RNC on Offense Over Twitter Election Tampering

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Tweets CEO Jack Dorsey The wheels are submiting the alleged Biden family shake-down emails. The Republican National Panel floated a story to Fox Information about its complaint regarding Twitter’s election tampering, and now the right is holding

Continue Reading RNC on Offense Over Twitter Election Tampering

On Election Night, Watch These Seven Key Counties

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here The East Coast polls will be the first to close on election night and are likely to signal how the contest shapes up for Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Donald J. Trump. Since the United States does not have a single national election, but rather 50 individual state contests, smaller

Continue Reading On Election Night, Watch These Seven Key Counties

Have Big Tech Giants Just Signed Their Own Death Warrants?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Whether the Hunter Biden email story is the gospel truth or a Republican-led October surprise matters not; what should concern all Americans is the ability to have unfettered access to the news to make independent, informed decisions. However, this liberty is diminishing with lightning speed. Everyone on the right has

Continue Reading Have Big Tech Giants Just Signed Their Own Death Warrants?

The Uprising Podcast: Roe v Barrett

Will she ban birth-control and abortion, or just one of those? Amy Coney Barrett undergoes her Senate trial. Scott D. Cosenza, Esq. Legal Affairs EditorScott D. Cosenza, Esq. is Legal Affairs Editor of LibertyNation.com. Scott writes extensively on legal issues and is the Policy Director for One Generation Away.

Continue Reading The Uprising Podcast: Roe v Barrett

Kamala Harris Quarantines After Staffers Catch COVID-19

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) announced that she would be below quarantine after finding out that 2 of her campaign staffers examined positive for the coronavirus . She and her running lover, former Vice President Joe Biden, have

Continue Reading Kamala Harris Quarantines After Staffers Catch COVID-19

The Media Rallies to Save Joe Biden from Burisma Email Scandal

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Emails that claim to show Hunter Biden introduced his father to a Burisma Holdings executive have been consigned to the digital memory hole. The electronic documents undercut Joe Biden’s statements that he had nothing to do with his son’s business dealings. From social media companies refusing to accept links to

Continue Reading The Media Rallies to Save Joe Biden from Burisma Email Scandal

Hunter Biden Emails Send Dad’s Campaign Into Panic Mode

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Democratic President candidate Joe Biden avoids responding to a lot of crucial questions. However , He might not make it to election day, Nov 3, without having to respond to a restored examination of his son’s involvement along with Burisma

Continue Reading Hunter Biden Emails Send Dad’s Campaign Into Panic Mode

Amy Coney Barrett – Calm, Cool, and Collected

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Pick a cliché: “Cool like a cucumber” or “She came to perform. ” And perhaps the idiom that will best fits the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings of Amy Coney Barrett is definitely “It’s all over but the shouting. ”

Continue Reading Amy Coney Barrett – Calm, Cool, and Collected

A Handmaid’s Hearing: Can Democrats Bork Amy Coney Barrett?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Will it be Justice Barrett? Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing to the Supreme Court begins on Columbus Day in the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee. We can expect four days of an attempt to convince the public that she is, alternately, a straight-laced appeals court judge and a radical religious zealot.

Continue Reading A Handmaid’s Hearing: Can Democrats Bork Amy Coney Barrett?

Kamala Harris Learns That History is Hard

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Our winsome woman of color and vice-presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket boldly declared during the veep debate that President Abraham Lincoln said sitting a Supreme Court Justice 27 days out from a presidential election was damn near sacrilege. Or in Sen. Kamala Harris’ own words: “In 1864… Abraham Lincoln

Continue Reading Kamala Harris Learns That History is Hard

Election 2020 – Policy or Personality – C5

Liberty Nation Staff We consider ourselves genuine patriots — the kind of people who get chills when fireworks go off on the Fourth of July, who reflexively stand up when the National Anthem is played and believe America is still the greatest nation on earth. And we believe this nation is filled with others like us

Continue Reading Election 2020 – Policy or Personality – C5

Is Joe Biden Capable of Leading a Fractured Nation?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Now that our betters in big corporate media have all but called the election for Joe Biden, we come face to face with a proposition all but dismissed just a few months ago: Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. as the leader of the free world. The key word in there is

Continue Reading Is Joe Biden Capable of Leading a Fractured Nation?

Pence v. Harris – Expecting a Civil Debate?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here After the obnoxious first presidential debate debacle starring narcissistic moderator Chris Wallace, with guest appearances by President Donald Trump and Joe Biden, hopes and dreams for civil discourse are now pinned on the looming vice-presidential showdown. In what is sure to set a much different tone, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA)

Continue Reading Pence v. Harris – Expecting a Civil Debate?

Michelle Obama: Blacks Cower in Fear in Trump’s Racially Hostile America

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Former first lady Michelle Obama plays the race card to the hilt in a stunningly harsh attack on President Donald Trump in a “closing argument” video appeal to voters released Oct. 6 in support of Democratic White House nominee Joe Biden. In the highly combative video, Obama directly asked undecided voters to

Continue Reading Michelle Obama: Blacks Cower in Fear in Trump’s Racially Hostile America

Waiting for Amy? SCOTUS Starts New Term

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here The first Monday in October is the traditional start day for the new Supreme Court term, and so it was for 2020. Sitting for the first time since 1993 without Ruth Bader Ginsburg and via telephone, the eight-member Court heard two cases and issued numerous orders. The Senate Committee on the Judiciary announced the same day it had scheduled hearings Oct. 12-15 on the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Kim Davis Thomas Dissents on Gay Marriage – Again Before the Court started its virtual hearing, it issued several orders in other cases, including one involving Kim Davis, the infamous county clerk in Kentucky who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples based on her stated religious objection. This defied a Supreme Court ruling holding, they were entitled to marry based on a newly found constitutional right. She was sued by two couples denied marriage licenses who claim she had violated their constitutional right to marry. Davis argued she had qualified immunity from the suits. The district court denied her motion for qualified immunity, and the 6th Circuit upheld that decision. She then applied to the Supreme Court to hear her appeal, and it was refused. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito put out a blistering dissent from the denial of certiorari, slamming the Court’s 2015 majority ruling on gay marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Thomas wrote: “It would be one thing if recognition for same-sex marriage had been debated and adopted through the democratic process, with the people deciding not to provide statutory protections for religious liberty under state law. But it is quite another when the Court forces that choice upon society through its creation of atextual constitutional rights and its ungenerous interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause, leaving those with religious objections in the lurch.” Thomas went on to say the gay marriage ruling “enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.” The Court then heard arguments in two cases: whether Delaware may continue to discriminate against judicial candidates based on political party affiliation and a dispute between Texas and New Mexico regarding water rights. Tie Goes to the Runner The problem with having an even number of justices is the potential for a tie. As in a sporting contest, judicial ties satisfy no one, clarify nothing, and amount to a big fat waste of time and money for everyone involved. The principal way cases come to be argued at the Supreme Court is through its appellate jurisdiction, which often resolves a split in the circuits. This happens if two (or more) of the countries’ 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals rule differently on the same issue. One circuit court may decide a firearm waiting period is unconstitutional, while another holds a similar law is perfectly legal. Such widely disparate outcomes, based on federally guaranteed rights, presents an untenable situation. That explains why the Supreme Court hurries to rule on splits in the circuits and it’s best to have an odd number of justices. If there is a tie vote on the outcome of a case at the Supreme Court, the lower court ruling stands, allowing for a continued split in the Circuits and Americans living under two different sets of laws. Given that so many hot-button issues have recently been decided by 5-4 votes, the potential for instability is great with an even number of justices. There are ten cases calendared this term before Barrett’s examination concludes in the Senate. If she is confirmed, it remains to be seen whether she would rule on those cases or not. The Constitution is remarkably brief in its instructions on the Supreme Court, with none that might be helpful here. So the institution must turn to itself and quietly deliberate. ~ Read more from Scott D. Cosenza.

Continue Reading Waiting for Amy? SCOTUS Starts New Term

Biden Ahead 14 Percent and Other Fine Myths

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here It seems antithetical to publish a survey that does not reflect reality. One might wonder why an organization would want to circulate a sloppy and misleading poll with its name in bold print at the top. The recently released NBC News-Wall Street Journal public opinion study is a textbook case of a national survey that is more of a hot mess than an indication of the election to come. The Fourteen-Point Myth Conducted by Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies, this poll (and we use the term loosely) caused NBC News to publish a headline bellowing that former Vice President Joe Biden is 14 points ahead of incumbent President Donald Trump. So, what is the problem here? How about everything. This examination of the American public included 800 registered voters. Yes, a whopping 800 registered voters. Forget the mini sample size for a second and look at the type of voter questioned. There is quite a difference between registered voters and likely voters. Loads of people are registered, but when you conduct a survey, you want to talk to people who say they are likely to vote or have cast a ballot sometime in this century. After the 2016 election, SurveyMonkey reported that Democratic-leaning registered voters who stayed home cost Hillary Clinton the election. The bottom line here is that the gold standard in polling is to query “likely,” not registered, voters. The number of partisans sampled is another indication of whether you are looking at a poll that is worth its salt or one that should be flattened on the floor to paper-train a puppy. In general, a thoughtful pollster wants the quantity of Democrats and Republicans questioned to reflect an accurate portrait of the electorate. According to a May 2020 study by the Gallup organization, 40% of Americans say they are Independent, 31% identify as Democrat, and 25% as Republican. It seems that 40% for Independents is a typo – but it is not. Causing further confusion in the party-affiliation equation is that 22 states do not require or permit registered voters to designate political party preference. Thus, it can be a challenge to figure out how many Democrats versus Republicans voted in the last election. This NBC/WSJ survey questioned 45% who identify or lean Democratic and 36% who identify or lean Republican, and 13% who claim they are Independent. We can be sure that a 45%-36% Democrat/Republican split almost certainly did not occur in 2016. So how does this accurately reflect likely voters? It does not. Then there is question number 12: “And, did the presidential debate make you more likely to support Donald Trump, more likely to support Joe Biden, or did it not make a difference in how you are going to vote?” The results are quite fascinating – not because 19% said they were more likely to support Biden versus 6% for Trump but because three out of four previous trends in this tab got it wrong. So, for 2016, its trends showed Hillary Clinton swayed 31% and Trump 14%. For 2012, its poll reported Mitt Romney at 27% and Barack Obama at 24%. In 2004, John Kerry came in at 33% and George W. Bush at 17%. It’s a textbook on how to get it wrong every time. In the article announcing this national survey, NBC quotes its pollster Jeff Horwitt of Hart Research Associates as saying, “The clear loser from the debate was Donald Trump.” That may very well depend upon which poll you cite, but the clear loser of this NBC/WSJ survey is not President Trump – but rather pollster Horwitt. Myths and legends such as these have a way of metastasizing into the public consciousness. Educated voters should steer clear of the fairy tales or at least be aware that what they are reading is not an accurate portrait of the American electorate. ~ Read more from Leesa K. Donner.

Continue Reading Biden Ahead 14 Percent and Other Fine Myths

Update on President Trump’s Condition – 10/03/20 11:40 AM

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here At 11:40 AM on Saturday, October 3, White House physician Sean Conley provided an update on President Trump’s condition. On Friday, Mr. Trump revealed that he and the first lady had tested positive for COVID-19. Out of what the White House described as “an abundance of caution,” the president later departed the White House for Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, MD, where he is expected to remain for several days. A team of physicians from Walter Reed accompanied Dr. Conley at the briefing. The doctor said the team was “extremely happy with the progress the president has made.” The president had a cough and also a fever Thursday into Friday but, according to Conley, has been fever-free for more than 24 hours. Mr. Trump has not needed supplemental oxygen – a fact that appeared to disappoint members of the media who were present at the briefing. Seemingly to his amusement, Dr. Conley was asked several times if the president was, or had been, receiving oxygen. Conley said that Trump was walking around, working, and was having no difficulty breathing. Earlier today, the president was apparently in good spirits and told the medical team: “I feel like I could walk out of here today.” First Lady Melania Trump is still at the White House and is said to be coping well with mild symptoms. No definite timeline was given, regarding the president’s discharge. Due to the treatment he is receiving, the president could remain at Walter Reed for up to five more days, though Conley would not say for sure.

Continue Reading Update on President Trump’s Condition – 10/03/20 11:40 AM

Why Trump Country Should Not Panic

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here It is easy to get rattled in this bizarre and peculiar year. Even the most stalwart among us may be reeling from all that has happened in 2020. However, news that President Trump and the first lady have tested positive for COVID-19 has taken the drama of this annus horribilis to a new level and sent tremors through the heart of Trump Country. In a video posted on Twitter last evening, Mr. Trump looked well and said he “thinks he’s doing very well” but was heading to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center as a precautionary measure. Aides say the president has experienced mild symptoms and thus far Mr. Trump has been given two therapies to combat the virus. White House Physician Sean Conley said Trump initially received an eight-gram infusion of a “monoclonal antibody.” What this does is help the body fight the coronavirus better and faster. Called REGN-COV2, the drug is in the end stages of a clinical trial and not yet available for public use. There are other therapies available to the president at Walter Reed the latest report is that Mr. Trump has now begun a course of the popular antiviral, remdesivir. Medical experts say  Mr. Trump has a better than 95% chance of recovery and the first lady, because of her age, has a 99% recovery rate. There will be a lot of crazy speculation about Trump’s health but those are the facts, as they currently stand. Now that the initial shock of Trump’s diagnosis is over, and he is undergoing medical care and highly likely to recover, perhaps a peek at the political situation is in order. Again much like wild reports about the president’s health, we would do well to evaluate the political side of things with less emotion and more logic. The New York Times for instance has floated a trial balloon that the president remove himself from the ballot. While the left is spending every waking hour dreaming up plans for the president to exit the political stage, there are grounds for optimism among his base in this tumultuous time leading up to what many have asserted is “the most important election of our lifetime.” Reason 1: Leftist Schadenfreude Does anyone believe for a nano-second the left won’t overplay its hand with a tsunami of “I told you so”s and publicly delight in the fact that the president and his wife have contracted the Coronavirus? They will be dripping with a textbook case of schadenfreude, id est, deriving pleasure from another’s misfortune. The left-wing media, which primarily serves as a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, will publish thousands of column inches revealing its joy – and amusement – over Trump contracting COVID. Just about an hour after the president’s announcement that he and his wife tested positive for the Chinese virus, one legacy newspaper put out this tweet – which it later deleted, but not before journalist Andy Ngô obtained a screenshot: WaPo has deleted this tweet, which was sent out about an hour after Trump announced to the world he and the First Lady’s positive COVID-19 test. pic.twitter.com/GG2XjDTmW5 — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) October 2, 2020 Obviously, some wise people at The Washington Post thought better of that post and may even comprehend that taking pleasure in another’s misfortune does not make for a winning strategy with the American people. The electorate usually finds this sort of behavior distasteful, and history has proven time and again that the people of the United States love to root for the underdog. Therefore, it is entirely possible – even probable — that the left will be incapable of hiding their glee, and there will be blowback, which could very well turn into additional support for Mr. Trump. Reason 2: Warriors Prevail President Trump has always self-styled as a warrior – a fighter who does not give up. Should the president come out on the other side of this virus rather quickly and with few symptoms, it will signal strength, not weakness. Indeed, should he be able to take the stage for the second debate, it will illustrate his moxie. Rugged toughness is not only admired by Americans but is often rewarded. Overcoming this adversity could very well put the president in the cat-bird seat over a challenger that appears on the fringes of cognitive decline, cadaver-like, and shivering just beneath the surface of a mask. A Trump triumph over COVID would be an empowering optic for the citizenry on the cusp of the election because it would draw a clear distinction from the Biden Campaign, which has worked overtime to instill fear and trembling in the American public. Assuming the president’s condition does not degrade and he recovers, his victory over a potentially deadly virus will likely be heralded. This visual would certainly demonstrate virility. While a rapid recovery is not a certainty at this stage, it is a possibility that cannot and should not be overlooked. Reason 3: The Undecided Voter There are conflicting views regarding those who remain undecided in this election. If we look at the Rasmussen White House Watch Poll – a head to head Biden-Trump matchup – the most significant percentage of undecideds was 6% back in July. For the most part, those who say they don’t know who they will vote for has hovered between three and four percent. Are these people genuinely ambivalent, or are they part of the silent Trump voter contingent? The secret voter is not a new phenomenon, but it came into play in 2016 and is likely to tip the scales again in 2020. This is primarily due to widespread political polarization and the radical left calling Trump supporters every derogatory name in the book. It’s unlikely the president contracting COVID-19 will move the silent voter to switch to Camp Biden – especially if he recovers before election day. Of course, Trump strategists will need to be on their toes in this last month before the election. They must find new ways to get their candidate in front of the American public and re-imagine their campaign. But if President Trump has proven anything in the last four years, it is that he is a pugilist of the first order who often performs best when he’s down and certainly should never be counted out until the final bell rings. ~ Read more from Leesa K. Donner.

Continue Reading Why Trump Country Should Not Panic

Trump Has COVID-19, But Social Media Leftists Are The Sick Ones

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Shortly after midnight on Thursday, October 1, President Trump revealed that he and his wife, First Lady Melania, had tested positive for Coronavirus. News of his diagnosis comes amid a nationwide debate over the White House’s handling of the outbreak. After the president informed the public about his condition, people from both sides of the political divide wished him well. Bette Midler in Hocus Pocus Along with the thoughts and prayers, though, there was no shortage of gloating from many on the far left. To these folks, Trump’s diagnosis was a call for celebration rather than a demonstration of human decency. Celebrating Trump’s Coronavirus Diagnosis Several high-profile leftists took to social media to express their glee at the president’s condition, some even going as far as hoping for his death. While some of these individuals were mere activists, others have served in government or are seeking office. Zara Rahim, a former Obama White House staffer and former national spokeswoman for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, lashed out at Trump. “It’s been against my moral identity to tweet this for the past four years, but, I hope he dies,” she tweeted. She later deleted the post, but journalist Piers Morgan tweeted a screenshot taken before she removed it. Washed-up singer Bette Midler also delighted in Trump’s diagnosis, tweeting: “Gee, woke up this morning to learn Donald and Melania have tested positive for Covid-19.  How can a HOAX infect anyone? That’s a new one on me. I’m sure he’s taking the Clorox cocktail, but it’s so unpleasant. Thoughts and prayers.” Rep. Rashida Tlaib jumped on the opportunity to use Trump’s condition to attack him politically. “He still won’t wear a mask,” she tweeted. “He only cares about himself and his life, NOT those around him or the people he took an oath to protect. Too many lives lost because of his deadly lies.” Self-proclaimed Civil Rights activist Danielle Muscato also classed up the joint with a comment celebrating the story. She tweeted: “I’m not one to laugh at other people’s suffering, but…. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Burn in hell you mother f*cker” These are only a few of the vile expressions coming from leftists who are relishing the fact that the president of the United States tested positive for the virus. One user compiled an entire thread with screenshots of tweets expressing similar sentiments. Are We Surprised? To anyone who has been following politics for the last four years, this behavior is no surprise. While most people on both sides wouldn’t dream of rejoicing over the president’s situation, there are always far too many on the fringes who are more than willing to soil the nation’s political discourse with their unhinged rancor. Not only is it bad enough that these people use their voices to spread hate and nastiness, but they are also typically the ones given the microphone, which only amplifies the animosity. However, it seems likely that these folks are the ones who will be disappointed when the president recovers. Moreover, there can be no doubt that their conduct might backfire, causing moderates who may have considered supporting Biden and other Democrats to reconsider. Either way, it shows that America has a long way to go before it can heal the divide that has formed in our culture. ~ Read more from Jeff Charles.

Continue Reading Trump Has COVID-19, But Social Media Leftists Are The Sick Ones

Trump Has COVID-19, But Social Media Leftists Are The Sick Ones

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Shortly after midnight on Thursday, October 1, President Trump revealed that he and his wife, First Lady Melania, had tested positive for Coronavirus. News of his diagnosis comes amid a nationwide debate over the White House’s handling of the outbreak. After the president informed the public about his condition, people from both sides of the political divide wished him well. Bette Midler in Hocus Pocus Along with the thoughts and prayers, though, there was no shortage of gloating from many on the far left. To these folks, Trump’s diagnosis was a call for celebration rather than a demonstration of human decency. Celebrating Trump’s Coronavirus Diagnosis Several high-profile leftists took to social media to express their glee at the president’s condition, some even going as far as hoping for his death. While some of these individuals were mere activists, others have served in government or are seeking office. Zara Rahim, a former Obama White House staffer and former national spokeswoman for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, lashed out at Trump. “It’s been against my moral identity to tweet this for the past four years, but, I hope he dies,” she tweeted. She later deleted the post, but journalist Piers Morgan tweeted a screenshot taken before she removed it. Washed-up singer Bette Midler also delighted in Trump’s diagnosis, tweeting: “Gee, woke up this morning to learn Donald and Melania have tested positive for Covid-19.  How can a HOAX infect anyone? That’s a new one on me. I’m sure he’s taking the Clorox cocktail, but it’s so unpleasant. Thoughts and prayers.” Rep. Rashida Tlaib jumped on the opportunity to use Trump’s condition to attack him politically. “He still won’t wear a mask,” she tweeted. “He only cares about himself and his life, NOT those around him or the people he took an oath to protect. Too many lives lost because of his deadly lies.” Self-proclaimed Civil Rights activist Danielle Muscato also classed up the joint with a comment celebrating the story. She tweeted: “I’m not one to laugh at other people’s suffering, but…. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Burn in hell you mother f*cker” These are only a few of the vile expressions coming from leftists who are relishing the fact that the president of the United States tested positive for the virus. One user compiled an entire thread with screenshots of tweets expressing similar sentiments. Are We Surprised? To anyone who has been following politics for the last four years, this behavior is no surprise. While most people on both sides wouldn’t dream of rejoicing over the president’s situation, there are always far too many on the fringes who are more than willing to soil the nation’s political discourse with their unhinged rancor. Not only is it bad enough that these people use their voices to spread hate and nastiness, but they are also typically the ones given the microphone, which only amplifies the animosity. However, it seems likely that these folks are the ones who will be disappointed when the president recovers. Moreover, there can be no doubt that their conduct might backfire, causing moderates who may have considered supporting Biden and other Democrats to reconsider. Either way, it shows that America has a long way to go before it can heal the divide that has formed in our culture. ~ Read more from Jeff Charles.

Continue Reading Trump Has COVID-19, But Social Media Leftists Are The Sick Ones

Debate: Trump Wins on Issues as Wallace Torches Own Reputation

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Once things transitioned from temperamental bickering to substantive discussion, President Trump had an easy walk in the first 2020 presidential debate in Cleveland on Sept. 29. And all the blatant efforts to aid Democratic challenger Joe Biden made by his unofficial cornerman Chris Wallace failed to stem the incumbent’s momentum. The Fox News host and allegedly impartial debate moderator repeatedly attempted to rescue Biden just as the candidate was noticeably struggling. One moment stands out as the most crucial exchange of the evening and it alone is enough for the president to claim victory in this first showdown between the two contenders. When Wallace tried to equate the rioting and street violence that has plagued American cities since the death of George Floyd in late May with an alleged “white supremacist” threat, Trump deftly turned the conversation to Antifa. Biden then proceeded to carry water for the destructive leftist revolutionary group, calling it “an idea not an organization.” It was a devastating mistake and his media protector sensed it immediately. “We’re done, sir,” Wallace instantly pronounced, shutting down conversation on the topic as Trump eagerly prepared to pounce on Biden’s major misstep. But the damage had been done. Biden had put the exclamation point on a disastrous law and order segment and Wallace had revealed the sheer audacity of his flagrant bias. In one fell blow, Trump had scored big against both of his opponents. Rocky Start All Around The night did not start out as promising for Trump. In what must have been a deliberate move aimed at confusing the 77-year-old Biden, the president repeatedly interrupted and chirped throughout the opening 40 minutes. It was a questionable strategy in that it served to help Biden dodge issues. Instead of letting the Democratic standard-bearer talk and forcing him to make meaningful arguments before the American people, something he has struggled to do thus far in the race, Trump kept cutting in and allowing Biden to stop and regroup. But if Trump intended to anger Biden, he succeeded. The former vice president snapped off a couple of nasty remarks at the sitting president. “Folks, do you have any idea what this clown is doing?” he asked at one point. “Will you shut up, man?” was another riposte. That said, it was a frustrating first half, high on belligerence but severely lacking in weightiness. That all changed when the subject turned to the Coronavirus. Democrats see this as a winning issue, but Trump shined by spotlighting the disastrous effects of harsh lockdowns in blue states that he said were harming the economy and causing severe distress to citizens. “It’s almost like being in prison,” Trump said of the unprecedented social curbs on the personal freedoms of Americans in the name of health that are being most enthusiastically pursued in states with Democratic governors such as Michigan and New York. “You look at what’s going on with divorce. Look at what’s going on with alcoholism and drugs. It’s a very, very sad thing. And he’ll close down the whole country … We don’t need somebody to come in and say, ‘let’s shut it down.'” It is a framing that tens of millions of Americans can relate to. Rather than addressing this powerful imagery, Biden weakly responded that “millionaires and billionaires like [Trump] in the COVID crisis have done very well,” totally ignoring the personal pain regular people are experiencing in their everyday lives from the punitive lockdowns. This marked the first real drawing of blood in the debate, and the clear winner was Trump. Three more decisive victories were to follow. Second-Half Blowout A law and order discussion proved dominant for the president. After painting a bleak picture of the chaos in Democrat-led cities from rioting and looting in the name of “social justice,” Trump touted the backing he is receiving from police officials across the nation. “Name one [law enforcement] group that supports you,” Trump tauntingly challenged his opponent. “Go ahead, think, we have time.” As a tongue-tied Biden struggled to respond, Wallace dove in to push him off the ropes. “I think, gentlemen, I’m gonna take back the moderator’s role, and I want to get to another subject,” the faux newsman hurriedly interjected. It was an unprofessional act even by the expected standards of bias inherent in establishment media organs today. Sadly, it was the norm for the evening rather than the exception. Biden’s significant error in defending Antifa came soon after, with Wallace once again scurrying to change the subject. Trump was in top form by this point, however, and kept connecting on his punches despite Wallace’s unceasing efforts to find comfortable ground for Biden. When the Democrat tried to tout his late son Beau’s military service as part of a larger attack against Trump over spurious and anonymously sourced accusations that the president had labeled U.S. soldiers as “losers,” a razor-sharp Trump quickly turned the tables by bringing up scandal-plagued Biden son Hunter. “I don’t know Beau. I know Hunter,” Trump tartly stated. “Hunter got thrown out of the military, he was thrown out, dishonorably discharged, for cocaine use.” “That’s not true … none of that is true,” a flustered Biden replied. But it is mostly true. He was discharged in an “other than honorable” way for his cocaine use. As Trump was poised to further his advantage by bringing up Hunter Biden’s controversial financial dealings with Ukrainian energy company Burisma, Wallace again stepped in to cut him off. “I think the American people would rather hear about more substantial subjects,” Wallace decreed. “Well, you know, as a moderator, sir, I’m gonna make a judgment call here,” he then told the president. “You know, I’d like to talk about climate change.” “So would I,” Biden unsurprisingly agreed. Amazingly, the official presidential debate moderator not only helped the Democratic candidate avoid an exceedingly tough topic, he moved him onto a key partisan talking point as well. The bias was simply breathtaking. Yet here again Biden imploded. Trump was unflappable, and eventually managed to maneuver Biden, who has been desperately trying to pivot away from the progressive stridency of his party’s primary process, into disavowing the Green New Deal that is sacred policy among the left-leaning Democrats that his campaign will need to turn out in droves on Nov. 3. “The Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward,” Biden began. He then confusedly backed away from this agenda. “No, I don’t support the Green New Deal,” he proclaimed. “I support the Biden plan that I put forward … which is different than what he [Trump] calls the radical Green New Deal.” This, of course, is a direct contradiction of his statements during the Democratic primary race. In fact, Biden’s official campaign website at this very moment specifically touts his support for the progressive plan. “Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face,” his campaign declares. Lest he had any remaining shreds of professional reputation still left, Wallace allowed himself one last moment to immolate them during this last portion of the debate. “I can’t remember which of all his rantings it was,” Biden mockingly said of Trump’s final question to him. “I’m having a little trouble myself,” Wallace cackled. It was the capstone on a display of journalistic malpractice. But the bigger takeaway for the night was that when Trump backed away from the early needling and honed in on serious issues, he seriously dinged Biden time and again. That he did so even on the Coronavirus bell cow that Democrats are banking on to help win the election bodes very well for his campaign over the next month. ~ Read more from Joe Schaeffer. Get Your Top Election Coverage Right Here On Liberty Nation [embedded content]

Continue Reading Debate: Trump Wins on Issues as Wallace Torches Own Reputation

Trump Weekly Report: Just The Facts – 09.27.20

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Editor’s Note: Everyone’s got an opinion, but who has the facts? At LibertyNation.com, we like to say, “Truth is Making a Comeback because Facts Matter.” Each week, we cut through the noise to bring you some of the lesser-reported highlights of the president’s week. Monday, September 21President Trump traveled to Dayton, OH, where he delivered remarks on “Fighting for the American Worker” at Dayton International Airport. Afterward, Mr. Trump hosted a Great American Comeback Event at the Toledo Express Airport in Swanton, OH. Trump also announced new sanctions on Iran, enforced by Executive Order. In part, a statement from the president read: “My actions today send a clear message to the Iranian regime and those in the international community who refuse to stand up to Iran. The United States will not allow the Iranian regime to further advance capabilities to directly threaten and terrorize the rest of the world.” Tuesday, September 22Mr. Trump held another Great American Comeback Event at Pittsburgh International Airport in Pennsylvania. The president also delivered a pre-recorded address to the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly. His speech was critical of China’s actions in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as that country’s conduct concerning several other issues, including pollution. In concluding his address, Mr. Trump told the UNGA: “For decades, the same tired voices proposed the same failed solutions, pursuing global ambitions at the expense of their own people. But only when you take care of your own citizens will you find a true basis for cooperation. As President, I have rejected the failed approaches of the past, and I am proudly putting America first, just as you should be putting your countries first. That’s okay — that’s what you should be doing.” Wednesday, September 23The president delivered remarks from the East Room of the White House in honor of Bay of Pigs veterans. Later, he spoke with State Attorneys General on the subject of protecting consumers from social media abuses. During an evening press briefing, the president was asked about the Breonna Taylor killing in Kentucky. In response, Mr. Trump quoted a statement by the state’s attorney general: “Justice is not — justice is not often easy.  It does not fit the mold of public opinion and it does not conform to shifting standards. It answers only to the facts and to the law. If we simply act on emotion or outrage there is no justice. Mob justice is not justice.  Justice sought by violence is not justice – it just becomes revenge.” Thursday, September 24President Trump and the first lady went to the United States Supreme Court to pay their respects to the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Later, Mr. Trump traveled to Florida, where he hosted a Great American Comeback Event at Cecil Airport in Jacksonville. Friday, September 25On Friday morning, the president hosted a Latinos for Trump Roundtable in Doral, FL. In the evening, he was back in Washington, D.C., where he hosted a roundtable with supporters at Trump International Hotel. Later, Mr. Trump participated in a Great American Comeback Event at the Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport in Virginia.

Continue Reading Trump Weekly Report: Just The Facts – 09.27.20

Petrified Dems and Debates – C5

Will Joe Biden gaffe spectacularly or fizzle out? Will Trump score the decisive debate victory he needs? Liberty Nation Staff We consider ourselves genuine patriots — the kind of people who get chills when fireworks go off on the Fourth of July, who reflexively stand up when the National Anthem is played and believe America is still the greatest nation on earth. And we believe this nation is filled with others like us who have not been afforded the opportunity to be heard.

Continue Reading Petrified Dems and Debates – C5

2020 Election Battleground: Georgia

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here While Georgia has been a reliably red state since 1996, its 16 electoral votes make it a prize the Democrats would dearly love to turn blue. In terms of how residents of the state have voted in federal elections, though, it is hard to discern a Republican to Democrat trend. Georgians have not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1992, they have not elected a Democratic governor since 1998, and they haven’t sent a Democrat to the Senate since 2000. Republicans also command majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. From 2002, the state had 13 congressional districts; either five or six of those were represented by Republicans over the period of a decade. Georgia gained a 14th district in 2012 and had six Democratic representatives. Currently, the state has four Democratic and nine Republican seats in the U.S. House, with one vacancy. In 2016, President Donald Trump carried the state by a margin of almost six percentage points. Whether he or his Democrat challenger will carry Georgia in November is not an easy prediction, if one believes the polls. As of Sept. 22, the Real Clear Politics average of polls gives Trump a one-point lead over Joe Biden, and the latter’s campaign is targeting the state with a major ad buy. Senate Races David Perdue One of Georgia’s two Republican senators, David Perdue, is up for re-election in November, in line with the regular congressional schedule. However, Sen. Kelly Loeffler was appointed by Gov. Brian Kemp to fill the Senate seat vacated by the retiring Johnny Isakson in 2019. That means Loeffler will also be fighting for her seat in a special election. Perdue’s challenger is Democrat Jon Ossoff, who became famous for losing the most expensive congressional race in history in a 2017 special election. Perdue currently leads Ossoff in almost every poll by a margin of between two and seven points. Loeffler faces a far less straightforward race. In what is generally known as a “jungle primary,” multiple candidates from the same party will challenge the appointed incumbent. In all, 21 candidates qualified to contest Loeffler’s seat, including five other Republicans, eight Democrats, and five Independents, along with one Libertarian and one Green Party candidate. Among the challengers are Representative Doug Collins (R-GA), who currently represents the state’s 9th district, and former Senator Joe Lieberman’s son, Matt, a Democrat. House Races Georgia’s 5th congressional district, formerly represented by John Lewis (D), will be contested in a Sept. 29 special election – and is a safe Democrat seat. The 6th and 7th districts, currently represented by Democrat Lucy McBath and Republican Rob Woodall, respectively, are the only Georgia districts considered less than safe for the party now controlling them. If Georgia were to turn blue, future Republican presidential candidates would find that winning the Electoral College becomes a lot more challenging. It is why Democrats have been working hard, for several years, to swing the state in their favor – along with Texas and North Carolina. The trends mentioned earlier, though, do not indicate a significant red-to-blue switch among the state’s electorate. Like many other states, Georgia is mostly red or deep red everywhere outside the larger metropolitan areas. ~ Read more from Graham J. Noble.

Continue Reading 2020 Election Battleground: Georgia

Trump’s New Executive Order: Critical Race Theory Out

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here President Trump has issued an Executive Order banning all training based on Critical Race Theory (CRT) for those who work with the federal government, labeling such ideas as “destructive.” This follows soon after a presidential memo sought to bar these practices from government agencies. Although CRT is not mentioned by name, the implications are clear: no more race division at the taxpayers’ expense. As is his wont, the president announced the new order via his preferred channel, tweeting: “A few weeks ago, I BANNED efforts to indoctrinate government employees with divisive and harmful sex and race-based ideologies. Today, I’ve expanded that ban to people and companies that do business … with our Country, the United States Military, Government Contractors, and Grantees. Americans should be taught to take PRIDE in our Great Country, and if you don’t, there’s nothing in it for you!” The news will be seen as an escalation of hostilities by those committed to the intersectional agenda, and they may be right. Not only has this undercut CRT’s unassailable bastion in federal agencies, it also veers into the realms of those who seek to work or contract for the federal government. Legal Ramifications The president also made a case that such “training” undermines existing statutes: “Our Federal civil service system is based on merit principles. These principles, codified at 5 U.S.C. 2301, call for all employees to ‘receive fair and equitable treatment in all aspects of personnel management without regard to’ race or sex ‘and with proper regard for their . . . constitutional rights.’ Instructing Federal employees that treating individuals on the basis of individual merit is racist or sexist directly undermines our Merit System Principles and impairs the efficiency of the Federal service.” What of those who work in the private sector? Are they to be left to fend for themselves? Apparently not. The Executive Order instructs the Attorney General to assess whether such training courses may contribute to a “hostile work environment,” and if so, would it “give rise to potential liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.” But it is for contractors who plan to continue working with the government that the most heavyweight directions come into play: “The contractor shall not use any workplace training that inculcates in its employees any form of race or sex stereotyping or any form of race or sex scapegoating.” What this means in practice is that there will be no more disparaging of people based upon their color or sex and that to insist otherwise through any form of Critical Race Theory training would be tantamount to a form of racism or sexism itself. Timing, Timing, Timing Critically, President Trump’s announcement comes in the run-up to the 2020 election. For those of his supporters who may be wavering, this is a diet of pure red meat designed to bring them back into the fold. The president has presented this as a battle for the soul of America, and he may well be right. The order states that all institutions impacted must fall into line and report within 90 days, yet another clear message aimed to show the undecided voter that this battle is only won with Trump’s re-election. His framing of the argument is that this will be a boon for equality and that individuals shall no longer be judged negatively by the color of their skin or their sex. It would take a brave opposition to try and fight that position. ~ Read more from Mark Angelides.

Continue Reading Trump’s New Executive Order: Critical Race Theory Out

Romney All In on SCOTUS Vote

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Like crazed mathematicians, people and pundits have been puzzling over whether the Republican-led Senate can get a potential associate justice voted in before the political winds change. With a 53-seat majority, the GOP has been sweating bullets that certain members may not fully back the swift nomination process. One such worry has been over former presidential candidate and Utah Senator Mitt Romney. But no more. In a statement that must have quelled the fast-beating hearts of the Republican leadership, Romney wrote: “I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.” This by no means signals that he will cast his vote in favor of President Donald Trump’s soon-to-be-announced pick, but it signifies that, absent any great scandals or issues with jurisprudence, a smart choice by the president will be confirmed by the Senate. Romney continued: “[The] historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.” Perhaps waxing a little more eloquently than we are used to, Romney said that his decision was “not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent.” The Hold-Outs The senators who have so far refused to accept the possibility of voting are Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Both have indicated that they don’t believe a vacancy this close to an election should be acted upon. Whether they will be won over by the eventual candidate and change their tune remains to be seen. Other notables in the “undecided” camp, Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Colorado’s Cory Gardner, are now off the fence and willing to support a vote. Monday night (Sept. 21), Gardner said: “When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent. I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm.” And Miracles? Even if Murkowski and Collins decide to not vote or vote against the candidate, that still leaves a majority for the GOP. Should the party lose one more senator, it would fall to Vice President Mike Pence to cast the deciding ballot. But what of Democrat support? If it seems likely that the nomination will go though, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that a Democrat or two might jump ship and cast a positive vote. The fact that Trump’s shortlist is heavily stacked with females, and females of color no less, could provide good optics for a senator looking to boost credentials. It seems that this has moved beyond the stage of “could it happen” to a question of what date and how many votes. ~ Read more from Mark Angelides.

Continue Reading Romney All In on SCOTUS Vote

American Politics is About to Go Nuclear

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Practically speaking, politics in America has never been for the faint of heart, but since Donald J. Trump ascended to the White House, civility has substantially degraded. With the passing of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it appears a partisan battle royale is shaping up and about to get ugly posthaste. All weekend the political chatter has highlighted the “special friendship” between Ginsburg and the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Unfortunately, this appears to be nothing more than lip service to the good old days, and it is highly unlikely Democrats and Republicans will be ready to break bread together any time soon. Each side carries a particular revilement for the other, including castigating their opponents with invectives, rebukes, and downright lies. However, with the delicate balance of the Supreme Court at stake, the partisan battle is headed toward a new, even more divisive frontier. Mitch McConnell Enter Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), a hardscrabble and wily politician who knows how to play hardball. Within minutes of Ginsburg’s passing, McConnell signaled that a Senate vote to confirm her replacement would not be far off. His intention to move full speed ahead sent the Democrats into a meltdown. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) asserted the Democrats would “use every arrow in our quiver” to block such a move. She even went so far as to invoke the “I” word – impeachment – to halt a vote should the Senate move to confirm a new justice before the election. The unveiled threats continued with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who appears loaded for bear should Republicans try to fill RBG’s seat on the high court. According to one report, Schumer led the charge during a conference call with members of his party this weekend, saying: “Let me be clear: if Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this, then nothing is off the table for next year. Nothing is off the table.” Then he added: “Our number one goal must be to communicate the stakes of this Supreme Court fight to the American people,” according to an unnamed Axios source who was reportedly part of the tele-meeting. What rankles the loyal opposition was their inability to get President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, before a Senate committee. Now they are crying foul at the thought of Trump getting a third nominee onto the bench. The media wing of the Democratic party has already started the presses rolling. A September 19 article heading from The New York Times opined: “The fight over the confirmation of Judge Garland in 2016 set the tone for an even more brutal battle over who should succeed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.” Ah, but no one wants to say that there are differences between the Garland nomination and the vacancy left by Ms. Ginsburg. This is – to put it simply – power. Chuck Schumer The Democrats did not control the Senate when Obama made the appointment of Merrick Garland – and they still don’t. As an almost powerless party, they can do little but cover themselves in sackcloth and ashes and whine that the people should choose the new Supreme Court justice. But who are the Senate and the president if not the voices of the people? They are “representatives” of the people who have been duly elected by the voting public. Until a new election is held and decided, the unvarnished truth is that the people have already spoken. This truth frustrates the leaders of the Democratic Party because they realize they are backed into a corner with little room to maneuver. At this moment – and despite the defection of two GOP senators who say they won’t approve a nominee before the election – the Democrats find themselves thwarted at every turn. Will the GOP Man Up? McConnell is currently laughing all the way to the floor of the Senate because he already invoked the so-called nuclear option when Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The rule change means that a nominee can be approved with a simple majority vote. It worked like a charm for both Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. So, the Democrats have nowhere to go with their bitterness and angst save the friendly cable television outlets and the legacy media. The left-wing Fourth Estate will shout as loudly and often as they like, but if the GOP has enough cajones, a new Trump Supreme is a done deal. So the burning question that lies dead ahead is: Will the GOP man up and do the deed, or will they cower before the empty threats of Democrats and the media madness that is bound to reach a fever pitch as election day 2020 approaches? This, my friends, is that unique place in politics where the road that lies ahead is clear – if only our elected officials are brave enough to take it. ~ Read more from Leesa K. Donner.

Continue Reading American Politics is About to Go Nuclear

Will Progressive Excess Sink Establishment Joe?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Joe Biden was nominated by an increasingly radical Democratic Party to be an acceptable face to mainstream Americans in a general election. Yet the presidential contender is seeing the progressive shibboleths to which he, along with every other rival, bowed down during the primary season come back to haunt him. In Los Angeles, two law enforcement officers were ambushed, shot, and left clinging to life Sept. 12 in a shocking crime. Black Lives Matter protesters attempted to block the emergency-room entrance at the hospital the officers were rushed to, with one thug shouting, “I hope they f—— die.” For month, leading Democrats, including Biden and his running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), have been expressing their vocal support for the Marxist BLM movement and its slogans. As this was happening, live-streaming entertainment goliath Netflix reaped a tsunami of public outrage by releasing Cuties, a French film about 11-year-old girls “coming of age” that is widely perceived to normalize pedophilia. The powerful corporation is seeded with top Democratic donors at its highest ranks. From a strictly political point of view, President Donald Trump should write each of them a thank-you card. Out on a BLM Limb A Fox News poll released Sept. 13 shows public support for the Black Lives Matter cause continuing to plummet. A sturdy 48% of likely voters surveyed believe BLM protests in Portland, OR, Kenosha, WI, and New York are riots. Only 40% of those polled see the unrest as legitimate protest. In a July ABC News poll, when the summer of George Floyd was in full fever, 63% of those surveyed expressed support for “the Black Lives Matter movement.” Police officers are now being openly targeted by hoodlums draped in a threadbare “social justice” garment that Democrats and their media allies are finding impossible to keep stitched together. Given the incendiary language long used by BLM activists, the cold-blooded attempted execution in Los Angeles was almost a foregone conclusion. Law enforcement officials had warned of the escalating dangers against them. The FBI reportedly informed Chicago police in late August that more than 30 street gangs had “formed a pact to ‘shoot on-sight any cop that has a weapon drawn on any subject in public.'” It seems Democrats should have been able to anticipate the consequences of their imprudent proclamations. In a telling 2016 television appearance with CNN’s Jake Tapper, even Biden acknowledged a facet within BLM that promotes a murderous hatred of cops: “Look what the President [Obama] said when the Black Lives Matter people in one – one – demonstration said, ‘you know, kill the police, the sooner the better,’ or some phrase like that. The president condemned it immediately. But that’s not – that’s not the black community. That’s not the community – that group, that element of Black Lives Matter doesn’t speak for all of Black Lives Matter…. “And so it is just a very broad statement. There are some people in Black Lives Matter who don’t want to talk and have dialogue and others who do.” Biden went on to call BLM an “umbrella” of various peoples protesting racial discrimination by police. So as far back as 2016, he knew that people who advocated the killing of police officers were sheltering under that “umbrella.” Yet he and his fellow Democrats blindly waved the Black Lives Matter banner following the death of Floyd in police custody in late May. Biden parrots BLM talking points on “systemic racism” and made them a significant focus of his dystopian nomination acceptance speech at the Democratic convention. As the officers in Los Angeles fight for their lives, Team Biden is charged with the difficult task of tamping down the overheated reaction while trying not to offend the identity politics-obsessed members of his Democratic Party. Netflix Creates Uproar With that in mind, Biden did not need Netflix to create a pedophilia uproar less than two months before the election. But it did, furthering many Americans’ disgust with cultural progressivism at a time when the blue nominee is trying to steer a moderate course. The release of Cuties has spurred a consumer backlash. A Change.org petition demanding Netflix remove the film has well more than 600,000 signatures, and the company’s stock price has taken a hit amid reports of massive subscriber cancellations. It is well known that Barack Obama and his wife Michelle have a lucrative production deal with Netflix. And former top Obama adviser and reported Biden running mate finalist Susan Rice is a member of the company’s Board of Directors. What may not be widely realized are the other high-level Democratic Party connections at Netflix. CEO Reed Hastings and his wife Patty Quillin are major party donors. The couple donated $2 million in 2018 to the Senate Majority PAC, which funds efforts to elect Democrats to the U.S. Senate, according to the watchdog website Open Secrets. Netflix Co-CEO and Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos is responsible for green-lighting all programming offered by the streaming site. He and his wife Nicole Avant are also huge Democrat donors. The Hollywood Reporter noted in 2012 that the pair had “just made the top tier of Obama ‘bundlers,’ raising more than half a million dollars in one night.” Avant was Southern California finance co-chairwoman for Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and became ambassador to the Bahamas in the Obama administration. Many repulsed by leading Democrat financial bigwigs airing a movie that starkly depicts pre-teen girls sexually gyrating will no doubt recall the loony embrace of “transgender” children by then-party frontrunner Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) last October. The nationally televised spectacle became even more outlandish when Warren later declared that the nine-year-old child involved would personally vet her Education Secretary nominee if she became president. This is the weirdness Democrats had hoped to avoid with Biden at the front. But it does not seem to be working. Even the Coronavirus crisis, which the party considers politically advantageous, is proving damaging in unforeseen ways. With Americans suffering mightily from the economic strains caused by lockdowns and social curbs imposed in the name of health, Democrat championing of illegal aliens has become an unpopular topic, Trump has not been hesitant to pounce. At a Sept. 13 rally in Nevada, he reminded supporters of Biden’s acquiescence to radical progressive demands during the primary: “Remember the [first Democratic] debate where they’re all standing there and they looked around. ‘Who’s going to give free healthcare to illegal aliens?’ And everyone’s raising hands and he’s going ‘ah, ah.’ Take a look, I’m not kidding. It’s sad. It’s pathetic.” On a variety of issues, Democrats are finding a fragile Biden gives poor cover for the radical utterances of 2019 and the lemming-like embrace of Black Lives Matter agitators. The milk is spilled, and it’s not going back in the carton. ~ Read more from Joe Schaeffer.

Continue Reading Will Progressive Excess Sink Establishment Joe?

Supreme Court Showdown is a Minefield for Trump’s Critics

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Did we even think it possible that an electorate already forced to navigate the frightening, shark-infested waters of a pandemic, crashing economy, and widespread civil unrest would see those existential issues shoved aside just a month and a half before an election of historic magnitude? Only in 2020. Indeed, a year we have all spent in a tormented existence just turned even more taxing on the soul of the nation. A grim, twilight struggle to gain control of the highest court in the land for a generation or more is now a certainty. And while the framers of the U.S. Constitution hardly envisioned a Supreme Court and federal judges with the level of power that has ultimately accrued to the judicial branch in the fullness of time, the reality on the ground – judicial supremacy – assures a titanic battle which could make the shameful Brett Kavanaugh episode look tame – if that is actually possible. Joe Biden The left will almost certainly employ whatever weapons remain in their well-worn anti-Trump arsenal to obliterate Trump’s nominee. You can bet they are already preparing the harshest of personal attacks on the most prominent names on Trump’s extensive and publicly-released list of potential justices. So Much At Stake For the Left This is for good reason. The left has far more at stake in this confirmation fight than the right. If Joe Biden wins the election and can name a replacement for the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that would only sustain the current right-leaning composition of the court. But if Trump and Mitch McConnell push his nominee across the finish line, conservatives will gain control of the court. One side seeks to survive, the other to thrive. Thus, the stakes are higher than ever for a progressive movement that has long depended on the federal courts to sanction explosively controversial initiatives rejected in the normal legislative process. Abortion, gay marriage, and restrictions on the first and second amendments are issues that come most immediately to mind. Democrats have tied their own hands in this matter. They have unloaded virtually every scurrilous allegation on Donald Trump, so incessant personal attacks on the president during this process will hardly startle voters accustomed to hearing for years on end that Trump is everything from a fascist to a white supremacist. The Trump-addled left has cried wolf for so long that few beyond the long-gone Trump haters will pay much attention. Brett Kavanaugh The Kavanaugh Miscalculation The party also disgraced itself immeasurably in the battle to destroy Trump’s last Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. It cost them dearly in the 2018 Senate elections, which expanded GOP control of the upper chamber.  The Democrats’ array of scandalous, unfounded allegations against Kavanaugh will make their coming sound and fury about another upstanding nominee little more than just hollow cries in the darkness. There was always a sense that in going after Kavanaugh, the left picked the wrong battle, for control of the court was not at stake – Kavanaugh was simply a bit more conservative than the justice he replaced, Anthony Kennedy. It seemed more prudent to save their fire for this battle, with the very direction of the court at stake, but they all but forfeited their integrity at the altar of destroying Kavanaugh. On top of that, much like in the vice-presidential selection process, Joe Biden has boxed himself into a corner by promising to name a black woman to the high court. The need to satisfy a party given over to identity politics rendered Kamala Harris the only real choice as running mate for the former vice president, and now he will have to respond by either doubling down or renouncing his promise to nominate a woman of color to the Supreme Court. We will soon find out whether Biden will bow to growing pressure to announce who his nominee would be. The Possible Nominee? Among likely Trump nominees, there is little question that the most politically advantageous choice for the president would be Appellate Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett. She is a rising star in conservative judicial circles, young (48 years old) and attractive, already Senate-confirmed, and widely admired. As a woman replacing another woman on the court, her selection would box Biden and the left into an even deeper corner because personal attacks on the winsome Judge Barrett days before an election would not sit well with those pesky suburban women who the left has been heavily courting throughout the Trump era. Like the famous Tinkers to Evers to Chance double-play combination of baseball legend, the judicial assembly line from the Federalist Society to the White House to the Senate has been nothing short of a well-oiled machine. Trump has already delivered more than 200 judges to the federal courts – more in three and a half years than Obama named in eight years. Now, he stands at the precipice of a historic moment, destined to be discussed and debated for years to come. The opposition has weakened itself to a point where only the hope of a precious few Republican Senators who might be cajoled into joining the resistance can stand in the way. ~ Read more from Tim Donner.

Continue Reading Supreme Court Showdown is a Minefield for Trump’s Critics

Ruth Bader Ginsburg – Sex Crusader

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died, at 87 years old, of complications from pancreatic cancer. Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts said: “Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature. We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague.” The societal and political implications of Ginsburg’s death less than two months before election day, and amid the global health pandemic will be of immense magnitude. Ginsburg’s death puts incendiary issues like abortion, gun control, and affirmative action onto the front burner of the election now. She was the most reliable liberal vote on the court since her appointment in 1993 after being nominated by Bill Clinton. Notorious RBG Justice Ginsberg enjoys a near rock-star status on the left and stands as a feminist icon. While she is the author of hundreds of judicial opinions, she made her most significant impact on the law at the Supreme Court before she ever wore a robe there as a Justice. Ginsburg helped start and then helmed the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU, where she argued six sex discrimination lawsuits before the Supreme Court. She won five of those cases – a remarkable achievement, and one that changed forever how men and women were regarded under the law. Ruth Bader Ginsburg gave her husband Martin credit for an idea she thought helped her win. She chose male plaintiffs, hoping they would be more sympathetic. Her success in the litigation came both from plaintiff selection and an excellent presentation of the arguments themselves, in written and oral advocacy. In Craig v. Boren, for example, she successfully argued that an Oklahoma law allowing women to purchase beer at 18, but forbidding men from doing so until 21, was impermissible gender-based discrimination, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Speaking last year, Justice Ginsburg said: “If I am notorious, it is because I had the good fortune to be alive and a lawyer in the late 1960s [and into the 1970s, when it] became possible to urge before courts, successfully, that equal justice under law required all arms of government to regard women as persons equal in stature to men.” She went on to say that, although we “have not reached Nirvana” in terms of equality, “the progress I have seen in my lifetime makes me optimistic for the future.” Point Guard On The Court As a Supreme Court Justice, she was a reliable vote for the left-wing – writing blistering dissents or powerful majority opinions. A few short years after she joined the high court, she would author the 7-1 opinion on government facilities or programs that discriminate on the basis of sex. Justice Ginsburg’s majority opinion struck down the sex-based exclusion of women from the Virginia Military Institute, a public school. She wrote: “Neither federal nor state government acts compatibly with equal protection when a law or official policy denies to women, simply because they are women, full citizenship stature – equal opportunity to aspire, achieve, participate in and contribute to society based on their individual talents and capacities.” Ruth Bader Ginsburg Political Animal Ginsburg’s career on the court is marked by little deviation from fidelity to left-wing jurisprudence and political ideology. She was so committed to advancing it on the court that she refused to step down during the Obama administration for fear that any replacement he could get through the Senate would be insufficiently leftist. The Justice told an interviewer: “Who do you think President Obama could appoint at this very day, given the boundaries that we have? If I resign any time this year, he could not successfully appoint anyone I would like to see in the court.” NPR reports: “Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” In hindsight, the Justice might have wished she allowed President Obama to advance her replacement rather than Donald J. Trump. Anyone nominated by President Trump is likely to rule the opposite of how Justice Ginsberg would have on most wedge issues dividing left and right. As the Supreme Court often decided rules on major society-changing issues with 5-4 rulings, the consequences of replacing her with a Trump appointee cannot be understated. The right to gay marriage, gun ownership, and independent campaign speech were all recent issues decided by 5-4 rulings, for instance. The Ballad of Merrick Garland – The Sequel Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wasted no time declaring his support for a Trump nominee to fill the late Justice’s seat this fall. McConnell successfully delayed President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to replace Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, citing the presidential election. Garland was nominated in March of that year. Republicans successfully blocked a vote on the nomination citing what they called the “Biden Rule,” recalling a quote from Joe Biden, who was, at the time, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee: “It would be our pragmatic conclusion,” Biden said, “that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.” The first female Justice on the Supreme Court was Sandra Day O’Connor. She was nominated to replace the retiring Potter Stewart on August 19, 1981, and was confirmed by the Senate just 33 days later. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was famously friends with Antonin Scalia, a Supreme Court Justice she seldom agreed with on law or politics. She was by all accounts, a devoted wife and mother. She met her husband as an undergrad at Cornell. As Ginsberg herself put it: “He was the first boy I ever knew who cared that I had a brain.” ~ Read more from Scott D. Cosenza. 

Continue Reading Ruth Bader Ginsburg – Sex Crusader

Free Speech – A Life And Death Matter

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here It would be almost ridiculous to deny that there are certain things that, in today’s climate, you just can’t say. While there are cases to be made for producing a more civil society, it seems that at its root, these efforts to silence are little more than tyranny and an attempt to manipulate not just what we say but what we permit ourselves to think. And this, in every sense of the word, is dangerous. When we begin to censor ourselves, we give away our power to act and operate in the world. Whether it is through a wish to be considered within the Overton Window of opinion, or whether we keep our mouths shut to protect our jobs or position within the community, it would take a brave soul to suggest that they never filter themselves. But here’s the thing: this is encouraged, and it is to the motivations of those who do the encouraging that we must look. The standard excuse for this encouragement is that it creates a better, more inclusive society. Inclusive language stops people from being outsiders. It makes the world a “nicer” place. And we all want to live in a kinder, nicer place – don’t we? Is It About Truth – or Control? The problem is: we don’t buy it. We don’t believe that the people espousing these flaccid excuses care for a kinder and better world; if they did, they wouldn’t be calling those who demand freedom of speech “nothing but racists and bigots.” If they wanted a kinder culture, they would not be vilifying those who disagree with them. It’s the fatal flaw in their argument. What they want is control—nothing more, nothing less. They know it is impossible to control every individual on a person by person basis. They seek, then, to create a societal structure in which people will edit themselves, out of fear that, If they don’t, the rampant harpies who have drunk the KoolAid will demonize them and attempt to destroy their lives. These are not good people. Let’s use an example. Someone makes a twitter comment. Perhaps it’s racist; maybe it’s unkind – but that’s a subjective judgment. Maybe the comment is merely an opinion. All of a sudden, the mob swoops in and begins wishing death and destruction upon the commenter. These critics then forward the comment to the author’s employers; they light the commenter up all over the internet. Suddenly, this commenter cannot show his or her face in public – or maybe even get another job. Naturally, the internet mob, or even physical protestors, are beaming with glee at the taking down of one more “fascist.” But what if this guy has a family? They are punishing his wife and his children for his crimes; what if he employs people and has to shut down his business as they have demanded? What if the vitriol causes him to take his own life? It happens. This actually happens. These are not good people; they are far from it. But, we often look at this as a modern phenomenon. It’s not. The only difference now is that the persecutors have almost total control. We need to look back to earlier days when the powerful and influential in society were the ones who stood up for the freedom of speech and expression. On March 15, 1783, George Washington gave a speech to his officers. It is known now as the Newburgh Address. He encouraged his officers to petition Congress. Here’s the thing; he disagreed with the idea, but thought that his troops should be able to use their voices; it was an excellent reminder to them of why they were fighting. He said: “For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter.” Washington understood that all men and women must be able to exercise their own expression. Have we learned nothing from the last 50 years of pop culture that tells us repressing ourselves is bad for us? It is psychologically and physically damaging not to be able to be your true self, and in many cases, this means being able to speak your mind, or, as has become so popular nowadays, to speak your truth. The Risks of Speaking Your Truth I say “popular nowadays,” but in fact, speaking your truth is an incredibly old concept. We can trace it back to ancient Greece around 500 BC, but as an idea, it is likely much older. There’s a word: parrhesia. It has a few different translations, but at its core, it means “to speak boldly.” But there is an undercurrent to the word parrhesia that is often ignored. To speak boldly comes with inherent risk – not always of physical danger, but perhaps of upsetting a relationship or of creating a crisis. In Ancient Athens, parrhesia was quite literally a fundamental component of democracy. If you could not speak out in a public forum, then democracy was denied. All must be able to speak what they see as the truth. Michel Foucault, the French philosopher and historian, dug into the concept of parrhesia. He wrote that in certain circumstances, to speak boldly can result in danger: “In such a case, you do not risk your life, but you may hurt him by your remarks, and your friendship may consequently suffer for it. If, in a political debate, an orator risks losing his popularity because his opinions are contrary to the majority’s opinion, or his opinions may usher in a political scandal, he uses parrhesia. Parrhesia, then, is linked to courage in the face of danger: it demands the courage to speak the truth in spite of some danger. And in its extreme form, telling the truth takes place in the “game” of life or death. “ I like this last line: telling the truth in the game of life or death. It’s powerful, and it cuts to the heart of the matter. Those who want us to remain silent will, eventually, take harsher measures. History shows this. Those who spoke out against Stalin and Mao, those “political dissidents” who were sent for re-education, or disappeared never to be heard from again; this is the end result of what these monsters are selling. For now, we can choose to remain silent; eventually, it will be enforced. Telling the truth is, and always has been, a game of life and death. ~ Read more from Mark Angelides.

Continue Reading Free Speech – A Life And Death Matter

Did CNN’s Kid Gloves Make Biden a Believable Heavyweight?

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here An 800-pound gorilla was hovering over Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s Sept. 17 drive-in town hall in Scranton, PA, and everyone tuning in, whether friend, foe, or neutral, was fully aware of it. Democrats dearly needed the event, televised nationally by CNN, to send a strong signal that the soon-to-be 78-year-old former vice president, who has been plagued by loud public deliberations about his health and stamina, could stand on a stage and tackle a variety of subjects with verve and vigor. Aided by a friendly media network that handpicked the citizens asking the questions and abetted by a cooperative and unchallenging moderator, the program served as a dress rehearsal of sorts to see how Fall 2020 Biden will be able to acquit himself on a debate platform with President Trump. The messaging was mostly familiar but there were a couple of key moments that revealed Team Biden might be pivoting away from the competent professional establishment posturing it has advanced. There was also an attempted disconnect from the disastrous piggybacking on a Black Lives Matter movement that has rapidly descended into ugly violence after enjoying a summer of basking in the sunshine of unreserved big-box media and Democratic Party acclaim. Batting Leadoff: Death The evening started out with a heavy emphasis on the Coronavirus crisis that Democrats appear to believe is a major winning issue. The topic plays into the gloom-and-doom storyline Biden has been so laboriously stressing about the state of the nation under the Trump administration. It was no coincidence then that the very first question of the evening was about death as CNN host Anderson Cooper dutifully played Charon, boatsman of the dominant media underworld, transporting Biden over the River Styx into the darkness of Trump’s America. Shani Adams addressed the candidate, saying her sister had died of the Coronavirus and asking Biden what he would do to protect Americans and their jobs if he were elected president. The longtime former Delaware senator quickly took the opportunity to rip Trump for not being more assertive on mask-wearing, a particular talking point Democrats are eager to use as a hammer against the president. “[Trump] continues to think that masks don’t matter very much, although he says it, and then he has these large gatherings only with everybody around with no masks on. And it’s extremely dangerous. And so there’s a lot of people, a lot of people hurt, a lot of people not being able to see their families. A lot of people gone. A lot of empty chairs,” Biden proclaimed. Cooper then teed Biden up to further denigrate Trump. “If you were president, could you see a scenario where you downplayed critical information so as not to cause panic?” the alleged newsman asked. “Not at all,” Biden replied to the meatball query. “The idea that you’re gonna not tell people what you’ve been told – that this virus is incredibly contagious, seven times more contagious than the flu, you breathe the air, you get it sucked into your lungs – what has he done?” “If he had just acted one week earlier, he would have saved 37,000 lives” Biden asserted, citing Columbia University’s medical school as a source. “He knew it and did nothing, it’s close to criminal,” he continued. Here Comes the White Populist Democrat? The rather lengthy amount of time devoted to the Coronavirus at the town hall provides more evidence that the Biden campaign will continue to promote a Good vs. Evil framing against Trump in the weeks before the Nov. 3 vote. But there were signs of changing tactics on other fronts. At the Democratic National Convention in August, Biden’s squad featured a host of speakers representing the establishment heyday of 1988-2016, including former president Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Colin Powell, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and John McCain’s widow Cindy McCain. Aging “moderate” Republican John Kasich even made an appearance to tout Biden’s ability to work both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C. It was all part of a “return to normalcy” theme being used to paint Trump as a disruptive force that has brought chaos to America. Unsurprisingly, the narrative has not proven to be the least bit successful in a post-2016 political climate clamoring for authentic change. And so Biden road-tested a new personality on CNN’s stage, that of “Populist Joe,” the scrappy Everyman from blue-collar America. “I really do view this campaign as a campaign between Scranton and Park Avenue,” Biden said, portraying Trump as the spoiled rich kid from the big city. “All that Trump can see from Park Avenue is Wall Street. All he thinks about is the stock market … In my neighborhood in Scranton, not a whole lot of people owned stock.” Does this mean the American people will now be fed the heretofore inconceivable sales pitch that a man who was first elected to the United States Senate in 1972 and has been seated at the leading tables of political power in this nation for the past 47 years is the true populist in the race? If Democrats really wanted to take this tack against an incumbent president who captured the White House by running as a total outsider from conventional politics, why on Earth did they select the most credentialed careerist by far in their overcrowded primary field to be their nominee? Perhaps even more telling was Biden’s noticeable walk-back on the rabid clamoring for police reform in Democratic circles. “The vast majority of police are decent, honorable people,” he said in a comment that certainly could not be pleasing to BLM true believers in the party’s rank and file. He then laid out a calm, sensible approach to policing controversies that was clearly designed to tamper down Democrat rhetoric in the wake of rioting and violence that has seen police officers targeted and brutally ambushed in recent days. “We have to have a much more transparent means by which we provide for accountability within police departments,” Biden blandly uttered before vocalizing the need to teach “people how to de-escalate” in policing situations. The only de-escalation that Biden was talking about here was that of his party’s shockingly shortsighted embrace of street rioters since the death of George Floyd in late May. From there, Cooper asked Biden about white privilege. Once again, the man who has spent the vast majority of his adult life in Washington, D.C., broke into Scranton Joe mode. “Sure, I benefited just because I don’t have to go through what my black brothers and sisters have had to go through,” Biden declared before immediately moving off that subject material. “Growing up here in Scranton, we’re used to guys who look down their nose at us,” he then said. “People who look at us and think that we’re suckers, look at us and they think that we don’t – we’re not equivalent to them.” “Well, I tell you what bothered me, to tell you the truth,” he continued. “Maybe it’s my Scranton roots. I don’t know. But when you guys started talking on television about, ‘Biden, if he wins, will be the first person without an Ivy League degree to be elected president,’ I’m thinking, who the hell makes you think I have to have an Ivy League degree to be president?” The remark, of course, is factually incorrect. Biden would not be the first person without an Ivy League degree elected president. He would be the first since Ronald Reagan in 1980 and ’84 and the first Democrat since Jimmy Carter in 1976. But more significant by far was the fact that a prominent media figure spoon-fed Biden a cornerstone progressive talking point and he ran away from it and started talking like a Trump populist-nationalist. Does this quick spin away from “white privilege” as a cue for the candidate to start blathering about identity politics mean that Democrats are finally beginning to realize that racial guilt is not a winning formula in a general election? Biden would have been burned at the stake for such comments during the Democratic primary process. Acknowledging that white people don’t always have it easy is sheer heresy in today’s progressive-dominated Democratic grassroots. Yet here was the party standard-bearer ruminating on his hardscrabble Caucasian roots on a leftist cable news network. It would seem change is coming to the Democrat campaign strategy as Trump continues to rise in the polls. That leads to two questions going forward. One, is it believable? And two, is it too late? A third crucial question of the evening will play itself out over the coming weeks: Is Joe Biden truly up to the task of debating Donald Trump three times? ~ Read more from Joe Schaeffer.

Continue Reading Did CNN’s Kid Gloves Make Biden a Believable Heavyweight?

Constitution Day: A Reminder of Liberty in the COVID Era

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here This time each year, we honor the Constitution of the United States. This foundational document, created September 17, 1787, and the Bill of Rights that quickly amended it have safeguarded the freedom of Americans for more than two centuries. However, over the years, it has been further modified, misinterpreted, and even ignored entirely. As I wrote last year in remembrance of the Republic, “the United States they created was not quite the nation we know today.” And in this, the first year CE (COVID Era), that statement rings truer than any of us could have imagined this time last year. From the lockdowns and business closures to the mask-wearing and social distancing ordinances, leaders at all levels of government across the nation have been flexing their authoritarian muscles since the pandemic declaration. As seems to always be the case, the crisis was quickly used to justify more government authority in the lives of the people – for our own good, of course. Ostensibly this is temporary – but is it? When was the last time the government took more power for itself to see us through a crisis – whether the government solution worked or not – and then actually relinquished that power? In the COVID Era, we have thousands of private businesses closed and millions of Americans living off government benefits. Schools are finally reopening and some of the unemployed are returning to work, but at what cost? Many schools have pushed parents out of the equation as much as possible, and some colleges are holding education hostage by requiring students surrender more of their freedoms than ever before. As Liberty Nation’s Laura Valkovic explained in August, one college in Michigan requires every student to install an app that tracks their location and reports them if they leave campus. Another Michigan institution wants students to wear a device that measures vital signs and comes with a handy Bluetooth contact-tracing feature. This grasping for control should come as no surprise from the bastion of statist thought that is American academia. The real shock should be the Supreme Court – the body tasked with interpreting the Constitution and whether laws are in compliance with it – ruling against a church in what seems like a clear-cut violation of the First Amendment. Steve Sisolak, the Democrat governor of Nevada, decided that churches could only seat 50 people at most, while casinos were free to operate at 50% capacity. Calvary Chapel offered to exceed the state recommendations for social distancing, if only they were allowed the same capacity as the casinos. With a sanctuary capable of seating 200 worshipers, Calvary Chapel wants simply to allow a maximum of 90, sitting 6 feet apart from each other and wearing masks. But the governor wouldn’t allow it, and the Supreme Court refused to help. As Liberty Nation’s Scott D. Cosenza wrote at the time, “Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley thought the Constitution would give them the same rights at least that casinos had. Four justices agreed, but only four, and so the churches must turn away their flock as bets are placed across town.” As the year wears on, many wonder when – indeed, if – life will ever get back to normal. Some say that this or something like this may very well be the new normal. Those are dire warnings that must not go ignored. We know that governments have a tendency to gobble up more power and grow at every opportunity, but what can we do to stop it? Treasure Coast News, a USA Today affiliate out of Florida, has a wise suggestion for how to celebrate Constitution Day 2020: Remember and read the Constitution. Heck, don’t stop there. Read the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence as well – then read the various letters and speeches of our Founding Fathers. Don’t allow the promise of government security erase the memory of what they fought for. Last year, I concluded that “In spite of those who would gladly trade individual liberty (and responsibility) for the security and care of the government, we haven’t entirely fallen back to being serfs to the crown … yet.” This year, I am beginning to wonder. ~ Read more from James Fite.

Continue Reading Constitution Day: A Reminder of Liberty in the COVID Era

Russian Bounties on US Troops Unproven – Democrats Furious

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Another disgraceful chapter in the decline of the establishment media continues to unfold as the U.S. military on September 14 revealed that it had been unable to corroborate the details of an alarming New York Times article from June. Although it continues to investigate an allegation that the Russian government has offered cash rewards to the Taliban for the killings of American military personnel, a senior Marine Corps general told NBC News that he had uncovered no evidence to support the story. What is more likely, then? That high-level people are willing to go on record denying something they know is true, or that The Times’ anonymous sources either do not exist or are lying? Falsehood Flies, the Truth Limps When it comes to negative stories about the Trump administration, one must be careful. It is always worth weighing the likelihood that someone is perpetrating a smear, against the possibility that honest government officials have uncovered a terrible secret that the president or cabinet officials have been keeping under wraps. In all honesty, both scenarios are almost equally likely when it comes to any U.S. president – or any other world leader, for that matter. A portion of Americans will immediately choose to believe that the story in question is nothing more than a fabrication. Another group will accept without hesitation whatever accusation has been made – needing no further evidence or investigation. Therein lies the payoff for media organizations that, like The New York Times, are interested in only one thing: discrediting and disparaging President Trump and doing all they can to ensure that he does not win a second term in the White House. These media organizations do not care if the tales they put out are debunked or later denied by numerous identified sources – as the Russian bounty story has been. Once it is out there in the public consciousness, nothing else matters. On Twitter and Facebook, the original report will be shared tens of thousands of times. The refutation, when it comes, will be passed around far fewer times. As the Anglo-Irish satirist and author, Jonathan Swift, wrote in 1710: “Besides, as the vilest Writer has his Readers, so the greatest Liar has his Believers; and it often happens, that if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect…” Case in point, the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. The special counsel concluded that there was no proof of deliberate conspiracy between then-candidate Trump and the Russians. Reams of documents have since come to light, proving multiple instances of political bias on the part of the FBI investigators. Protocols and, in at least one case, laws were broken. Still, the majority of Americans who dislike Trump to this day insist that the president and the Russians collaborated to steal the 2016 election. So it is with the Russian bounty story. Even on the same day that General Frank McKenzie told NBC: “It just has not been proved to a level of certainty that satisfies me,” Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) tweeted: “Plain & simple: Donald Trump has gone 80 days without condemning [Russian President] Putin for putting reported bounties on our troops. This is unforgivable.” Despite including the word “reported,” Duckworth deliberately perpetuated an unfounded allegation for which not a shred of evidence has been presented and behind which stand only anonymous sources. Anonymity is For Cowards The anonymity of these sources brings up another point. Why would an intelligence official, having discovered that a foreign government was offering financial rewards to a U.S. enemy for killing American soldiers, not want to come forward publicly and reveal themselves? Because doing so would hurt their career, perhaps? Putting one’s career ahead of exposing such a scheme is nothing less than an act of rank cowardice. Gen. McKenzie did not simply decide to issue an off-the-cuff denial, either. The military has investigated the matter, analyzing intelligence relating to Taliban attacks against American personnel over the past several years. Thus far, no connection to any agreement with the Russians has been discovered. The case is not closed yet, and McKenzie’s admission of that fact demonstrates that he is not operating with an intent to kill the story – if he were, he would have deliberately left NBC with the impression that the investigation had concluded. The most likely scenario, here, is that The Times – probably in consultation with anti-Trump intelligence officials and perhaps even Democratic politicians – decided that this would be the perfect story to damage the president in two ways. It would maybe drive a wedge between Mr. Trump and the military and, at the same time, breathe a little air into the rotting corpse of the Russian collusion fable. Perhaps, too, the establishment media knows that President Trump has single-handedly discredited them more than any other person in American history. For that, they hate him and they know that, if they fail to bring him down, they are finished. It is not about Russians and the Taliban – this seemingly concocted scandal is one more Hail Mary pass into the November end zone. Four more years of Trump will destroy The Gray Lady and all of her elitist media co-conspirators. ~ Read more from Graham J. Noble.

Continue Reading Russian Bounties on US Troops Unproven – Democrats Furious

Trump Skirts Unconcealed Landmines at ABC Town Hall

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here It was more about the failed gotchas from host George Stephanopoulos and the handpicked “regular” Americans asking predictably hostile questions than the answers given at the ABC News Town Hall with President Trump on Sept. 15. From the Coronavirus crisis to claims of “systemic racism” in American policing and society to alleged military dissatisfaction, Trump fielded unsurprising queries fully in line with progressive framing of the president and emerged unscathed. And that was about the only result worth noting from the nationally televised broadcast. Nothing bold was on display from either side as a partisan big-box media outlet took its expected swings without drawing blood and Trump ably defended himself without delivering any devastating counterpunches of his own. Shrill Yet Easy to Navigate George Stephanopoulos An unfriendly media represented here in the form of ex-Bill Clinton adviser Stephanopoulos sees the Coronavirus as an issue that can be used to hurt Trump while the president appears to believe the controversy over policing in America is a winner for him. Two of the more prominent failed gotchas for the evening were on these particular subjects. Paul Tubiana, identified as a 2016 Trump voter, started things off by asserting that the president put his life in danger by not fully embracing the unprecedented social curbs being imposed on the American people in the name of fighting the virus. Tubiana is diabetic. “I’ve had to dodge people who don’t care about social distancing and wearing face masks. I thought you were doing a good job with a pandemic response, until about May 1, then you took your foot off the gas pedal,” Tubiana proclaimed. “Why did you throw vulnerable people like me under the bus?” The question highlights a bizarre tactic frequently employed by Democrats and their media allies despite its proven poor track record since Trump appeared on the national political scene in 2015. Highly emotional claims of personal victimization on issues that affect 330 million Americans are not persuasive no matter how earnest they may sound. The question did nothing to put Trump on an uncomfortable footing. All he had to do was resort to familiar talking points on how his administration has dealt with the virus. ABC nevertheless persisted in pushing the argument that face masks are an undisputed crucial tool in fighting the virus, even though tens of millions of Americans do not accept the “settled science” of progressive minds on the controversy. Julie Bart asked Trump why he didn’t wear a mask in public more often given how essential they are to combating the virus. Well, gee, that’s two different folks, America. It must be a consensus. “There [are], by the way, a lot of people who don’t want to wear masks,” Trump replied, not saying anything that everybody already doesn’t know. “There are a lot of people that think the masks are not good.” Nothing was resolved, no new terrain was explored, and the whole discussion seemed frustratingly pointless as a result. Failed gotcha Number Two came over the dreaded “R” word and, again, both question and response were pat and predictable. Black pastor Carl Day of Philadelphia challenged Trump’s Make America Great Again slogan by echoing the sentiments of 1619 Project progressivism. “Because you say again, we need to see when was that ‘great?’ Because that pushes us back to a time in which we cannot identify with such ‘greatness,'” the pastor asked. This isn’t a Democratic primary town hall, ABC. We’re in general election mode now. Telling Trump that America was never great will not hurt his standing with the vast majority of undecided voters. Nor is it going to cause him to say something he shouldn’t. The president was able to easily transition into talk about improving black unemployment numbers under his administration before the Coronavirus fallout struck the U.S. economy and the conversation again became routine. Police Trump Card Trump appeared most robust on the subject of police reform, and it was here where Stephanopoulos had to tread softly. As Black Lives Matter protests continue to degenerate into rioting and senseless violence, public support for the movement is flagging. The horrific Sept. 12 ambush of two Los Angeles police officers has further bolstered Trump’s longstanding pro-law and order campaign theme. “How about that horrible crime that took place two days ago, where this terrible human being walks up to a police car with two people sitting in the car, and he starts shooting bullets right through the glass, right in their face?” Trump firmly stated. “And just has destroyed, I mean, I hear they’re going to make it but they’re going to have a hard time ever being the same.” “But that’s a lack of respect,” he continued. “When somebody can do that, that’s a lack of respect. There’s no retribution in the field. There’s no retribution.” Stephanopoulos attempted to turn to statistics that he said proved “systemic” police racism but Trump had a ready response. “So I just saw a poll where African Americans in this country, black communities, are 81 percent in favor of having more police,” the president said. “They want more police, they want protection. They suffer more than anybody else by bad police protection – all minorities, whether it’s Hispanic or black or Asian. They suffer more than anybody else, George.” It was not a fruitful topic for ABC’s gotcha game and the more Stephanopoulos pursued it, the stronger Trump came off. The most canned question of the night, one every viewer had to know was coming, concerned the anonymously sourced and highly dubious article in the leftist magazine The Atlantic that “reported” that Trump had called America’s war dead “suckers” for giving their lives for their country. Alexandra Stamen of Pittsburgh did the asking. As usual, the question was highly emotional but not difficult for Trump to rebuff. “I never made those statements,” he replied. “They were never made by me.” “Do you know we had 26 people as of today come out to say it never happened, and many people were there,” he added, fully secure in his response. When Stephanopoulos stated that “General [and former Trump administration Defense Secretary James] Mattis said you’re a divider; you’re not trying to unite the country,” it set up the president to fire back at his prominent critics. “General [and former White House Chief of Staff] John F. Kelly said he agreed with that,” Stephanopoulos continued. “John Bolton, who was your national security adviser, said you are a danger to the country.” “These are people that I let go,” Trump said. “These are disgruntled former employees, to put it in a nice way – a term people would understand … Mattis was fired, as you know, by President Obama and I fired him also. OK? … If you look at John Bolton, John Bolton – all he wanted to do was blow people up. He wanted to go to war with everybody …” And so it went. Would-be traps dished out in emotive voices were revealed to have hollow cores. There was no serious challenge for Trump to overcome in the soggy affair and so it can’t be said that he put on a bravura performance. He did display stamina and an ability to handle an array of topics, two tasks he accuses his health-addled Democratic opponent Joe Biden of being unable to perform. In that regard, it was a successful night. But for many Americans tuning in, it must have felt like watching a rerun of a formulaic program that has been aired many times before. ~ Read more from Joe Schaeffer.

Continue Reading Trump Skirts Unconcealed Landmines at ABC Town Hall

So Dems Want to Talk Gun Control – Bring It On

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here If ever there were a year to keep quiet about gun control, one might think it would be 2020. The COVID-19 scare and violent mobs roaming in the streets of U.S. cities have sent Americans in record numbers to purchase firearms. Perhaps this is because nothing brings forth the desire to own a gun more than fear, and it is safe to say this year has been frightening on many levels. Wealthy suburbanites have been forced to defend their property, fights have broken out in stores over toilet paper, gangs of bullies have accosted diners, citizens have been gunned down in the streets like roadkill — and the Democratic nominee for president, Joe Biden, has chosen this time to bring up gun control. Really? According to Statista.com, “In August 2020, firearm sales in the United States grew by 57.8 percent when compared to the same period in the previous year. Around 1.8 million handguns were sold in the United States” last month. Gun stores have been packed with first-time buyers who stood in line to get their hands on a weapon, and there is constant chatter among firearm enthusiasts about the lack of ammunition available. One can easily make the case that 2020 could go down as the year when “guns are making a comeback.” All this firearm activity is a backdrop to events that led Biden to tweet: “Weapons of war have no place in our communities. We need to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.” The predicate for Biden’s comment was the ambush of two Los Angeles law enforcement officers. For the moment, we shall ignore the fact that an assault weapon was not used in the incident, which sent two sheriff’s deputies to the hospital in critical condition. Public statements about a weapons ban – at a time when people clamor for firearms – seems a bizarre political strategy. And it defies logic that all people purchasing guns are Republicans. Surely, Democrats are buying up weaponry as well. Biden’s stance on gun control is well documented. He explicitly stated that firing a shotgun into the air is his preferred method of self-defense. To CNN’s Anderson Cooper’s 2019 question about whether a Biden administration will come for your guns, the former vice president responded, “Bingo! You’re right if you have an assault weapon.” The Definition of a Biden Assault Weapon At a fundraiser in 2019, Biden queried his audience: “Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons, including pistols with 9mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?” As the NRA Institute for Legislative Action pointed out: “… in targeting 9mm pistols, Biden has called for a ban on one of the most popular firearms in America. In its annual report on the U.S. firearms industry, Shooting Industry reported that 9mm caliber pistols are the most commonly produced pistol and have been for many years. In 2017 alone, there were more than 1.7 million 9mm pistols produced in the U.S. Cumulatively, there are tens of millions of 9mm pistols in the hands of law-abiding Americans.” Thus, it is a head-scratcher as to why Biden would single out the exceedingly popular 9mm. There is no question that the Democratic nominee for president is a big “C” gun grabber — with a sincere desire to confiscate guns. Why he felt the need to remind voters of his stance on a topic of such importance to many Americans is perplexing. Just about every police organization one can dredge up has already endorsed President Trump. So, what could be the rationale behind Biden bringing gun control to the forefront of his campaign for president? Perhaps there is no logic to it whatsoever. It might be we are witnessing just Joe being Joe. ~ Read more from Leesa K. Donner.

Continue Reading So Dems Want to Talk Gun Control – Bring It On

Twitter Flags Biden Pics for Child Exploitation

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Here’s a story that the corporate press would rather you didn’t hear. Social media company Twitter has flagged videos of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden acting inappropriately with young girls. While gleefully reporting on every instance in which social media companies take action against President Donald Trump, it remains oddly silent on this particular development. Twitter Flags Biden Videos RT reported that C-Span footage showing Biden touching young girls was flagged as “child sexual exploitation” by Twitter. This flag was discovered during an online argument about the former vice president. I tried to respond with a video of evidence on how Biden interacts with women and little girls but Twitter flagged me for trying to post images of child molestation hahahahahahhaha. Guess twitter agrees with @jvgraz pic.twitter.com/tOIUMrcyAs — Joe Bidens Televised Shart (@koenigjake) September 12, 2020 During the conversation, Johnny Graz, a progressive activist, argued that Biden should be investigated for sexual assault. To bolster Graz’s argument, another Twitter user attempted to post a video compilation of Biden inappropriately touching young girls during photo ops. So that user, named Jake Koenig, posted a screenshot displaying Twitter’s message informing him that the post was flagged for “trying to post images of child molestation.” He wrote: “I tried to respond with a video of evidence on how Biden interacts with women and little girls but Twitter flagged me for trying to post images of child molestation hahahahahahhaha. Guess twitter agrees with @jvgrazpic.” Twitter not only marked the footage as child sexual exploitation but also banned the user’s account until he deleted the post. The video shows Biden touching lawmakers’ daughters and granddaughters. In parts of the footage, he can be seen leaning in close and whispering in their ears. Biden has been the subject of speculation over his behavior with young girls for years. There are even more videos showing him engaging in this type of behavior, sniffing the hair of young and adult females and placing his hands on their shoulders. Some women have levied more severe accusations against Biden, claiming he engaged in improper behavior with them. In March, Tara Reade, who served as one of his staffers when he was a senator, publicly accused him of sexually assaulting her in 1993. Not Worth Coverage? It appears that the corporate media have decided to give Biden the Obama treatment with this story. If the proverbial shoe were on the other foot, and Twitter had flagged a video featuring Trump in the same manner, there is no doubt that it would be splashed across every left-leaning news site. In fact, the Fourth Estate has exhibited a remarkable lack of curiosity regarding these types of allegations against Biden, despite its supposed support of the #MeToo movement. But this story only confirms what most already know: The press is intent on getting Biden into the Oval Office, even if it means sacrificing journalistic principles. Read more from Jeff Charles.

Continue Reading Twitter Flags Biden Pics for Child Exploitation

It’s Open Season on Cops

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here When two Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies were shot in an apparent “ambush” on Saturday, it set off a series of events that have left the nation more shaken and more divided than at any other time since the riots began. The violence itself and the anti-cop protests that followed have been swiftly condemned by politicians on both sides of the divide, yet this has not stopped certain elements attempting to play political games. Both deputies were recent graduates, a female aged 31, and a male aged 24. They were shot at close range as they sat in their squad car. According to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, the officers “sustained multiple gunshot wounds and are in critical condition.” But their ordeal and that of their families was not over. Protesters soon gathered at the hospital where they blocked entrances and began chanting “death to police,” “kill the police,” and other derogatory terms. Swift Justice President Trump has called for “swift justice,” and wrote that, “If [the deputies] die, fast trial death penalty for the killer. Only way to stop this!” Joe Biden released a statement, saying: “Acts of lawlessness and violence directed against police officers are unacceptable, outrageous, and entirely counterproductive to the pursuit of greater peace and justice in America — as are the actions of those who cheer such attacks on.” Notably, Biden’s remarks seem to directly tie the shootings in with the lawlessness that has been plaguing American cities since the death of George Floyd. By suggesting that the attempted murders were an “unacceptable” method of pursuing “greater peace and justice,” the presidential hopeful has perhaps inadvertently linked this tragedy to the overarching unrest in the public mind. With protesters at the hospital screaming, “That’s why you’re dying one by one, you stupid f—s. Y’all gonna die one by one. This ain’t gonna stop,” and “I hope they f—— die,” there does not seem to be much effort to distance themselves from the attack. Two of the protesters were arrested at the scene: an unidentified man refused a dispersal order and later grappled with the police, and a woman, who, according to reports, interfered with the arrest. She was later identified as a journalist. Abhorrent Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, speaking on NBC, said: “There’s no place in civilized society for anybody to draw an arm and to shoot our law enforcement officers that put their lives on the line … And I won’t ever let a couple [of] voices that not only are uncalled for, but it’s abhorrent to say something like that when we have two deputies, who are sheriff’s deputies, in grave condition.” There is now a $100,000 reward for information that leads to the capture and conviction of the shooter. A Rising Tide of Violence There appears to be a growing use of violence against police officers that has spawned from the riots and protests across the country. In Chicago, officers have been warned by the FBI that 36 different gangs have entered a “shoot-on-sight” pact to open fire on any officer they see with a gun drawn and to film it. More than 700 police officers have been injured during the unrest that has rocked the nation. Chicago is facing an unheard-of number of both murdered cops, and officers committing suicide. Law enforcement leadership in cities with riots is resigning en masse as members’ ability to effectively police is stripped from them by politicians who refuse to end the carnage. Until politicians do more than just put out pithy soundbites and platitudes, it will be open season on law enforcement. And that makes everyone less safe.

Continue Reading It’s Open Season on Cops

Robert Mueller, the Missing Cellphone Data, and a Duck

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here At this point, the following statement is not breaking news, even though it has probably never been spoken of in the establishment media. It is worth reading, though – very slowly, so that you can ponder its meaning and implications: Robert Mueller’s Office of Special Counsel (OSC) team erased all data from at least 15 cellphones after those devices – or, more specifically, the data on those devices – had been requested by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz. All of these phones, we are being told, were wiped clean (no, Hillary, not with a cloth) by accident. Really? Are we supposed to believe that? Here’s another statement you should read and think carefully about. This one might be from a Shakespeare play, but probably not. It is, however, one of the most useful pieces of advice one could ever hope for: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Wise words indeed. These “unintentional” acts of destruction of evidence occurred, of course, during the OSC’s investigation into the now-debunked Trump-Russia collusion affair. The phones were wiped of data by people who – like most human beings in the developed world – use a cellphone frequently. The Cellphone Complexity It’s not as if these were complex, scientific devices unknown to their users. The individuals who worked under Robert Mueller in this investigation – one of the most important and consequential in American history – were high-rollers in their respective fields. Even in the private sector, between fielding calls to and from clients, district attorneys, law enforcement agencies, their personal assistants, making donations to the Democratic Party, and playing Sudoku, these men and women were using cellphones on a daily basis. The prosecutors, investigators, and administrative staff of the OSC were entirely familiar with the operation of these electronic marvels. Resetting a cellphone to factory specifications is not something that is accidentally done while reaching for a paper towel to mop up the coffee you spilled because your wife just sent you an incredibly hilarious cat video. It is inconceivable that we are now supposed to believe that 15 or more cellphones simply were mishandled by these top-tier professionals engaged in the most politically sensitive investigation of our lifetimes. The Crooked Investigation Robert Mueller’s probe into alleged collusion between President Trump’s 2016 election campaign and Russian agents was crooked from the start. It had to be. We know this for several reasons. First, because it was an evolution of an FBI counterintelligence operation that was being run by people who utterly despised Trump. That fact has been verified by their electronic communications at the time and from remarks they have since made. We know because Trump associate Roger Stone, who may be a sleazy character but was not a man who presented any physical danger to anyone, was marched out of his house in a predawn-raid at gunpoint by an army of heavily-armed police officers. We know because Michael Flynn was coerced into pleading guilty to lying to FBI agents. We know because Mueller himself and his favorite pitbull, Andrew Weissmann, both have questionable prosecutorial records. We know because the lead FBI agent on Mueller’s team, Peter Strzok, indulged in an epic exchange of text messages with his mistress – also an FBI employee assigned to Mueller’s team – on the subject of how much they loathed Donald Trump and his supporters. In order to regain our trust in the justice system and in the notion that nobody – as Democrats love to remind us – is above the law, we must hope that Attorney General Bill Barr and federal prosecutor John Durham do not take this cellphone debacle lightly. Perhaps someone should mail to each of these two esteemed officials the latest ornithological guide, so that we may be assured that they know a duck when they see one. ~ Read more from Graham J. Noble.

Continue Reading Robert Mueller, the Missing Cellphone Data, and a Duck

Liberty Nation’s Election Countdown: 50 Days To Go

Please respect our republishing guidelines - Click Here Donald Trump and Joe Biden The November 3 election could be the most important one in recent history. Both sides are diametrically opposed and many argue that the fate of the nation is at play. Liberty Nation wants you to have the full facts. We update this page daily so please bookmark and keep checking back. Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll: Trump approval 48% ( no change ) ~ Latest Presidential Polling: Monmouth = Biden +7 Rasmussen Reports = Biden +2 Economist/YouGov = Biden +9 Hill/Harris = Biden +8 Reuters-Ipsos = Biden +12 CNBC/Change Research (D) = Biden +6 USC Dornslife = Biden +10 Harvard-Harris = Biden +6 IBD/TIPP = Biden +8 ~ Political Betting Odds to Win the Presidency: Joe Biden – 10/17 (-170) Donald Trump – 3/2 (+150) Betting odds explained: Betting odds are displayed here in the British format, known as fractional odds, and the American format, often called moneyline odds. With fractional odds, the first number represents the amount of money bet and the second number is the return. 3/5 means that a winning bet of $5 would yield $3 profit. Moneyline odds show a minus (-) or plus (+) symbol for favorites and underdogs, respectively. The favorite may have odds of -300, meaning that one would have to bet $300 in order to win $100. An underdog might have odds of +250, meaning that one would win $250 if one wagered $100. ~

Continue Reading Liberty Nation’s Election Countdown: 50 Days To Go