. Would not let him meet with us.”

Video

Other Republicans railed against Democratic counterparts for skipping the hearing, such as Missouri Republican Sen. Eric Schmidt.

“Today, as we seek to answer this question, it is deeply disappointing, but not surprising, that most Democrats on this committee have chosen all but boycott the hearing and failed to call a single witness,” Schmidt said at the hearing. “They have chosen to ignore this issue like they ignored President Biden’s decline. Their absence speaks volumes, an implicit admission that the truth is too inconvenient to face. By refusing to engage in this critical examination, they abdicate their responsibility to the American people. This de facto boycott is not just a refusal to participate. It’s a refusal to serve the American people who deserve answers about who was truly leading their government.‘

“The title of the hearing, ‘Unfit to Serve,’ captures a sobering and undeniable truth,” Schmidt added. “President Biden was mentally unfit to carry out the responsibilities of the most powerful office in the world. Given his mental incapacity, the American people deserve to know who was running the country the last four years.”

SENATE REPUBLICANS PLAN HEARING ON BIDEN’S ALLEGED COGNITIVE DECLINE COVER-UP

The hearing included testimony from three experts, including University of Virginia law professor John Harrison, conservative think tank Heritage Foundation fellow Theodore Wold, and a former White House press secretary from the first Trump administration, Sean Spicer.

Concern over Biden’s mental acuity hit a fever pitch in 2024 as the election cycle heated up, when the then-president delivered a dismal debate performance against now-President Donald Trump in June. The debate opened the floodgates of criticism, including traditional Democrat allies calling for Biden to drop out of the presidential race after conservatives had already long argued that Biden’s mental acuity was slipping and he was unfit to serve as commander in chief.

Three shots of Biden during the debate — Former President Biden’s debate against Donald Trump in 2024 opened the floodgates to criticisms over his mental acuity. (Getty Images )

Concerns over his health have continued after his presidential tenure ended, including with the revelation that the Biden admin frequently used an autopen to sign official presidential documents, the release of Biden’s interview with former Special Counsel Robert Hur, and Biden’s shock announcement in May that he had advanced prostate cancer.

The conservative Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project first investigated the Biden administration’s use of an autopen earlier in 2025 and found that the same signature was on a bevvy of executive orders and other official documents, while Biden’s signature on the document announcing his departure from the 2024 race varied from the apparent machine-produced signature.

SCOOP: GOP PUSH FOR NEW HOUSE COMMITTEE TO PROBE BIDEN DECLINE ‘COVER-UP’ GAINS STEAM

Heritage fellow Wold testified before the committee and described the alleged cover-up of Biden’s declining health a “constitutional crisis.”

Trump Autopen Explainer — An example of an autopen in operation.

“I will say the 25th Amendment. It’s a modern contrivance, but it still is consistent with the American Constitution, which assumes that officers of the United States will act virtuously and morally,” Wold said. “And the idea that members of the Cabinet would go to the length of avoiding the Oval Office so as to abdicate their responsibility to verify the appropriateness of the president’s acuity or the ability to authenticate actions taken by the president. If that’s not a constitutional scandal, I honestly, I don’t know what would what would constitute such.‘

“There could be the potential for crimes,” he said. “But moreover, the 25th Amendment can only function in its sole mechanisms if people are actually willing to call a spade a spade.”

BIDEN’S SENILITY SCANDAL LEADS TOP REPUBLICAN TO DEMAND DOJ PROBE INTO ‘REPRESENTATIONS’ TO PUBLIC

President Biden in Washington, D.C. — Concerns over President Biden’s health hit a fever pitch in 2024 amid the campaign cycle after conservatives had long sounded the alarm on the president’s health. (Evan Vucci/The Associated Press)

The U.S. Constitution’s 25th Amendment states that “whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”

Biden’s Cabinet, other administration officials and Democrat lawmakers fiercely defended his health amid outcry from Republicans and others that Biden’s health had cratered and that he was likely unfit to serve as president.

Category:

corruption, Political

Tagged with:

Mollie Hemingway Delivers Masterclass Explainer on The ‘Government-Funded’ War on Free Speech

By: Shawn Fleetwood | March 25, 2025

Mollie Hemingway testifying before Congress. — ‘They know our voice is so powerful and influential that they can’t accomplish their goals unless they shut us down. They will not succeed.’

Author Shawn Fleetwood profile

Shawn Fleetwood

Visit on Twitter@ShawnFleetwood

Americans constitutionally protected right to free speech “has been under worse attack in the last decade than at any other point in our nation’s history,” Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway told lawmakers during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Tuesday.

“The tentacles of the censorship-industrial complex are choking out freedom of expression, debate, and the right to criticize powerful institutions such as corporate media and the government,” Hemingway said.

Throughout her opening statement, The Federalist’s editor-in-chief highlighted how the federal and state governments have “fund[ed] and promote[d] censorship and blacklisting technology,” and have even gone as far as to “direct Big Tech companies to censor American speech and debate.” She specifically cited how academic institutions “such as Stanford University and the University of Texas are given large grants, not to defend free speech, but to conduct research on so-called ‘disinformation’ for use by the censorship regime.”

“Non-profit think tanks such as the Aspen Institute post so-called ‘disinformation’ seminars to groom journalists to publish pro-censorship propaganda and to suppress important stories, such as the Hunter Biden laptop bombshell,” Hemingway said. “Non-profit censorship groups such as the Global Disinformation Index and for-profit censorship businesses such as NewsGuard produce widely used censorship tools and blacklists to favor left-wing media while working to silence media that fight false narratives.”

As described by Hemingway, censorship tools employed by groups such as GDI and NewsGuard “routinely rate leftwing news outlets, that are no threat to the permanent bureaucracy, higher than those that challenge prevailing orthodoxies.” These deceptively crafted lists are subsequently used by companies to “boycott some publications and reward others with advertising,” she explained.

Watch Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway's full opening remarks before the U.S. Senate on the censorship-industrial complex. pic.twitter.com/PYZ49DkaxJ
— The Federalist (@FDRLST) March 25, 2025

“The Washington Post and New York Times routinely receive the highest marks. Those publications won Pulitzers for their role in the Russia collusion hoax, and we have some participants in that hoax here on this subcommittee,” Hemingway said. “My publication, The Federalist, exposed that hoax through dogged reporting and investigation, as we did with the media’s vicious lies against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. We exposed much of the censorship industrial complex, too, even suing the State Department after discovering its role in promoting and marketing censorship tools that are being used against us even as we sit here today.”

As noted by Hemingway, The Federalist is no stranger to being a target of the expansive censorship-industrial complex.

During the summer of 2020, for example, the left-wing Center for Countering Digital Hate colluded with NBC News to try and strip The Federalist of its Google ad revenue. As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd reported, “NBC News reported that Google banned The Federalist due to a shoddy report from the network’s ‘verification unit,’ and the Center for Countering Digital Hate took issue with The Federalist’s reporting about the race-motivated rioting and violence that plagued the nation during the summer of rage.”

Hemingway also cited a 2023 report by the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government “documenting how Stanford University colluded with two governmental entities to pressure social media companies into censoring true information, jokes, satire, political reporting, and analysis, all of which they claimed was ‘disinformation.’” The Federalist editor-in-chief noted how she and Federalist CEO Sean Davis were targeted by this censorship operation.

“One of the censored items was a story about a TV appearance in which I said of the media, ‘They lie, they lie, they lie, and then they lie.’ Gallup reported in February that my view is held by 70 percent of Americans, who say they don’t trust corporate media to report news accurately, fairly, or fully,” Hemingway said.

Hemingway concluded her opening statement by noting the difficulties in “facing” the vast censorship-industrial complex, and that while it “would have been easy to fold,” doing so is “exactly what censors want: to make it impossible to report the truth about their lies.”

“They know our voice is so powerful and influential that they can’t accomplish their goals unless they shut us down. They will not succeed,” Hemingway said. “We will never stop. The more they try to shut us down, the harder we’re going to work to stay open, because it’s not about us — it’s about whether we will have a civilization where people are allowed to say and think things tyrants don’t want us to.”

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Category:

censorship, corruption, Free Speech, Political

Tagged with:

Not A Single Democrat Witness In Congress Agreed Only Citizens Should Vote In Federal Elections

BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | MARCH 12, 2024

Witnesses testify at Senate Judiciary Hearing

None of Democrats’ witnesses in a congressional hearing Tuesday could say resolutely that they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election.

During a Senate Judiciary Hearing on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee asked the witnesses to provide a basic “yes” or “no” answer to a series of questions about non-citizens voting.

“Do you believe that only citizens of the United States should be able to vote in federal elections?” Lee asked each of the witnesses.

“We don’t have a position about non-citizens voting in federal elections, we believe that’s what the current laws are, and so we’re certainly fighting for everyone who is eligible under current law to vote,” Executive Director of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Damon T. Hewitt said.

“That’s a decision of the state law but I want to emphasize –” President of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Lydia Camarillo said.

“It’s a decision of state law as to who should vote in federal elections?” Lee interjected.

“States decide who gets to vote in various elections, and in federal elections I believe that we should be encouraging people to naturalize and then vote,” Camarillo said.

“Okay but you’re saying that the federal government should have no say in who votes in a federal election?” Lee pressed.

“I don’t have a position on that,” Camarillo responded.

Director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project Sophia Lin Lakin told Lee, “Federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections and our focus is on enabling all eligible voters to be able to vote and cast their ballot.”

Only two witnesses, counsel at Public Interest Legal Foundation Maureen Riordan and Manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation Hans von Spakovsky said they do not believe non-citizens should be able to vote. Both were Republican witnesses.

Lee then asked all the witnesses whether “people registering to vote should provide documentary proof of their citizenship in order to register to vote.” Hewitt replied the real question is how asking people to provide proof of citizenship affects them.

“I think your first question kind of answers the second. Based upon the applicable rules, federal or state elections, what have you, we know we have to follow those rules. The question is what is the impact of those rules?” He said in response.

Camarillo called the question “redundant” and said, “It’s already being asked.”

Current federal law stipulates voters must simply check on a form that they are a U.S. citizen, but they do not have to provide any proof.

Lakin flat-out argued asking people to prove they are U.S. citizens to vote amounts to discrimination: “Documentary proof of citizenship or requirements are often discriminatory,” she said.

Riordan and Spakovsky agreed voters should be required to prove they are citizens. Lee said he was troubled that not every witness could simply answer “yes” to both of his questions.

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to federalize all elections by stripping states and local jurisdictions from making changes to their elections without approval from federal bureaucrats. If the legislation is passed, the U.S. Justice Department could essentially take over an election if its left-wing allies claim minority voters are being harmed by something as simple as requiring an ID or proving citizenship to vote.

A federal judge recently ruled Arizona’s law requiring individuals to prove U.S. citizenship in order to vote in a statewide election is not discriminatory and could proceed after leftists lodged a series of suits.

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Author Brianna Lyman profile

BRIANNA LYMAN

VISIT ON TWITTER@BRIANNALYMAN2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Max Eden Op-ed: Books aren’t being banned at school. But Democrats, media do defend porn for kids in school libraries

By Max Eden Fox News | Published September 21, 2023 5:00am EDT

The Senate Judiciary Committee recently held a hearing into so-called “book bans.” My message to Congress was simple: books aren’t being banned, and it’s good that they are.

For years now, the left has been having a field day crying foul over parents who are concerned about what they’re finding in school libraries. Democrat pollsters have convinced their clients that this is a winning issue, and President Joe Biden even featured it in his re-election launch video. But Republican Senator Kennedy and I demolished that narrative with one simple trick: we read the books out loud.

When Fox News played clips of Senator Kennedy, it had to bleep out so much of it that it sounded like an emergency broadcast message. I took no pleasure in (probably) being the first, and hopefully the last, to read words like “butt-plugs” and “strap-on dildos” into the Congressional Record. But if discussion of these items have no place in the U.S. Senate, then maybe they also have no place in public schools?

Amazingly, by the end of the hearing even the Democrat Senators seemed to agree. Senator Durbin, who called the hearing, insisted that no one supported having obscene or pornographic materials floating around in school libraries. So, it really should be case closed, then. Because that’s what this issue is truly all about.

Video

The Heritage Foundation’s Jay Greene, Madison Marino, and I published a report closely examining so-called “book bans.” The term itself is deeply misleading, as the media has accepted the expansive definition of “ban” offered by PEN America, a leftwing advocacy organization. According to PEN, if a book is removed, reviewed, and then put back on the shelves, it has been “banned.” And if the school moves the book to a guidance counselor’s office, or places a parental permission requirement on it, it has been “banned.” So, we set out to determine how many of PEN’s alleged 2,532 “banned” books were actually still available. The answer: about three fourths of them.

Don’t believe it when the media tells you that “book banning” has anything to do with race. Parents have certainly objected to books dealing with race. For example, PEN America listed the Black Lives Matter-inspired The Hate U Give as the fifth-most banned book. But we found it available in every single school library in question. Parents might object, but school districts aren’t obliging.

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ORGANIZE WALKOUT TO PROTEST TRANS BATHROOM RULE

And don’t believe it when the media tells you that “book banning” is all about LGBT issues. As the Washington Post documented, only seven percent of book challenges contained the term “LGBT” without also containing the term “sexual.” (Although those challenges may have contained terms like pornographic or obscene.) All of the top 10 most removed books contained extremely sexually explicit passages, and more than half regarding heterosexual relations.

Why are we even having this debate, then? Well, part of the answer is that the Democrats thought they had a winning rhetorical issue. “Book banning” certainly polls badly. And it’s hard to argue against when the media won’t even allow you to say what’s actually in these books. So, you can understand the cynical calculus behind Democratic politicians lining up to effectively insist that anyone who objects to porn in school libraries is a bigot.

Video

But there’s actually something deeper and more intentional to it. Senator Mike Lee played a clip of Deborah Caldwell-Stone, the director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. Caldwell-Stone advocated for: “sustained messaging that reframes this issue, that takes it away from the idea that these are inappropriate for minors, or sexually inappropriate for minors, and promote them as diverse materials and programming that are about inclusion.”

Why reframe obscene material as “diverse” or “inclusive”? Because of a political agenda. Emily Drabinski, the head of the American Library Association, is a self-proclaimed “Marxist” who recently declared that “public education needs to be a site of socialist organizing [and] I think libraries really do too. … We need to be on the agenda of socialist organizing.”

A hundred years ago, Marxists pursued a strategy of leveraging sex education to break familial bonds and refashion society. It might sound too strange to say that something similar is going on today. And yet, America’s most prominent sex education organization is literally named “SEICUS: Sex Ed for Social Change.”

Most parents would not embrace the notion that public employees should teach their children lessons about sex on behalf of political agendas. Indeed, most parents would not approve in general of public employees providing their children with sexually explicit material for any reason. And yet, Democrat politicians and the media have been running defense on behalf of porn in school libraries for their own partisan gain.

Maybe that will stop soon. But sadly, too many in public education are ideologically committed to the proposition that exposing kids to sexually explicit material is good because it’s “inclusive.”

Max Eden is a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where he focuses on education reform, specifically K–12 and early childhood education.

Category:

Education, LGBTQ+ AND TRANSGENDER, Political

Tagged with:

Sen. Kennedy makes Dem lawmaker squirm while reading excerpts of LGBTQ Kids books during hearing: ‘Disturbing’

By Gabriel Hays Fox News | Published September 12, 2023 3:03pm EDT

Senator John Kennedy, R-La., made Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias uncomfortable while reading aloud from several LGBTQ and sexually-themed children books during a recent Senate hearing.

In a viral moment from the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that was held Tuesday to examine book bans and censorship in various U.S. states, the GOP lawmaker read certain lewd excerpts from LGBTQ books that conservative parents have been seeking to remove from public schools and public libraries, so they aren’t accessed by kids.

Giannoulias attended the hearing as witness as he has spearheaded legal efforts in Illinois to block parents from being able to ban books they deem as inappropriate to children.

FLORIDA SCHOOL BOARD FORCED TO REMOVE DOZENS OF BOOKS AFTER PARENTS READ ‘GRAPHIC’ PASSAGES ALOUD

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., read excerpts from sexually graphic books “Gender Queer” and “All Boy Aren’t Blue” during a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday.

One of the bills he pushed earlier this summer was a measure that would block government funding to libraries that don’t adhere to the American Library Association’s “Library Bill of Rights,” a document saying reading materials shall not be removed or restricted because of “partisan or personal disapproval.”

In order to challenge Giannoulias’ push to block book bans, Kennedy read aloud sexually graphic portions of two books that parents across the United States have pushed public institutions to keep out of their kids’ reach. Addressing the Secretary of State, the senator said, “Let’s take two books that have been much discussed. The first one is called ‘All Boys Aren’t Blue.’ And I will quote from it.”

[Warning: Graphic depictions of sex]

He read, “’I put some lube on and got him on his knees, and I began to slide into him from behind. I pulled out of him and kissed him while he masturbated. He asked me to turn over while he slipped a condom on himself. This was my a—and I was struggling to imagine someone inside me. He got on top and slowly inserted himself into me. It was the worst pain I think I have ever felt in my life. Eventually, I felt a mix of pleasure with the pain.’”

Kennedy then read from “Gender Queer”: “’I got a new strap-on harness today. I can’t wait to put it on you. It will fit my favorite dildo perfectly. You will look so hot. I can’t wait to have your c— in my mouth. I’m going to give you the b—— of your life, then I want you inside of me.’”

IOWA SCHOOL DISTRICT TO REVIEW NEARLY 400 BOOKS THAT WERE FLAGGED FOR SEX ACT DEPICTIONS, GENDER IDENTITY

Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe, is one of the banned and challenged books on display during Banned Books Week 2022 at the Lincoln Belmont branch of the Chicago Public Library on Sept. 22. (Chris Sweda/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

The lawmaker then turned to Giannoulias, inquiring, “What are you asking us to do? Are you suggesting that only librarians should decide whether the two books that I just referenced should be available to kids? Is that what you’re saying.”

“No,” the official replied, after which Kennedy demanded, “Tell me what you’re saying.”

As Giannoulias began, Kennedy interjected, saying, “Don’t give me a speech, tell me what you’re asking.”

The secretary of state responded, saying, “With all due respect, senator, the words you spoke are disturbing – especially coming out of your mouth – is very disturbing. But what I would also tell you that we’re not advocating for kids to read porn, to Senator Booker’s point.”

Kennedy then asked, “What are you advocating for?” The witnesses replied, “We are advocating for parents, random parents not to have the ability – under the guise of keeping kids safe – to try and challenge the world view of every single manner on these issues.”

The debate continued, with Kennedy accusing the lawmaker of “getting conceptual,” a notion Giannoulias denied.

“I want to know what you’re recommending,” The senator said. “It sounds to me like what some of you are saying – the librarians should decide who gets to see that book.”

The Secretary of State defended his case, adding, “I’m saying when individual parents are allowed to make a decision of where that line is in ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ – which involves a rape scene – should that book be pulled from our libraries? I think it becomes a slippery slope.”

Kennedy shot back, saying, “Well, I think you ought to think about it a little bit more before you come here If you’re going to propose something, you ought to be able in 30 seconds to be able to explain what you’re asking us to do.”

For more Culture, Media, Education, Opinion, and channel coverage, visit foxnews.com/media

Video

Gabriel Hays is an associate editor for Fox News Digital.

Category:

LGBTQ+ AND TRANSGENDER, Political

Tagged with:

Riley Gaines challenges Dem senator, says rights of women, girls ‘thrown out the window’

By Elizabeth Elkind | Fox News | Published June 21, 2023 2:31pm EDT

Former college championship swimmer Riley Gaines challenged Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin, D-Ill., on Wednesday after he accused Republicans of promoting “hateful rhetoric” by questioning the rights of transgender youth.

Gaines was on Capitol Hill as a witness for the Senate’s hearing on LGBTQ civil rights, where Durbin said lawmakers need to be careful when talking about this issue.

“At this point, I’d like to remind our colleagues, our children are listening, and they are in danger,” Durbin said. “In fact, today, transgender youth are among the most at risk of homelessness, depression and death by suicide. So, when these young people who are already struggling hear politicians amplify hateful rhetoric that denies their very existence, what message does it send?”

RILEY GAINES MOCKS MESSAGE APPARENTLY SENT TO HARVARD SWIM TEAM ABOUT LIA THOMAS

Riley Gaines and Sen. Dick Durbin at a Senate hearing — Riley Gaines challenged Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin during a hearing on Wednesday. (CSPAN)

Later in the hearing, Gaines pushed back and told Durbin he needs to think about biological women and girls who she said are at a disadvantage competing against trans people.

“Sen. Durbin, in your opening statement, you had mentioned this rhetoric,” she said. “You had mentioned that, what message does it send to trans individuals? And my comeback to that is, what message does this send to women, to young girls, who are denied of these opportunities?”

“So easily, their rights to privacy and safety thrown out of the window to protect a small population, protect one group as long as they’re happy,” she said. “What about us? That is the overall general consensus of how we all felt in that locker room.”

Rather than answering directly, Durbin argued that there was “no evidence” transgender women perform better than those born that way.

RILEY GAINES SHARES MESSAGES OF SUPPORT AFTER TRANS GIRL’S 2ND-PLACE FINISH IN CALIFORNIA MEET OF CHAMPIONS

Lia Thomas on the podium — Lia Thomas, left, and Riley Gaines look on from the podium after finishing tied for fifth in the 200 freestyle at the NCAA Division I Women’s Swimming & Diving Championship at the McAuley Aquatic Center, March 18, 2022, in Atlanta. (Mike Comer/NCAA Photos via Getty Images)

“Since reference was made to my earlier statement, I would just like to add something for the record: There is no evidence that transgender athletes are an issue in certain levels of sports. No transgender female athlete has ever won an Olympic medal in women’s sports, though the International Olympic Committee has allowed transgender athletes to compete since 2004,” Durbin said.

“But one non-binary athlete who was assigned female at birth won a medal in women’s soccer in 2021,” he added.

TRUMP-APPOINTED JUDGE RULES AGAINST TRANSGENDER STUDENT’S DEMAND TO WEAR HEELS AND DRESS TO GRADUATION

Trans kid protest — Protesters supporting trans-identifying minors during a rally in Minnesota. (Getty)

Gaines was on Capitol Hill as a witness for the Senate’s hearing on LGBTQ civil rights, where she pushed back on allowing transgender students to participate in the school sport of their chosen gender. Gaines has become an activist on behalf of biological female athletes after graduating from the University of Kentucky, where she competed against trans swimmer Lia Thomas in championship-level events.

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

GOP senator detonates pro-abortion professor with one simple question: ‘I refuse to be shackled by your question’

By: CHRIS ENLOE | April 28, 2023

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) outraged a congressional witness on Wednesday with a simple question about her perspective on abortion.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about “the assault on reproductive rights in a post-Dobbs America,” Kennedy asked University of California-Irvine Chancellor’s Professor of Law Michele Goodwin whether she supports unfettered abortion.

“I think this a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question. Do you support it being legal to abort an unborn child up to the moment of birth?” Kennedy asked.

Goodwin, however, seemed uninterested in answering the question. She told Kennedy the question is more complicated than he believes, to which he said he simply wants her personal perspective.

“I’m just trying to understand your perspective, and I’m not accusing you of this. But, you know, people sort of talk around this issue,” he responded, before asking his question again: “If there were a bill that said that a woman has an unfettered right to abort an unborn baby for any reason up to the moment of birth, would you vote yes or would you vote no?”

“Senator Kennedy, I refuse to be shackled by your question,” Goodwin shot back.

Democrat witnesses refuse to answer Kennedy: “Do you support abortion up to the moment of birth?”www.youtube.com

After several moments of back-and-forth in which Goodwin and Kennedy talked over one another, Kennedy asked, “You’re advocating a law that says that an unborn baby can be aborted up to the moment of birth for any reason, are you not?”

“Let me clarify what the 14th Amendment says in the first sentence that citizens of the United States are individuals that are ‘born.’ That is what our Constitution says,” she responded. “Do you support our Constitution?”

It’s not exactly clear what Goodwin was trying to say with her reference to the Constitution. Either she was suggesting that the 14th Amendment does not apply to unborn children because they are not yet born, or she was making a reference to the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

The exchange ended when Kennedy reassured Goodwin that he didn’t want to argue with her, opining that he believed Goodwin was “afraid” to admit her support for “unfettered” abortion.

“You’re not going to answer it and that’s your right,” he said. “But I would respect you more if you would just say, ‘Here is my answer.'”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

American Bar Association gives Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett its highest rating

Reported by SARAH TAYLOR | October 12, 2020

The American Bar Association on Sunday announced that it has given Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett its highest rating. Monday is the start of Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearings.

In a Sunday letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the American Bar Association advised that Barrett is “well qualified” for a position on the Supreme Court.

On Sunday, DC Examiner reporter Jerry Dunleavy shared the letter on Twitter, writing, “The American Bar Association released its determination that Judge Amy Coney Barrett is ‘Well Qualified’ on the eve of the start of her Supreme Court confirmation hearings.”

A portion of the letter reads, “The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the federal judiciary has completed its evaluation of the professional qualifications of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who has been nominated by the President to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

“As you know, the Standing Committee confines its evaluation to the qualities of integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament,” the letter continues. “A substantial majority of the standing committee determined that Judge Barrett is ‘Well Qualified,’ and a minority is of the opinion that she is ‘Qualified’ to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The letter concludes, “The majority rating represents the Standing Committee’s official rating.”

As noted by the Daily Wire, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in 2001 referred to the American Bar Association’s judicial ratings as the “gold standard by which judicial candidates are judged.”

On Sunday night, Barrett released the opening statement she plans to issue on Monday morning.

A portion of her remarks read:

Courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law, which is critical to a free society. But courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.

That is the approach I have strived to follow as a judge on the Seventh Circuit. In every case, I have carefully considered the arguments presented by the parties, discussed the issues with my colleagues on the court, and done my utmost to reach the result required by the law, whatever my own preferences might be. I try to remain mindful that, while my court decides thousands of cases a year, each case is the most important one to the parties involved. After all, cases are not like statutes, which are often named for their authors. Cases are named for the parties who stand to gain or lose in the real world, often through their liberty or livelihood.

You can read the remarks in their entirety here and below.

Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearing greeted by rival protests outside Supreme Court

by Mike Brest, Breaking News Reporter | October 12, 2020 11:00 AM

WASHINGTON, D.C. — As the Senate Judiciary Committee was set to begin the confirmation process for Judge Amy Coney Barrett, rival protests took place outside the White House and the Hart Senate Office Building on Monday morning. One group, Refuse Fascism, an anti-Trump group who doesn’t want Barrett to be confirmed, started their day at the steps of the Supreme Court. Many were dressed in full hazmat suits and chanting, “No COVID test, no hearing!” which was a nod to Chairman Lindsey Graham’s refusal to make it mandatory for senators to be tested for COVID-19 before the hearing.

They held up signs supporting the Affordable Care Act, which Democrats believe is in jeopardy if she is on the highest bench, and one protester held up a sign of a clothes hanger with the phrase “Never Again,” a nod to Roe v. Wade, the prevailing law on abortion. Democrats are fearful that Barrett, who is pro-life, could swing the court the other direction if the case comes in front of the court again.

They left the Supreme Court and began marching toward the Hart Senate Office Building when they briefly encountered a larger group of pro-life protesters who want Amy to “fill the seat.”

“No confirmation until inauguration!” the anti-Trump group chanted as they passed by the pro-life organizers. Most protesters in both groups were wearing masks, but neither was actively trying to keep six feet between themselves and others.

The group in favor of Barrett’s confirmation, which included many young adults, walked around the Hart Senate Office, and they congregated outside one of the entrances to the building. With protesters holding up Barrett versions of Shepard Fairey’s “Hope” poster of Barack Obama, and others waving signs reading, “I am the pro-life generation,” they chanted, “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Roe v. Wade has got to go!”

Barrett’s hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee will go on until Thursday. The senators on the committee and Barrett herself are set to testify on Monday, while lawmakers will then question her on Tuesday and Wednesday with outside witnesses both in her favor and against her speaking on Thursday.

Senate Republican leadership plan to get Barrett confirmed to the Supreme Court before Election Day.

‘In a category of excellence’: Graham praises Barrett and warns Democrats against Kavanaugh repeat

by Susan Ferrechio, Chief Congressional Correspondent | October 12, 2020 09:27 AM

Sen. Lindsey Graham opened the historic confirmation hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett by praising her as academically gifted and admired for integrity and by warning Democrats against repeating the process that dragged out the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Monday outlined the Senate schedule to usher Barrett through the confirmation process and advance her to the Supreme Court, likely before the Nov. 3 election.

Graham, a South Carolina Republican, described Barrett as “in a category of excellence” that should make the nation proud but warned that the confirmation will take place in an election year.

“My Democratic colleagues will say, ‘This has never been done,’” he said, countering, “The Senate is doing its duty, constitutionally,” even though no justice has been confirmed so close to an election.

Graham said there have been 19 justices confirmed in an election year, 17 of them when the White House and Senate parties were aligned.

Monday’s hearing will be composed of opening statements by senators and Barrett, who is now a court of appeals judge for the 7th Circuit, having been confirmed to that bench by the Senate in 2017. Senators will question Barrett on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Graham said the hearing is not about “persuading each other, unless something really dramatic happens,” but said it would give Democrats a chance to “dig deep into her philosophy” and serve the same purpose for the GOP.

“Most importantly, it gives you, the American people, the chance to find out about Judge Barrett,” Graham said. “Find out for yourself.”

Graham warned Democrats that Barrett “doesn’t deserve” the treatment of Kavanaugh, who was scrutinized in an additional hearing to air accusations by a former high school acquaintance who said he sexually assaulted her.

“Let’s remember — the world is watching,” Graham said.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

EXCLUSIVE: House Intel Committee Has Received All Docs On Trump Dossier From DOJ, FBI

Reported by Richard Pollock | Reporter | 5:04 PM 01/08/2018

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/08/exclusive-house-intel-information-has-received-all-docs-on-trump-dossier-from-doj-and-fb-i/

Rep. Devin Nunes Briefs Reporters At The White House On Intelligence Cmte Russia Investigation

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence members gained access to all Department of Justice and FBI documents it possesses on the Trump dossier, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

The committee was able to review Friday all FBI and DOJ documents on the Trump dossier, former MI-6 British agent Christopher Steele who authored the dossier, and Fusion GPS, the political opposition firm that hired Steele. DOJ also provided Obama administration applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which could approve the surveillance of the Trump transition team, according to a source with direct knowledge of the case.

The information could serve as a key breakthrough in the committee’s investigation of Steele, Fusion GPS and the Russians who influenced the dossiers’ contents.

The only exception to the release was an FBI one FD-302 document that FBI Director Christopher Wray showed only to Nunes. The document pertains to interviews of sources or suspects. The committee also will have access to interview key Justice Department and FBI officials later in January.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes announced on Jan. 3 that assistant Attorney General Rob Rosenstein approved committee access to documents pertaining to Steele, Fusion GPS and any applications for surveillance of Trump transition officials. The committee’s document request was re-issued in a Jan. 4 letter from Nunes to Rosenstein.

The Intelligence Committee is seeking a clear understanding of how the FBI and Obama’s Justice Department officials used the dossier, which Steele compiled from unknown Russian sources. The dossier contained unverified and disparaging charges about Trumps activities in Russia.

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid Fusion GPS for the dossier. The intelligence committee is also investigating whether the FBI or the Justice Department also agreed to pay Steele for his information, how they used the information and what steps, if any, they took to verify its content.

The documents additionally could provide insights into the Obama administration’s request to “unmask” or force the intelligence community to reveal the identity of Trump transition officials who were in contact with diplomats and foreign principals.

The Justice Department and the FBI have actively stonewalled Congress since 2017 over the Obama administration’s relationship to Fusion GPS, Steele and its use of the dossier to obtain a warrant before the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court, which can authorize surveillance on American citizens.

Nunes expressed frustration with the lack of any response to the requests for documents in a December letter to Rosenstein. “Unfortunately, DOJ/FBI’s intransigence with respect to the August 24 subpoenas is part of a broader pattern of behavior that can no longer be tolerated,” he wrote.

“As a result of the numerous delays and discrepancies that have hampered the process of subpoena compliance, the committee no longer credits the representations made by DOJ and/or the FBI regarding these matters,” Nunes told Rosenstein.

The information also could be used for a criminal investigation of Steele.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, said he believed Steele lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier, and he urged the department to investigate.

“I don’t take lightly making a referral for criminal investigation,” he said. “But, as I would with any credible evidence of a crime unearthed in the course of our investigations, I feel obliged to pass that information along to the Justice Department for appropriate review,” he said according to The New York Times.

TheDCNF contacted the White House for confirmation about the matter but has not yet received any response.

Follow Richard on Twitter

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Additional Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Thursday September 21, 2017

Category:

Political, Society

Tagged with:

The Star Witness On Sessions’ ‘Racism’ Has Deeply Troubled History

Authored by Kevin Daley / Legal Affairs Reporter / 01/10/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/10/the-star-witness-on-sessions-racism-has-deeply-troubled-history/

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), an advisor to U.S. President Elect Donald Trump, speaks to members of the Media in the lobby of Trump Tower in the Manhattan borough of New York City, New York November 17, 2016. REUTERS/Mike Segar/File Photo ∧

Thomas Figures, an assistant U.S. attorney whose accusations of racial bias torpedoed Sen. Jeff Sessions’ nomination to the federal bench in 1986, had a history of erratic and disturbed behavior, colleagues and estranged family say.

New sworn statements obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation given by former colleagues allege Figures, who died in 2015, was a paranoid figure who, among other things, believed “CBS Evening News” anchor Dan Rather was communicating with him through his television. An office loner with a flair for confrontation, Figures was later indicted by federal authorities for attempting to bribe a witness.

30 years later, his testimony continues to shape press coverage of Sessions’ nomination to serve as attorney general in the Trump administration.

The Star Witness

A Democrat who joined the U.S. attorney’s office during the Jimmy Carter administration, Figures was the first black man to serve as a federal prosecutor in Mobile, Ala. Though a stalwart of local Democratic politics — he was vice chair of the Mobile County Democratic Conference and his brother was a state senator — Figures chose to remain on the staff of the district’s new conservative U.S. attorney, one Jeff Sessions, following the election of former President Ronald Reagan. The pair worked together for five years.

Sessions and Figures would part ways, if only for a moment, in 1985. One year later, Sessions was preparing for the exchange of platitudes typical of a committee hearing for a district judgeship, when Figures scuttled his nomination with crippling allegations of racist sympathies.

Invited by Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to give testimony to his character, Figures alleged Sessions regularly called him “boy” in private and admonished him to watch his mouth around the office’s white employees. His allegations were not corroborated by any member of Sessions’ staff. He also falsely claimed that Sessions ordered him to close his investigation of the lynching of a young black man named Michael Donald. Democrats on the panel peppered Sessions with biting questions and comments in the ensuing days. (RELATED: Leading Democrats Liked Jeff Sessions Before They Hated Him)

“Mr. Sessions is a throwback to a shameful era, which I know both black and white Americans thought was in our past,” Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy said during the proceedings. “It is inconceivable to me that a person of this attitude is qualified to be a U.S. attorney, let alone a U.S. federal judge.”

Figures was one of two witnesses who expressed concerns about Sessions’ racial politics. The other witness, a civil rights attorney named J. Gerald Hebert, testified that Sessions had made disparaging remarks about the ACLU and the NAACP. He went on to tell the committee he did not believe Sessions to be a racist.

Sessions’ appointment floundered, and the White House withdrew the nomination on July 31.

A Paranoid Streak

Federal investigators and former colleagues say Figures routinely displayed a pattern of erratic and paranoid behavior.

TheDCNF exclusively obtained an affidavit Monday given by former FBI special agent John Brennan, who worked with Figures while he was a federal prosecutor, that claims Figures often made strange claims. In the sworn statement, Brennan says Figures once told him he believed CBS News anchor Dan Rather was signaling to him during his nightly news broadcasts, and relaying information he wanted Figures to use.

“Mr. Figures told me that CBS News anchor Dan Rather and other news anchors would glance off camera and were signaled when he was watching television,” Brennan’s affidavit reads. “Mr. Figures claimed that, once signaled, Mr. Rather, or the other news anchors, would speak directly to him from the television and tell him things they wanted him to do or would give him information they wanted him to have.”

On another occasion, Figures allegedly told Brennan he believed his home was bugged and asked him to execute a search of the house. The ensuing search did not turn up listening devices. In a related instance, Brennan says Figures told him he terminated a road trip from Mobile, Ala. to Dallas, Texas because he believed a truck with a satellite antennae was following him.

Brennan’s statements correspond to a second affidavit obtained by TheDCNF given by Cheryl Crisona, an assistant U.S. attorney who worked with Figures from 1981 to 1985. Crisona alleges Figures was confrontational with colleagues, and often made a secretary she shared with him cry. The affidavit mirrors claims Figures’ ex-wife Janice made during divorce proceedings in 1991. (RELATED: Democrats Face Uphill Battle Blocking Sessions)

Crisona says Figures was suspicious of group conversations in the office, for fear he was the subject of discussion. “He was very paranoid about any group in the office talking, always assuming that we were talking about him,” the affidavit reads. “In a nutshell, every one of us in that office was afraid of Thomas Figures,” she added.

Figures Indicted

Six years later in 1992, Figures was indicted by federal prosecutors for attempting to bribe a convicted drug dealer.

The kingpin, John Christopher, was preparing to take the stand against Figures’ client, Noble Beasley, who was accused of attempting to distribute 11 pounds of crack cocaine. A letter written by Christopher’s lawyer, Joseph Kulakowski, that was obtained by TheDCNF, claims Figures presented himself as Christopher’s lawyer in the docket room of a county jail and gained access to Christopher in a private meeting room. During that meeting, federal authorities alleged Figures offered Christopher $50,000 not to testify against his client.

At trial, when confronted with recordings of his meeting at the county jail, Figures testified that he was attempting to lure Christopher into a criminal scheme so he could report him for attempted bribery. He was acquitted of all charges, though Beasley would go on to serve a life sentence.

Figures has since died, further calcifying a legacy of strained race relations. Accounts of Figures’ testimony have appeared, without reference to his dubious credibility, on CNN and CBS broadcasts, as well as in print through the Associated Press, Vanity Fair, and The Daily Beast, among others.It is a matter of public record that Sessions supported the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, the Defense of Marriage Act, and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which invalidated key provisions of the Voting Rights Act. However, remarks Sessions is alleged to have made behind closed doors, while widely disseminated in media, appear to rest on increasingly untenable grounds.

Follow Kevin on Twitter

Send tips to kevin@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Harry Reid: Vote to Amend U.S. Constitution to Limit Political Speech

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/18/Harry-Reid-Vote-to-Amend-U-S-Constitution-to-Limit-Political-Speech

On May 15, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on June 3 on amending the U.S. Constitution to limit political speech. If ultimately adopted, it would mark the first time in American history that a constitutional amendment rescinded a freedom listed as among the fundamental rights of the American people.

The proposed amendment was introduced by Sen. Tom Udall (D-CO) as S.J.R. 19 and if ratified would become the Twenty-Eighth Amendment. It provides in part that “Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect [to] the Federal elections … [and] State elections.”

The proposed amendment includes a provision that “Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press.” So Breitbart News, The New York Times, and the mainstream media would be able to say whatever they want, but citizens and citizen groups such as the National Rifle Association could not.

The American people have amended the Constitution 27 times in the nation’s history. Ten of those happened in a single package when the states ratified the Bill of Rights, and another three occurred between 1865 and 1870 following the Civil War, forbidding slavery and racial discrimination.

Reid usually opposes amending the Constitution. In 2011, Reid voted against S.J.R. 10, a proposed constitutional amendment by Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee (R-UT) that would require the federal government to balance the federal budget. In 2004 Reid voted against S.J.R. 40 that would have protected marriage as the union of one man and one woman, which would not include same-sex partners or polygamous marriages of three or more people.

Only one amendment has modified a previous amendment. The Eighteenth Amendment was ratified in 1919 and empowered Congress to forbid alcohol nationwide. Then the Twenty-First Amendment was ratified in 1933 to repeal the Eighteenth Amendment and allow alcohol to flow once again.

But the right of Americans to fully engage in political speech is guaranteed by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. If S.J.R. 19 becomes part of the Constitution, it would be the first instance in which a right secured by a constitutional amendment was later scaled back.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) promises that the full Senate will vote on the measure later this year.

WATCH REPORT BELOW:

Breitbart News senior legal analyst Ken Klukowski is a fellow with the American Civil Rights Union. Follow him on Twitter @kenklukowski.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Senate Judiciary Committee’

By Emma Colton Fox News | Published June 18, 2025 2:35pm EDT

Share this:

By: Shawn Fleetwood | March 25, 2025

Share this:

BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | MARCH 12, 2024

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Share this:

By Max Eden Fox News | Published September 21, 2023 5:00am EDT

Max Eden is a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where he focuses on education reform, specifically K–12 and early childhood education.

Share this:

By Gabriel Hays Fox News | Published September 12, 2023 3:03pm EDT

Gabriel Hays is an associate editor for Fox News Digital.

Share this:

By Elizabeth Elkind | Fox News | Published June 21, 2023 2:31pm EDT

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital.

Share this:

By: CHRIS ENLOE | April 28, 2023

Democrat witnesses refuse to answer Kennedy: “Do you support abortion up to the moment of birth?”www.youtube.com

Share this:

Reported by SARAH TAYLOR | October 12, 2020

Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearing greeted by rival protests outside Supreme Court

‘In a category of excellence’: Graham praises Barrett and warns Democrats against Kavanaugh repeat

Share this:

Reported by Richard Pollock | Reporter | 5:04 PM 01/08/2018

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence members gained access to all Department of Justice and FBI documents it possesses on the Trump dossier, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

“As a result of the numerous delays and discrepancies that have hampered the process of subpoena compliance, the committee no longer credits the representations made by DOJ and/or the FBI regarding these matters,” Nunes told Rosenstein.

The information also could be used for a criminal investigation of Steele.

Share this:

Share this:

Authored by Kevin Daley / Legal Affairs Reporter / 01/10/2017

Thomas Figures, an assistant U.S. attorney whose accusations of racial bias torpedoed Sen. Jeff Sessions’ nomination to the federal bench in 1986, had a history of erratic and disturbed behavior, colleagues and estranged family say.

The Star Witness

A Paranoid Streak

Figures Indicted

Share this:

by Ken Klukowski 18 May 2014

Share this:

In His Service

Email Subscription

Recent Posts

Family

NEWS

Opinion

Personal

Political

Spiritual

Archives

Spam Blocked

Tag Cloud