Stories about
Cory Booker


Cory Anthony Booker (born April 27, 1969) is an American politician currently serving as the junior United States Senator from New Jersey, in office since 2013. The first African-American U.S. Senator from New Jersey, he was previously the 36th Mayor of Newark from 2006 to 2013. Before that Booker served on the Newark City Council for the Central Ward from 1998 to 2002.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) said Monday that President Donald Trump could lose the 2020 presidential election if his “personality” is the central focus of his campaign.

“The person who defines that race is going to win the race. If this is about Donald Trump and his personality, he isn’t going to win it,” Ryan said during a lecture in Vero Beach, Florida, according to TCPalm.com.

The former speaker said President Trump should focus on issues of substance, rather than not style, if he wants to beat his Democrat presidential rival next year. Potential Democrat presidential contenders include Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris (D-CA), and Cory Booker (D-NJ). Former Vice President Joe Biden and former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) are expected to launch campaigns in the coming weeks.

Ryan retired from the House in January after serving three years as the chamber’s speaker. Under his watch, Republicans lost a House majority in the 2018 midterm election.

President Trump and Ryan have had an uneasy relationship. In an interview with the Daily Caller, the president blamed Ryan for failing to help secure funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Well, I was going to veto the omnibus bill and Paul told me in the strongest of language, ‘Please don’t do that, we’ll get you the wall.’ And I said, ‘I hope you mean that, because I don’t like this bill,'” the president told the outlet.

“Paul told me in the strongest of terms that, ‘Please sign this and if you sign this we will get you that wall.’ Which is desperately needed by our country. Humanitarian crisis, trafficking, drugs, you know, everything — people, criminals, gangs, so, you know, we need the wall,” he added. “And then he went lame duck.”

Breitbart News published October 2016 audio of Ryan vowing to never defend President Trump following the release of the Access Hollywood tape. “His comments are not anywhere in keeping with our party’s principles and values,” Ryan said. “There are basically two things that I want to make really clear, as for myself as your Speaker. I am not going to defend Donald Trump—not now, not in the future. As you probably heard, I disinvited him from my first congressional district GOP event this weekend—a thing I do every year. And I’m not going to be campaigning with him over the next 30 days,” Ryan said during a conference call with Republican lawmakers.

Ryan was the vice presidential candidate for Sen. Mitt Romney’s (R-UT) failed 2012 White House bid.

The Washington Times

Published  1 month ago

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

For two years, Democrats and their leadership have been haranguing the people of the United States with hysteria claiming that President Trump was an agent of the Russians, stole the election, is mentally disturbed or unfit and obstructed justice — among other bizarre and crazed accusations. Yet Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the Democratically-led House, has announced that impeaching Mr. Trump is “not worth it.”

In an interview for The Washington Post magazine, conducted on March 6, Mrs. Pelosi said, “I’m not for impeachment. … This is news. I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”

This new revelation from Mrs. Pelosi is another example of Democrats casually admitting that everything they’ve done to this country through their obscene accusations against the president and his supporters was a sham.

After all, if you believe that the duly elected president of the United States is actually a foreign agent for a nation that has historically been an enemy of this country, you should be shocked at Mrs. Pelosi walking away from the idea of taking action.

Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept made this observation on Twitter: “Anyone who has ever believed Trump is controlled & blackmailed by Putin to the point that Putin makes Trump treasonously sacrifice America’s interests for Russia’s — and there are a lot of you — should be marching in fury in the streets over Pelosi’s refusal to impeach Trump.”

But this isn’t the only example of the fraud perpetrated by the Democrats on their own base and this country. Recently, Hillary Clinton noted that she was not going to run for president again in 2020. This on the heels of 2016 supporters telling her to not run. A CNN panel in early March, comprised of 2016 Hillary voters, made it clear her supporters want her gone.

Host Alisyn Camerota asked if Mrs. Clinton had a role in 2020. “No,” answered one male immediately. Another woman said, “No, stay away.” And another was empathic, “Look, I love you, Hillary — I love you, I love you, but stay away. We are so divided right now that anything that has Hillary on it is automatically going to separate us again.” Another piped up with: “I just think her time is done. I think it’s been — it’s done. We do need something new.”

That’s pretty harsh. We’ve been told every day since the election that she won that election in 2016. That Donald Trump stole that election. That Mr. Trump used the Russians to help him steal it from her. In fact, 2020 would simply be her re-election to her second term.

The answer to this is the same as Mrs. Pelosi’s decisions: The Democratic grass-roots have known all along the accusations against Mr. Trump have been a fraud. The 2016 election was fair. Mrs. Clinton did not lose because it was stolen; she lost because she took people and things for granted, didn’t go to Wisconsin and arrogantly wrote off blue states as guaranteed. In other words, Hillary lost because she was Hillary. And they know it.

The aftermath of then-Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing is another good example of how gaslighting the public is now a Democratic art. We were told for weeks that he was a drug-dealing pimp who organized gang rape parties. And this was just in high school.

Despite his eventual confirmation to the high court, Sens. Kamala D. Harris and Cory Booker, two of those prominently leading Democrats who attempted virtual character assassination, who strutted and preened on television with their furrowed brows during the persecution, aren’t demanding that Justice Kavanaugh be removed; they aren’t out there organizing rallies to protest the horrible man who has been put on the Supreme Court.

Instead, they’re running for president, because the Democrats think that attempting to destroy an innocent man for political gain should get you promoted.

In assessing these politicians, the American people have two options: National Democrats are either the most incompetent leaders in the history of the country, losing interest and walking away from two evil, corrupt men who hold incredible positions of power. Or the more obvious choice: All these accusations against Mr. Trump and Justice Kavanaugh (like those against the Covington Catholic High School kids and actor Jussie Smollett’s imagined “MAGA Country” attackers) were false from the start, revealing a political and media elite that see the nation as a horse to ride and abuse until it drops and dies.

At first, Democratic leadership may have been excited that someone like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was pushing Democratic support for infanticide, open borders and controversies involving blackface, Klan outfits and allegations of sexual assault, out of the headlines.

Those issues, however, are not forgotten by the American people. Neither is anti-Semitism. The American family is driven by a much longer-term outlook, which includes being concerned about what kind of country our children will be inheriting. Since at least January, the Democrats have had the very bad luck of being seen for what they are, and it is not what the American people imagine, or want, for their future.

• Tammy Bruce, president of Independent Women’s Voice, author and Fox News contributor, is a radio talk show host.

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

The Democratic Party announced today that it will hold its 2020 presidential convention in Milwaukee Wisconsin. There, Democrats are expected to nominate a radical abortion activist to take on President Donald Trump.

Democrats are heading to Wisconsin in an attempt to win back a state that supported Trump in 2016.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez is set to announce Monday Milwaukee will host the July 13-16, 2020 convention.

Holding the convention in Wisconsin is significant for Democrats after 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton declined to campaign in the state during the general election. Clinton narrowly lost the state to Trump, which along with small vote deficits in Pennsylvania and Michigan, decided the election in his favor.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, said last month he was confident Milwaukee would be chosen, saying the choice was “advantageous to the Democratic Party.”

Other cities in the running included Houston and Miami.

Republicans will hold their 2020 convention to nominate Trump for re-election in Charlotte, North Carolina.

When it comes to the 2020 presidential election there is no bigger divide between President Donald Trump and the pro-abortion Democrats who want to replace him than the issue of infanticide and abortions up to birth.

While President Trump has taken a strongly pro-life position throughout his presidency and has compiled a strong pro-life record opposing abortion and defunding the Planned Parenthood abortion business, Democrats have promoted killing babies in abortions even in the late term of pregnancy. And recently they supported infanticide.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions

Between now and the presidential primaries next year and the November 2020 general election, pro-life groups have vowed to hold these pro-abortion presidential candidates accountable for also supporting infanticide.

“Today’s vote exposes beyond all doubt the modern Democratic Party’s extreme agenda of abortion on demand through the moment of birth and even beyond – a deeply unpopular position even within their own rank and file,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “An overwhelming majority of voters are horrified by infanticide and want Congress to protect babies born alive during failed abortions. But when forced to take a position on the record, not a single one of the top Senate Democrats running for president in 2020 could muster the basic decency to outlaw infanticide.”

“President Trump’s pro-life leadership is obviously resonating with the public and could not present a clearer contrast to Democrats’ extremism. SBA List’s army of grassroots pro-life activists will go on offense to hold Democratic presidential contenders accountable for their betrayal of the most vulnerable and for trampling the will of the American people,” she told LifeNews.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue said the Democrats running for president all claim to suport universal health care — except for babies who survive abortions.

The Democratic Party Platform says, “Democrats have been fighting to secure universal health care for the American people for generations, and we are proud to be the party that passed Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act.”

“Yesterday, they walked away from that pledge, finding an exception to its universal coverage,” he said. “If a baby survives an abortion, he is not entitled to health care. The majority of Democrats voted to permit infanticide; only three voted for the bill that would protect the kids. President Trump denounced what the Democrats did.”

“Every Democrat who is either running for president, or planning to run, voted to legalize selective infanticide. The Democrats no longer support universal health care,” he concluded.

Not only do contenders such as Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have 100-percent pro-abortion voting records, they also sponsored a radical pro-abortion bill that would have legalized abortions for basically any reason up to birth.

Sean Hannity

Published  1 month ago

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders lead the pack in recent polling for potential 2020 Democratic nominees; setting the stage for another showdown between the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic Party.

“It’s no surprise that the 76-year-old Biden and 77-year-old Sanders are ahead of the rest of the ever-expanding field of Democratic White House hopefuls, which right now stands at 14. It illustrates that polling in the 2020 race – at this very early point in the cycle – is being dominated by name recognition. Biden and Sanders have national profiles that overshadow the other contenders, including high-profile Sens. Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Cory Booker of New Jersey,” reports Fox News.

The poll shows Biden taking the top spot with 28% of the vote and Sanders falling behind at 25%.

The former Vice President is widely expected to officially launch his 2020 presidential campaign by mid-April.

Read the full report at Fox News.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

In a new opinion column written in The Wall Street Journal, Senator Ben Sasse and Meghan McCain write about how the Democrat Party is now controlled by Planned Parenthood abortion extremists who support infanticide.

The Nebraska Senator and the daughter of former presidential candidate and Senator John McCain say the Democratic Party is now running by pro-abortion radicals who have moved far away from even the abortion supporters of yesteryear like Bill Clinton. At least those abortion advocates used to be able to say they wanted abortions to be rare. Today’s modern abortion advocates don’t even pay that lip service.

“The party of ‘safe, legal and rare’ has been captured by the loud voices and deep pockets of an extremist abortion industry that treats abortion as a moral good. Major Democratic politicians are even unwilling to protect the lives of babies who survive attempted abortions,” they write.

They excoriate all of the Democrat presidential candidates who recently voted for support infanticide, saying “infanticide isn’t complicated. The current debate is about whether or not it’s OK to deprive newborns of appropriate medical care.” The bill merely “would have required health-care providers to give babies who survive abortions the same care they would give to any other baby at the same gestational age.”

“It shouldn’t be controversial. It shouldn’t be partisan…. Yet under enormous pressure from an abortion industry that spends tens of millions in campaign contributions, Senate Democrats—including six seeking the presidency in 2020—filibustered the bill,” they wrote.

They also complained how the media has become a willing pro-abortion accomplice covering up the truth “with cheap euphemisms and a prefabricated narrative,” and describing “all pro-life policies, even ones backed by a majority of Americans, as ‘controversial.'”

And they highlighted how abortions up to birth and infanticide have received support from top Democrat politicians.

“Gov. Andrew Cuomo lit One World Trade Center pink to celebrate late-term abortion and the removal of protections for babies born alive during botched abortions,” they wrote. “Meanwhile in Virginia, Gov. Ralph Northam endorsed infanticide outright, suggesting that a baby born during a botched abortion ought to be ‘made comfortable,’ but then possibly left to die on the table.”

“This debate is about infanticide. Planned Parenthood is defending that crime. Many in the national media are overlooking it. Democratic politicians are hiding from it. But the American people are repulsed by it. The recent vote was a missed opportunity to protect the most vulnerable among us. But it will not be the last,” McCain and Sasse concluded.

When it comes to the 2020 presidential election there is no bigger divide between President Donald Trump and the pro-abortion Democrats who want to replace him than the issue of infanticide and abortions up to birth.

While President Trump has taken a strongly pro-life position throughout his presidency and has compiled a strong pro-life record opposing abortion and defunding the Planned Parenthood abortion business, Democrats have promoted killing babies in abortions even in the late term of pregnancy. And recently they supported infanticide.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) said Monday that President Donald Trump could lose the 2020 presidential election if his “personality” is the central focus of his campaign.

“The person who defines that race is going to win the race. If this is about Donald Trump and his personality, he isn’t going to win it,” Ryan said during a lecture in Vero Beach, Florida, according to TCPalm.com.

The former speaker said President Trump should focus on issues of substance, rather than not style, if he wants to beat his Democrat presidential rival next year. Potential Democrat presidential contenders include Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris (D-CA), and Cory Booker (D-NJ). Former Vice President Joe Biden and former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) are expected to launch campaigns in the coming weeks.

Ryan retired from the House in January after serving three years as the chamber’s speaker.

President Trump and Ryan have had an uneasy relationship. In an interview with the Daily Caller, the president blamed Ryan for failing to help secure funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Well, I was going to veto the omnibus bill and Paul told me in the strongest of language, ‘Please don’t do that, we’ll get you the wall.’ And I said, ‘I hope you mean that, because I don’t like this bill,'” the president told the outlet.

“Paul told me in the strongest of terms that, ‘Please sign this and if you sign this we will get you that wall.’ Which is desperately needed by our country. Humanitarian crisis, trafficking, drugs, you know, everything — people, criminals, gangs, so, you know, we need the wall,” he added. “And then he went lame duck.”

Breitbart News published October 2016 audio of Ryan vowing to never defend President Trump following the release of the Access Hollywood tape. “His comments are not anywhere in keeping with our party’s principles and values,” Ryan said. “There are basically two things that I want to make really clear, as for myself as your Speaker. I am not going to defend Donald Trump—not now, not in the future. As you probably heard, I disinvited him from my first congressional district GOP event this weekend—a thing I do every year. And I’m not going to be campaigning with him over the next 30 days,” Ryan said during a conference call with Republican lawmakers.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

On Tuesday afternoon, two weeks after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 18th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 16 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled it out of order. After Democrats denied Johnson’s request to vote on the bill he criticized them for failing to allow a vote. As Democrats have done on five occasions, the pro-life Congressman’s mic was ultimately cut off as he attempted to speak further on the legislation.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

ACTION: Contact members of Congress and urge them to sign the Discharge Petition to bring the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to the House floor for a vote.

Sara A. Carter

Published  1 month ago

This article was first published on The Hill

“Medicare for all” sounds good and may make good electioneering slogan sense for presidential candidates like Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.). It is a sales pitch to younger voters and will likely remain popular — at least until the public really understands what an expensive wrecking ball it is.

One of the most shocking pillars of the “Medicare for all” proposals being touted is the demolition of all private insurance. The resulting upheaval and displacement of health-care access across the board is the main reason that “Medicare for all” doesn’t have a chance of passing.

It is one thing to promote a basic government administered health insurance to reach the have nots; it is quite another to demolish all private insurance to paste up a prefabricated government one-size-fits-all product. The time and place to consider a massive socialized medicine program like “Medicare for all” is in a more primitive society without a well formed health-care system.

The destruction of the existing system and replacing it with a rigid government-run system with fewer choices might ultimately be cheaper in the long run but it would certainly be lower quality. Socialized health care across the board is not a good fit for America’s way of life. You may not be able to keep your doctor under ObamaCare, but at least you get to keep your health-care system. Not so with “Medicare for all.”

Of course, if “Medicare for all” ever passes, the senators and congressmen and congresswomen promoting it will quickly put together a plan to get their own high frills health coverage another way.

This article was published by Dr. Marc Siegel, an Opinion Contributor for The Hill.

Click here to read full article on The Hill

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Bill de Blasio, the Communist Mayor of New York took a page out of Kim Jong Un’s playbook and announced “Meatless Mondays” will be implemented in public schools across NYC beginning in the 2019-2020 school year.

Bill de Blasio, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other Communists in the Democrat party are now trying to control how much meat Americans eat.

The government believes that vegetarian meals, which are deficient in many vitamins and minerals only found in meat and poultry, are “healthier” for Americans, so that’s what will be served to the kids on Mondays.

“Cutting back on meat a little will improve New Yorkers’ health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” De Blasio said. “We’re expanding Meatless Mondays to all public schools to keep our lunch and planet green for generations to come.”

We’re doing Meatless Mondays citywide for the future of our planet AND our @NYCSchools students! https://t.co/v3ZdrbcEfU

— Mayor Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) March 11, 2019

The Democrats want to control every aspect of our lives and are waging war on meat eaters by pushing vegan diets onto Americans — Veganism is just a form of starvation.

Bill de Blasio, Cory Booker and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sure sound a lot like North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, who fed his people fake meat dubbed “injogogi,” to help North Koreans survive the decades of famine.

“Injogogi” means “man-made meat” — in other words, it’s similar to what vegan Cory Booker eats and now the Democrat Communist lawmakers want us to eat it too.

Des Moines Register

Published  1 month ago

Bernie Sanders, who announced his 2020 campaign recently, is a close second in Iowa's preferences in poll of likely Democratic caucusgoers conducted March 3-6.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

New Jersey Democrat Senator Cory Booker exclaimed that the real heroes in the U.S. military are the transgender soldiers and that President Donald Trump’s proposed ban on transgender soldiers is a national security threat.

“Transgender servicemembers are heroes, just like all other servicemembers risking their lives for their country,” Booker said in his March 9 tweet, CNS News reported.

“President Trump’s effort to ban them doesn’t just fly in the face of our collective values—it’s a national security threat,” the announced candidate for the Democrat nomination for president in 2020 added:

Transgender servicemembers are heroes, just like all other servicemembers risking their lives for our country. President Trump's effort to ban them doesn't just fly in the face of our collective values—it's a national security threat. #ProtectTransTroops https://t.co/bQjTA5Ubkg

Booker attached a link to a video by the Human Rights Campaign featuring transgenders who once served in the military and who felt the need to speak out against the president’s ban on transgender soldiers.

Former Army captain Jennifer Peace, for instance, said in the video, “I had a great relationship with my soldiers and peers & my seniors & after coming out none of that changed because what they valued was my contribution to the mission, not my gender”:

"I had a great relationship with my soldiers, my peers & my seniors & after coming out none of that changed because what they valued was my contribution to the mission, not my gender."

These trans service members speak out on the Trump-Pence administration's #TransMilitaryBan. pic.twitter.com/D6X5PCclx3

— Human Rights Campaign (@HRC) March 8, 2019

For her part, former Amy Sgt. Patricia King exclaimed, “Having a unit that accepted who I was was one of the most empowering things because it said, ‘we don’t care about who you are as a person. We care about how well you do your job.'”

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

For a woman who has no problem offering to raise taxes on the American people, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) can't get around to paying her own. Doesn't that sound a little hypocritical? Claim Your Free Trump

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

In a stunning blow to the unhinged race-obsessed political left, a grand jury has hammered hate crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett with sixteen felony counts that could put the actor behind bars for years. The star of

National Review

Published  1 month ago

I have a new hobby. It’s collecting the excuses Democrats make for Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota Democratic congresswoman who has an unhealthy fixation on Jewish influence, Jewish money, and Jewish loyalty. Omar has said that Israel “hypnotized the world,” ascribing to Jews the power of mind control in the service of manipulating public opinion. She’s said the only reason Congress supports Israel is Jewish campaign donations. Most recently, using the classic anti-Semitic trope of dual loyalty, she criticized supporters of Israel for having “allegiance to a foreign power.” A real treasure, Omar is. A typical freshman congresswoman sees her mission as — forgive the expression — bringing home the bacon for her district. Not Ilhan. Her project is to mainstream anti-Semitic rhetoric within the Democratic party. Once upon a time, you’d have to visit the invaluable website of the Middle East Media Research Institute to hear such tripe. Now you just need to flip on C-SPAN.

And Democrats are powerless to stop it. They’re tripping over themselves, making rationalizations, dodging reality, and trying to clean up this anti-Semitic mess. Omar is new to this, they say. She never intended to come across as anti-Semitic. She can’t help it. “She comes from a different culture.” She didn’t know what she was saying — she’s a moron! She’s just trying to “start a conversation” about the policies of Israel’s government. And why are you singling her out, anyway. “She is living through a lot of pain.” She’s black, she’s a woman, and she’s Muslim. You can’t condemn her without also condemning white men of privilege. What are you, racist? Islamophobic? Shame on you for picking on this poor lady, who just happens to say that American Jews serve a foreign power by buying off politicians and using the Force to blinker people’s minds.

Before such “arguments” — they are really assertions of victimhood to intimidate critics — Nancy Pelosi shudders. She’s supposed to be this Iron Lady, returned to power after exile, ruling her caucus with a vise-like grip. But her hands are covered in Palmolive. She’s spent the first weeks of Congress doing little more than responding to the various insanities of Omar and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. Pelosi will condemn Omar one minute, before appearing with her on the cover of Rolling Stone the next. She’s lost a step. She can’t hold her caucus together when Republicans call for motions to recommit on the House floor. The policies her candidates ran on in swing districts vanished under the solar-powered glare of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. We’re not talking about covering preexisting conditions, we’re pledging to rid the world once and for all of the scourges of air travel and cow flatulence. Pelosi’s trigger-happy committee chairmen, firing their subpoena cannons into the air at random, look like goofballs desperate to impeach President Trump.

Whatever control Pelosi had over her majority vanished the second she delayed the resolution condemning Omar. It then became undeniable that AOC & co. is in charge. Identity politics has rendered the Democrats incapable of criticizing anti-Semitism so long as it dons the wardrobe of intersectionality. It’s nothing short of incredible that three women from three different cities — New York, Detroit, and Minneapolis — can run roughshod over 233 other House Democrats with a little help from social media, woke 24-year-olds in the digital press, and the Congressional Black Caucus. If you’re Ocasio-Cortez right now, you must love life from the comfort of the test kitchen in your luxury D.C. apartment building. What’s next for this trio — two of whom are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, two of whom support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement that seeks Israel’s destruction, and all three of whom combine radical anti-American politics with radical self-regard — finding a candidate to primary pro-Israel Democrat Eliot Engel, chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, on which Omar sits? Challenging Chuck Schumer in the Democratic primary when he’s up for reelection in 2022?

The most pressing order of business has got to be the 2020 presidential election. Omar, AOC, and Tlaib don’t strike me as Cory Booker supporters. Amy Klobuchar might be too much of a taskmaster for them. Most likely the radicals will line up behind the current frontrunner, Bernie Sanders, who has already surrounded himself with anti-Israel activists. Sanders has said criticism of Omar is just a means to “stifle debate” over Israel’s government. He’s too smart to believe that. As the most successful Jewish presidential candidate in history, he has a responsibility to draw lines. After all, he’s no stranger to the dual-loyalty charge — though of course in his case the other country was the Soviet Union.

Bernie Sanders has no interest in stopping Omar. He recognizes that she represents the impending transformation of the Democratic party into something more closely resembling the British Labour party. Labourites elected avowed socialist Jeremy Corbyn party leader in September 2015. The years since have been spent in one anti-Semitism scandal after another. Sanders wants desperately to be the American Corbyn. If anti-Semitism is the price of a socialist America, so be it. Remember what Stalin said about the omelette. I’m sure Bernie does. If Democrats can’t rebuke Omar swiftly and definitively, if they have trouble competing with Ocasio-Cortez’s Instagram cooking show, how will they be able to stop Sanders from carrying his devoted bloc of supporters to plurality victories in the early primaries, and using the divided field to gain momentum just as Trump did?

So far this year the Democrats have floundered in a pit of racism, sexual assault, and anti-Semitism. They’ve embraced policies akin to infanticide, and announced plans to expropriate wealth, pay reparations for slavery, eliminate private health insurance within two years, and rebuild or retrofit every building in the United States before the world ends from climate change twelve years from now. Throughout it all, they’ve received a pass from the know-nothing media. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Sanders have all made the claim that Omar has done nothing but criticize the policies of Bibi Netanyahu. That’s a bald-faced lie, a falsehood not one of the hundreds upon hundreds of reporters covering the Democratic field has scrutinized. These are the very people who have spent the past three years sermonizing on the importance of truth in politics, and they are doing Bernie’s work for him. Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution insists that the Democratic party continues to be center-left. But the election returns and publi- opinion data that support her thesis become much less important when the party’s biggest stars make a hard-left turn. The Democrats seem ripe for a takeover by Bernie and his pals, or at least for a blistering and incendiary battle for control similar to what the GOP experienced last time around.

Blame for Democratic radicalization is most often assigned to Trump — there’s little he isn’t blamed for — but it really ought to go to President Obama. It was Obama who established “daylight” between the United States and Israel, who blamed opposition to his Iran deal on “money” from “lobbyists,” who failed to veto a U.N. resolution singling out the Jewish State and declaring its settlements to have “no legal validity.” It was Obama’s disastrous second term — when he handed the reins of governance to an administrative state immune from popular sovereignty, when he flouted the Constitution in expanding his administrative amnesty, when he made overtures to hostile governments in Iran and Cuba — that set into motion the decline of the American center-left. Now the Obama bros defend Omar on their podcast and in their newsletter, and bolster the presidential candidacy of Robert Francis “Beto” “Take the Wall Down” O’Rourke. If Obama really wanted to arrest the Democrats’ slide into socialism and anti-Semitism, he’d speak out. Do you think Joe Biden will able to stop it? Fat chance. The odds of a Bernie Sanders nomination, a Howard Schultz candidacy, and a Donald Trump victory increase every time Ilhan Omar opens her mouth.

This piece originally appeared in the Washington Free Beacon. It is reprinted here with permission.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

Mockarena, Co-Founder

Cory Booker was speaking to a group of people about a piece of legislation he wanted to talk about, and decided to open up the floor for questions afterwords. Someone asked him to address the whole Ilhan Omar debacle, and you guys, LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS:

Dear Lord, how hard is it for Cory Booker to just say “Ilhan Omar’s comments were anti-Semitic & hateful & I condemn them”??

But Booker refuses to respond on air to the question.pic.twitter.com/7kQSe3Szjm

— Liz Wheeler (@Liz_Wheeler) March 7, 2019

OMG. So he wants questions, but then when the ONLY QUESTION ASKED is one that makes him uncomfortable, he calls for an end to questions. Welcome to what a Cory Booker presidency would look like, y’all. Democrats are the least transparent and least honest people in the universe. At least Trump answers basically every question asked of him (often to his detriment.)

Cory Booker is a cartoon character and this clip completely cracked me up!

CNBC

Published  1 month ago

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) speaks at his 'Conversation with Cory' campaign event at the Nevada Partners Event Center on February 24, 2019 in North Las Vegas, Nevada.

Senator Cory Booker introduced a sweeping criminal justice reform bill on Thursday, becoming the first 2020 presidential candidate to put forth a detailed plan to amend the country's prison system.

The bill, known as the Next Step Act, includes a collection of bold reforms that largely jump past the incremental progresses of previous bills like 2018's landmark First Step Act, which Booker co-sponsored.

"It's been 75 days since the First Step Act was signed into law, and already, it's changing lives," the New Jersey Democrat said in a statement. "But the First Step Act is just as its name suggests - it is one step on the long road toward fixing our broken criminal justice system."

The bill would slash mandatory minimum sentences in half for nonviolent drug offenders, making the longest mandatory sentence 10 years instead of 20 years. The First Step Act reduced the mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders but not for first-time offenders.

The bill would also completely eliminate the discrepancy between crack and powder cocaine sentences, which was first reduced in 2010 from 100:1 to 18:1 and applied retroactively in the First Step Act. Racial minorities are disproportionately sentenced for crack cocaine offenses: In fiscal year 2017, 94 percent of offenders were black or Hispanic, according to data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Booker also places special attention on formerly incarcerated individuals, including measures in the bill that would make it easier for those with criminal records to find jobs and obtain professional licenses. The bill would also reinstate voting rights to former felons nationwide.

Several of the reforms in the Next Step Act overlap with the marijuana legalization bill Booker introduced just last week. Both bills call for legalizing the drug nationwide, expunging criminal records for those charged with marijuana possession and investing money into communities harmed by drugs.

Criminal justice reform is shaping up to be a major issue during the 2020 presidential campaign. Bipartisan support for the issue is at its highest level in recent years, as evidenced by the passing of the First Step Act with enthusiastic support from President Donald Trump.

"People thought that passing the First Step Act was impossible, but we proved them wrong. We can do that again," Booker said at a press conference announcing the bill.

None of Booker's fellow Democratic presidential contenders in the Senate have signed on as co-sponsors of the bill yet. Two of the declared candidates, senators Kamala Harris of California and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, are former government prosecutors.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) told a group of supporters in Iowa that the Green New Deal is like fighting World War II.

Booker is a vegan and says America’s current meat-eating habits cannot continue.

This won’t go over well with Middle America or the millions of American meateaters.

Booker told the February issue of VegNews that he became a vegetarian in 1992 when, after a few days of trying the new lifestyle, he said, “Oh my gosh, I will never go back to eating meat.” He made the decision to go vegan in 2014…

The progressive senator doesn’t think veganism is just appropriate for his private life; he’d like everyone to embrace the diet because he believes the world can’t keep providing enough beef and pork to satisfy meat cravings.

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don’t have enough land.”

In addition to convincing the masses to give up meat, Booker has other legislative goals that would interfere with America’s eating habits.

Conservative Tribune

Published  1 month ago

Economist Thomas Sowell expressed great concern that enough Americans might be persuaded by the siren call of socialism to take the country down that route.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

On Friday, over one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 16th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 14 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Carol Miller (R-WV) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled her out of order. After Democrats denied Davis’ request to vote on the bill they cut her off ruled her out of order again as she attempted to criticize them for denying the request.

Miller responded to Democrats blocking a vote on the bill in comments to LifeNews afterwards.

“I’m a wife, a mother, and a grandmother, I’ve experienced the miracle of life and know that children are our most precious gift. We must ensure protection for the youngest and most innocent of our citizens, and it saddens me that my colleagues across the aisle are willing to play political games on a topic this important,” she said.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

ACTION: Contact members of Congress and urge them to sign the Discharge Petition to bring the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to the House floor for a vote.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

After days of infighting and a near-rebellion by Democratic rank-and-file members, the House on Thursday passed a bipartisan resolution that indirectly condemned Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar's 'anti-Semitic' and 'pernicious' comments -- without mentioning her by name.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Late Wednesday, one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 14th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 12 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Steve Watkins (R-KS) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled him out of order.

After the vote, Congressman Watkins told LifeNews: “This legislation is a matter of protecting human dignity and should not be a controversial issue. It amends Federal law so that in the case that a baby survives an abortion, the doctor must do everything in their power to give the baby medical care. I will continue to work with my colleagues to bring this legislation to the House Floor for a vote.”

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

www.theepochtimes.com

Published  1 month ago

The majority of American adults prefer not to live in a socialist country, according to a Harris poll released exclusively to Axios on March 10.

Almost 63 percent of adults and more than 50 percent of young Americans disagreed when asked if they “prefer living in a socialist country.”

The results of the poll are significant because the 2020 election is shaping up to be a referendum on socialism. The leading Democratic candidates have largely embraced the socialist policies long advocated by socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Meanwhile, President Donald Trump and Republicans are slamming socialism as a failed and destructive ideology.

“America will never be a socialist country,” Trump said at the State of the Union address last month.

Notably, while most Americans don’t want to live in a socialist country the majority still approve of socialist policies. Two out of three adults surveyed agreed that the government “should provide universal health care” and 56 percent said the government should provide “tuition-free college.” Sanders has embraces these two socialist policies for years. Several leading Democratic candidates have made them part of their 2020 platform.

“Those ideas that we talked about four years ago that seemed so very radical at that time, well, today, virtually all of those ideas are supported by a majority of the American people and have overwhelming support from Democrats and independents,” Sanders said at a rally in New Hampshire on March 10. “They’re ideas that Democratic candidates all across the board are supporting.”

Americans overwhelmingly support universal health care. Nearly 67 percent agreed that the government should provide universal health care, a socialist policy proposal embodied in the “Medicare for All” proposal embraced by Sanders and other candidates. “Medicare for All” would grant government near total control over the insurance and health care industries and virtually eliminate private health insurance.

Private Health Care

Curiously, the number of Americans agreeing that the government should allow private health insurance far exceeds the number of those backing universal health care. More than 86 percent of adults agreed that the government should allow private health insurance, suggesting that “Medicare for All” may be hard to sell to the public once Americans learn that the proposal will largely eliminate or prohibit private health insurance.

Young Americans showed stronger support for socialism, universal health care, and tuition-free college than the general population, the poll found. The trend is significant because millennials and generation Z will make up 37 percent of the electorate in 2020, according to Pew Research.

While backing socialist policies, a number of the Democratic 2020 candidates have attempted to distance themselves from the socialist label. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have said that they are not socialists.

The same candidates have nevertheless co-sponsored the Green New Deal, one of the most radical socialist proposals to come before Congress in years. The program could cost as much as $93 trillion over 10 years, according to the American Action Forum. The Green New Deal’s immense price tag would quadruple the tax burden on American citizens, costing $650,000 per household.

The Green New Deal

The Green New Deal (pdf) calls for a Soviet Union-like “10-year national mobilization,” which would replace or rebuild every house in America, take all gas-engine cars off the road in favor of electric vehicles, and shift the entire U.S. economy away from fossil fuels. The deal also promises jobs, food, and education to all Americans.

In addition to the staggering price tag, the Green New Deal would achieve socialism’s primary goal of government expansion into Americans’ private lives and property, since replacing every building and every car would have to be mandated and enforced.

“The Green New Deal is clearly very expensive. Its further expansion of the federal government’s role in some of the most basic decisions of daily life, however, would likely have a more lasting and damaging impact than its enormous price tag,” the American Action Forum wrote in its analysis.

The clamor for socialist policies and the enormous price tags that accompany them is happening as the growing national debt has become a national security issue. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said in February that the greatest threat to national security is the national debt.

“I’m concerned that our increasing fractious political process, particularly with respect to federal spending, is threatening our ability to properly defend our nation both in the short term and especially in the long term,” Coats said on Feb. 13.

“The failure to address our long-term fiscal situation has increased the national debt to over $20 trillion and growing. I would urge all of us to recognize the need to address this challenge and to take action as soon as possible before a fiscal crisis occurs that truly undermines our ability to ensure our national security.”

Follow Ivan on Twitter: @ivanpentchoukov

AP News

Published  1 month ago

NEW YORK (AP) — Bernie Sanders was minutes away from walking onto a Brooklyn stage last weekend to launch a second presidential campaign that he insisted would be all about the future. The...

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Late Tuesday, one week after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 13th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 10 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled him out of order. And, for the second time in a row, Democrats cut off a pro-life congressman’s microphone — preventing Rep. Smith from issuing a few seconds of comments criticizing Democrats from blocking the bill.

As shown in the video below, Smith’s mic is immediately muted after the chair denies the request for a vote to stop infanticide.

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a leading House member, discussed that in a recent interview with the Daily Signal.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I was disheartened by the vote, 44 senators that voted against legislation that would protect babies who were born alive, babies that had survived an abortion, were outside the womb, and yet they were not willing to bring in the insurer under law that they would bring in the doctor’s care,” she said. “In years past, this is passed with unanimous consent in the Senate. So it really exposed the extreme position that the left is taking right now, that Democrats are saying they reject legislation to protect babies born alive.”

“In the House, we are moving forward with a discharge petition. As you know, the Democrats have the majority in the House. One way that we can bring a bill to the floor is to demand a discharge petition,” she added. “You have to get 218 people to sign a discharge petition, and then you can bypass Speaker Nancy Pelosi and bring the bill directly to the floor. We’re working actively on that right now.”

Republicans would need all GOP members to sign the petition, along with 21 Democrats. Rodgers said she hoped polling data showing Americans strongly oppose infanticide would help change members’ minds.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris came out strongly in favor of gun control with a statement that sounded like something that would have been uttered by a pro-life leader.

Harris condemned a society in which babies are being slaughtered. The irony of course is that Harris’s support abortions up to birth and recently voted to support infanticide.

Kamala Harris: “We cannot tolerate a society and live in a country with any level of pride when our babies are being slaughtered.”

But you support abortions up to birth and voted for infanticide.https://t.co/dbayMLMIT3pic.twitter.com/rYVCJCSQ6x

— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) March 5, 2019

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That included Harris.

And the California senator is fully on board with the abortions up to birth agenda.

Harris defended abortions up to birth saying she supports women making the decision whether or not to terminate the life of their unborn baby even if that abortion occurs just before birth. She would not say if abortion was ever immoral.

“I think it’s up to a woman to make that decision, and I will always stand by that,” she told TheDCNF. “I think she needs to make that decision with her doctor, with her priest, with her spouse. I would leave that decision up to them.”

The comments are no surprise given that Harris voted for infanticide and has co-sponsored a radical pro-abortion bill that would have legalized abortions for basically any reason up to birth. The so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act” was introduced in Congress in 2017, with dozens of Democrat sponsors, including Harris and presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Beto O’Rourke, Kristen Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders.

Nicknamed the “Abortion Without Limits Until Birth Act” by pro-life groups, the bill would have invalidated nearly all state and federal abortion regulations, including waiting periods, informed consent requirements, bans on late-term abortions and sex-selection abortions and more.

Polls indicate that legislation like the bill, which was similar to New York’s radical new pro-abortion law, is strongly opposed by voters. A new Susan B. Anthony List poll found that 77 percent of likely voters support legislation to protect infants born alive after botched abortions. It also found that 62 percent oppose bills to expand late-term abortions. Polls by Gallup and Marist have found similar results.

Harris has a long track record promoting abortion and has recently come under fire for calling a pro-life Catholic nominee an “extremist” simply because he is a member of a Catholic group.

Harris is so extreme one abortion that she has received awards for her abortion advocacy.

Harris also came under fire for lying about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The false statements even earned her four Pinocchio awards from the pro-abortion Washington Post.

She also raided the home of David Daleiden, who exposed Pl;anned Parenthood selling body parts of aborted babies.

Washington Free Beacon

Published  1 month ago

Ilhan Communication

03/05 12:03 am

I have a new hobby. It's collecting the excuses Democrats make for Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota Democratic congresswoman who has an unhealthy fixation on Jewish influence, Jewish money, and Jewish loyalty. Omar has said that Israel "hypnotized the world," attributing Jews with the power of mind control in the service of manipulating public opinion. She's said the only reason Congress supports Israel is Jewish campaign donations. Most recently, using the classic anti-Semitic trope of dual loyalty, she criticized supporters of Israel for having "allegiance to a foreign power." A real treasure, Omar is. A typical freshman congresswoman sees her mission as—forgive the expression—bringing home the bacon for her district. Not Ilhan. Her project is to mainstream anti-Semitic rhetoric within the Democratic Party. Once upon a time, you'd have to visit the invaluable website of the Middle East Media Research Institute to hear such tripe. Now you just need to flip on C-SPAN.

And Democrats are powerless to stop it. They're tripping over themselves, making rationalizations, dodging reality, and trying to clean up this anti-Semitic mess. Omar is new to this, they say. She never intended to come across as anti-Semitic. She can't help it. "She comes from a different culture." She didn't know what she was saying—she's a moron! She's just trying to "start a conversation" about the policies of Israel's government. And why are you singling her out, anyway. "She is living through a lot of pain." She's black, she's a woman, and she's Muslim. You can't condemn her without also condemning white men of privilege. What are you, racist? Islamophobic? Shame on you for picking on this poor lady, who just happens to say that American Jews serve a foreign power by buying off politicians and using the Force to blinker people's minds.

Before such "arguments"—they are really assertions of victimhood to intimidate critics—Nancy Pelosi shudders. She's supposed to be this Iron Lady, returned to power after exile, ruling her caucus with a vise-like grip. But her hands are covered in Palmolive. She's spent the first weeks of Congress doing little more than responding to the various insanities of Omar and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. Pelosi will condemn Omar one minute, before appearing with her on the cover of Rolling Stone the next. She's lost a step. She can't hold her caucus together when Republicans call for motions to recommit on the House floor. The policies her candidates ran on in swing districts vanished under the solar-powered glare of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal. We're not talking about covering preexisting conditions, we're pledging to rid the world once and for all of the scourges of air travel and cow flatulence. Pelosi's trigger-happy committee chairmen, firing their subpoena cannons into the air at random, look like goofballs desperate to impeach President Trump.

Whatever control Pelosi had over her majority vanished the second she delayed the resolution condemning Omar. It then became undeniable that AOC & co. is in charge. Identity politics has rendered the Democrats incapable of criticizing anti-Semitism so long as it dons the wardrobe of intersectionality. It's nothing short of incredible that three women from three different cities—New York, Detroit, and Minneapolis—can run roughshod over 233 other House Democrats with a little help from social media, woke 24-year-olds in the digital press, and the Congressional Black Caucus. If you're Ocasio-Cortez right now, you must love life from the comfort of the test kitchen in your luxury D.C. apartment building. What's next for this trio—two of whom are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, two of whom support the Boycott Divestment Sanctions movement that seeks Israel's destruction, and all three of whom combine radical anti-American politics with radical self-regard—finding a candidate to primary pro-Israel Democrat Eliot Engel, chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee on which Omar sits? Challenging Chuck Schumer in the Democratic primary when he's up for reelection in 2022?

The most pressing order of business has got to be the 2020 presidential election. Omar, AOC, and Tlaib don't strike me as Cory Booker supporters. Amy Klobuchar might be too much of a taskmaster for them. Most likely the radicals will line up behind the current frontrunner, Bernie Sanders, who has already surrounded himself with anti-Israel activists. Sanders has said criticism of Omar is just a means to "stifle debate" over Israel's government. He's too smart to believe that. As the most successful Jewish presidential candidate in history, he has a responsibility to draw lines. After all, he's no stranger to the dual loyalty charge—though of course in his case the other country was the Soviet Union.

Bernie Sanders has no interest in stopping Omar. He recognizes that she represents the impending transformation of the Democratic Party into something more closely resembling the British Labour Party. Labourites elected avowed socialist Jeremy Corbyn party leader in September 2015. The years since have been spent in one anti-Semitism scandal after another. Sanders wants desperately to be the American Corbyn. If anti-Semitism is the price of a socialist America, so be it. Remember what Stalin said about the omelette. I'm sure Bernie does. If Democrats can't rebuke Omar swiftly and definitively, if they have trouble competing with Ocasio-Cortez's Instagram cooking show, how will they be able to stop Sanders from carrying his devoted bloc of supporters to plurality victories in the early primaries, and using the divided field to gain momentum just as Trump did?

So far this year the Democrats have floundered in a pit of racism, sexual assault, and anti-Semitism. They've embraced policies akin to infanticide, and announced plans to expropriate wealth, pay reparations for slavery, eliminate private health insurance within two years, and rebuild or retrofit every building in the United States before the world ends from climate change 12 years from now. Throughout it all, they've received a pass from the know-nothing media. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Sanders have all made the claim that Omar has done nothing but criticize the policies of Bibi Netanyahu. That's a bald-faced lie, a falsehood not one of the hundreds upon hundreds of reporters covering the Democratic field has scrutinized. These are the very people who have spent the past three years sermonizing on the importance of truth in politics, and they are doing Bernie's work for him. Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution insists that the Democratic Party continues to be center-left. But the election returns and public opinion data that support her thesis become much less important when the party's biggest stars make a hard-left turn. The Democrats seem ripe for a takeover by Bernie and his pals, or at least a blistering and incendiary battle for control similar to what the GOP experienced last time around.

Blame for Democratic radicalization is most often assigned to Trump—there's little he isn't blamed for—but it really ought to go to President Obama. It was Obama who established "daylight" between the United States and Israel, who blamed opposition to his Iran deal on "money" from "lobbyists," who failed to veto a U.N. resolution singling out the Jewish State and declaring its settlements to have "no legal validity." It was Obama's disastrous second term—when he handed the reins of governance to an administrative state immune from popular sovereignty, when he flouted the Constitution in expanding his administrative amnesty, when he made overtures to hostile governments in Iran and Cuba—that set into motion the decline of the American center-left. Now the Obama bros defend Omar on their podcast and in their newsletter, and bolster the presidential candidacy of Robert Francis "Beto" "Take the Wall Down" O'Rourke. If Obama really wanted to arrest the Democrats' slide into socialism and anti-Semitism, he'd speak out. Do you think Joe Biden will able to stop it? Fat chance. The odds of a Bernie Sanders nomination, a Howard Schultz candidacy, and a Donald Trump victory increase every time Ilhan Omar opens her mouth.

The Intercept

Published  1 month ago

The reporter Carol Rosenberg has been covering Guantanamo Bay since before it became a "war on terror" prison camp — and she's still at it.

Reportable - Modern Releases. Reporter Ready.

Published  1 month ago

Emerson Polling

03/04 7:00 pm

South Carolina 2020 Poll: Biden leads Primary Field by Wide Margin; President Trump Popular with Base

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Once a year, dignitaries gather in Selma, Alabama for the annual commemoration of 1965’s “Bloody Sunday” Edmund Pettus Bridge crossing.

During election cycles, many of those dignitaries are Democratic Party politicians, and even some seeking the highest office in the land, the United States presidency.

Last Sunday’s march was such an occasion. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) participated in the event, all of which have dabbled in the arena of presidential politics. If there was a takeaway from the occasion, Democrats are looking to make voter suppression and voting rights one of the main issues of the campaign.

“[T]here is no more fundamental right than the right to vote,” Clinton said to Selma marchers last Sunday. “It is under attack. It is under fire. It has got to be protected. No matter what else you care about, there is nothing more important than standing up and fighting for the right to vote right now.”

It is also on the agenda of this Democrat-controlled Congress. Right out of the gate, Democrats filed H.R. 1, titled as the For the People Act of 2019. The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Sarbanes (D-MD), includes a number of initiatives Democrats have long advocated.

Among those items included in the nearly 600-page bill are internet, automatic and same-day voter registration, restriction on removing or purging names from voter rolls,

“H.R. 1 is a nothing but a liberal wish list and massive government overreach forcing states into a one-size-fits-all approach to administering elections,” Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, said to Breitbart News. “This partisan power grab was written behind closed doors by special interests aligned with the Democratic Party.”

Last month, Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill testified before Rogers’ committee, chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) about the integrity of the American voting system. Merrill, who has registered 1,211,906 new voters since taking office in 2015 (817,108 electronically), which raised the state’s tally of registered to voters to a total of 3,468, 747, questioned the Democrats’ universal approach.

“United States Senators and Members of Congress that are unwilling or unable to consider the fact that each state has unique laws and circumstances with different levels of resources must understand that the passage of H.R. 1 would create an ineffective system that will create additional hardships for the entities responsible for administering and conducting elections in their state, and potentially cause unnecessary damage to the credibility and security of our electoral process,” Merrill said to Breitbart News. “State leaders must be given the opportunity to build their system around their state’s laws and citizens regarding elections as is indicated in the United States Constitution.”

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, raised questions about the bill’s infringement on constitutionally protected free speech.

“HR 1 is one of the worst bills introduced in Congress in recent memory,” von Spakovsky said to The Daily Signal. “Many parts of it are unconstitutional and it is full of bad and unwise provisions that will restrict free speech and grassroots political activity, as well as hamper the ability of state government to ensure the security and integrity of the election process.”

Should H.R. 1 pass the House, it is not expected to be taken up by the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate under the leadership of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

McConnell referred to the bill as “the Democrat Politician Protection Act” shortly after House Democrats unveiled it.

Yahoo

Published  1 month ago

Rev. Jesse Jackson joins government workers during a rally against the partial government shutdown at Federal Plaza, Thursday, Jan. 10, 2019, in Chicago. Yahoo News asked Jackson what he thought Trump “would have been doing” if he was in Selma at the time. “Probably with the storm troopers,” Jackson

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

The Obama administration did everything it could to transform abortion, a procedure that ends a life, into something to celebrate.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Democrats still haven’t come to grasp the fact that just because they say something and their media allies regurgitate it doesn’t make it so.

Hillary Clinton said in a speech Sunday in Selma, Ala., that the country is facing “a full-fledged crisis” under President Donald Trump, the man who defeated her in 2016.

The two-time failed presidential candidate was at an event commemorating the 54th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday,” when civil rights protesters marching from Selma to Montgomery were violently attacked by law enforcement as they tried to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

(That several Democratic presidential hopefuls were on hand Sunday may suggest that Clinton hasn’t entirely ruled out another run.)

Cory Booker and Sherrod Brown are at the head of the march as it leaves the church. Hillary Clinton joined later. pic.twitter.com/HPkk30sPB1

— Daniel Marans (@danielmarans) March 3, 2019

Claiming “racist and white supremacist views are lifted up” in the White House under President Trump, Clinton likened the alleged crisis to the turbulent 60s civil rights movement.

“This is a time, my friends, when fundamental rights, civic virtue, freedom of the press, the rule of law, truth, facts and reason are under assault,” she said.

“And make no mistake, we are living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy,” Clinton added.

Never mind that we have a representative republic, not a “democracy,” which is code for direct democracy, the majority imposing its will on the minority — see mob rule.

But what would a gathering of Democrats be without the exploitation of race, as seen when Clinton warned that civil and voting rights were under attack in the U.S., going so far as to compare it those who risked real danger in the march to Montgomery all those years ago.

“To anyone who has ever wondered what you would have done during those defining moments that we read about in history books, whether you would have risked arrest to demand votes for women or bled on the Edmund Pettus bridge to demand voting rights for all, the answer is what you are doing now could be as important as anything that anyone has done before,” Clinton said.

Along with smearing Trump — she did not mention the president by name — Clinton pushed the divisive claim that “civil rights are being stripped back.”

“When racist and white supremacist views are lifted up in the media and the White House, when hard-fought-for civil rights are being stripped back, when the single most important fight of our time, which makes it possible to fight every other fight and must be, as Frederick Douglass would say, our North Star — the fight to protect our vote — is not gathering the momentum and the energy and the passion it deserves, we have a lot of work to do, don’t we?” she said.

Clinton would revisit that theme later, undermining the integrity of our elections and shaking the confidence in the electoral process as she angrily declared that the election in neighboring Georgia was stolen from Stacey Abrams, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate.

“Stacey Abrams should be governor, leading that state right now,” Clinton said.

But then, Americans are familiar with Hillary Clinton’s pandering by this point.

How do we know she’s pandering?

Well, for starters, because she suddenly rediscovered her southern accent speaking in the Deep South.

“Reverend Green, when those bones get up, and when that spirit is breathed into them, and they start climbing out of that valley, the first place they go is to register to vote!” she said at one point, speaking in an elusive southern drawl that seems to only surfaces south of the Mason-Dixon line.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

The Obama administration did everything it could to transform abortion, a procedure that ends a life, into something to celebrate.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Former Attorney General Eric Holder announced in a Washington Post opinion-editorial Monday that he will not run for president in 2020.

“Though I will not run for president in 2020, I will continue to fight for the future of our country through the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates,” Holder wrote. While the Obama-era official did not endorse any of the several Democrat presidential candidates, he did state there are many “good options.” He urged candidates to focus on addressing a litany of progressive issues, including climate change and immigration. Holder also called on Democrats to join together after the primary to ensure a Democrat beats President Trump in 2020.

“Inspired by our history as the party of Franklin D. Roosevelt, we must restructure our economy in a way that promises economic security for the middle class, creates genuine opportunities for upward mobility and attacks the income inequality of this new Gilded Age. And we can’t have a better economy for working people without a health-care system that guarantees universal coverage,” Holder continued. “We are running out of time to deal with the existential threat of climate change. It is a moral imperative that we mitigate the damage that is already happening, take wide-ranging steps to reduce carbon emissions, and commit to being a net-zero carbon emitter within 10 years. This is our generation’s moonshot.”

The announcement comes after Holder told reporters earlier February that he would soon make a decision on a White House bid. “I’m going to decide if I’m going to try to find that space within the next month or so,” he said after addressing a voting rights event at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. “I’m going to sit down with my family very soon and decide whether or not this is something we’re going to seek.” Holder has teased a potential bid in the past, telling CBS’s The Late Show host Stephen Colbert in July 2018 that he would decide on running “sometime early next year.” Holder had met with former President Barack Obama to discuss a potential White House bid.

Had Holder entered the increasingly crowded Democrat presidential field, which now includes Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Cory Booker (D-NJ), the Obama-era official would have likely had to answer for several controversies which plagued his tenure as head of the Justice Department. Namely, in 2012, the House held Holder in criminal and civil contempt of Congress after failing to turn over subpoenaed documents to lawmakers as part of an investigation into Operation Fast and Furious, which allowed illegal gun sales in order to track the sellers and purchasers believed to be connected with Mexican drug cartels.

Holder, who was the third longest-serving attorney general, serves as chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, and has sued states over voting rights issues and legislative redistricting.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidates have served a combined 48 years in the Senate. They’ve served an additional 27 years in various mayoral offices and governor’s mansions across the country. Their total time in the House of Representatives adds another three decades of service. When you factor in likely candidates who have not yet declared or formed exploratory committees, those numbers rise to 108, 73, and 76 years, respectively. Yet who leads this historically broad and experienced presidential field? A 29-year-old bartender just wrapping up her first month in office.

To be sure, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is too young to launch her own bid for the White House. Nevertheless, the freshman congresswoman controls an entire primary pack of candidates too craven and opportunistic to offer any ideas themselves.

What major piece of legislation has Cory Booker, D-N.J., ever sponsored? What precisely constitutes the political legacy of Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.? The presidential aspirants have played it safe their entire careers. This cautious strategy has served them well – so well that now they hope to follow a first-term radical all the way to the Oval Office.

Last November, Ocasio-Cortez cooked her dinner live on Instagram. Within weeks Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, followed suit and opened their kitchens to the masses. A couple of months ago, a video emerged of Ocasio-Cortez dancing on a rooftop in college. As soon as the mainstream media covered the clip, Harris tweeted her own video shimmying back and forth in a chair. “I’m for *more* dancing in politics,” she beamed. Harris may dance, but Ocasio-Cortez calls the tune.

The nearest to a leader among the presidential aspirants is the 77-year-old socialist Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to whom progress means nothing more than rehashing the failed economic policies of the 1930s. Insomuch as he successfully pushed the Democratic Party toward the radical left in 2016, Sanders has accomplished more than his competitors. Still, three years later, even Bernie follows AOC’s lead on selling socialism to the people.

Ocasio-Cortez’s thrall over the 2020 race extends beyond style to specific matters of public policy. As she tells it, just a dozen years remain before air pollution extinguishes life on earth. To forestall Armageddon, we must pass the freshman congresswoman’s radical “Green New Deal.” This eco-socialist overhaul would outlaw planes, trains, automobiles, private health insurance, and 88 percent of the American energy industry before demolishing and rebuilding every edifice in the country, sticking the U.S. taxpayer with a $40 trillion tab. Nevertheless, as if in lockstep, Senators Gillibrand, Harris, Sanders, Warren, and Booker all signed up to co-sponsor the plan.

Advocates of Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal insist the plan enjoys wide support among all Americans, from liberal Democrats (92 percent) to conservative Republicans (57 percent). They fail to mention that virtually no one knows anything about it. According to the same Yale Center for Climate Change Communication study they cite, a full 82 percent of respondents knew “nothing at all” about the Green New Deal before answering the survey questions, all of which described the proposal in positive terms.

Presidential campaigns shed intense light on candidates and the policies they propose. One suspects support for the Green New Deal might crack once the American public learns the program will cost them their jobs, cars, doctors, flights, homes, heat, and electricity, among other pleasures.

Then the 2020 candidates will face an unpleasant choice: reverse course, thereby revealing themselves as the empty-suited opportunists that they are, or else persist in following an ignorant 20-something bartender down the path to electoral ruin. Leadership entails difficult decisions. The Democrats who would lead the free world will soon regret not making those decisions sooner.

SARAH PALIN

Published  1 month ago

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren was asked during a rally in Dubuque, Iowa why she and other Democrats believe all people in America should have the right to free healthcare, but the unborn do not deserve even the right to life.

BizPac Review reports Warren was addressing the crowd on a universal, single-payer healthcare option when she said: “What we say to each other is if it’s your grandma or it’s you or it’s your niece’s baby, we’re all going to pitch in a few nickels, so we can be there for each other. That is the best of who we are.”

A heckler then asked: “What about the babies that survive abortion — how come they can’t have health care?”

Warren quickly injected, “Infanticide is illegal everywhere in America.”

The heckler hit back at Warren’s decision to vote against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act: “But you voted against it.”

Check it out:

As the Daily Caller reports, the Senate failed to pass the bill earlier this week which “would have mandated that babies born alive after an abortion would receive the ‘same protection of law as any newborn.’”

“Democratic presidential hopefuls Sen. Kamala Harris of California, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont—who’s an independent but vying for the Democratic nomination—voted against the bill along with Warren,” the Daily Caller adds.

As Fox News reports, the legislation never saw an actual vote, but defeated by a 53 to 44 vote to end Democratic debate on the legislation. Democrats could have indefinitely debated the legislation so it was dismissed.

Here’s more from Fox News:

Three Democrats joined Republicans to support the bill — Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Doug Jones or Alabama. Three Republicans did not vote, apparently because of scheduling issues and plane flight delays — including Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Tim Scott of South Carolina.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that “any health care practitioner present” at the time of a birth “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

The bill, which exempted the mother involved in the birth from prosecution, also would have required practitioners to “ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.” It prescribed a possible term of imprisonment of up to five years for violations, not including penalties for first-degree murder that could have applied.

And, BizPac Review adds:

“Infanticide is illegal everywhere in America,” Warren replied Wednesday to her heckler.

That was a lie.

“There is no existing federal law enacting an explicit requirement that newborns delivered in the context of abortion be afforded ‘the same degree’ of care that ‘any other child born alive at the same gestational age’ would receive, as this bill would,” National Review notes.

“Only 33 states currently offer some kind of protection for infants born after attempted abortions, and those laws can be repealed; New York’s Reproductive Health Act last month did just that.”

New York Post

Published  1 month ago

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — Progressives aren’t the only ones enamored with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — speakers Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Convention made her their No. 1 liberal punching bag.

Sebastian Gorka, a former aide to President Trump, name-dropped the Democratic congresswoman and then cued the boos, which quickly followed. He mocked her Green New Deal. “Remember this one, use it,” he said. “It’s a watermelon: green on the outside, deep deep communist red on the inside.”

“They want to take your pickup truck, they want to rebuild your home, they want to take away your hamburgers, this is what Stalin dreamed about, but never achieved,” he added.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) also ridiculed AOC’s Green New Deal as he came onstage.

“You know, with this Green New Deal, they’re trying to get rid of all the cows. But I’ve got good news — Chick-fil-A stock will go way up because we’re gonna be eating more chicken!” Meadows said, referencing the fast food chain that has earned conservative support for the COO’s opposition to gay marriage.

Video screens at the three-and-a-half-day conference sporadically displayed Ocasio-Cortez’s face throughout Thursday morning.

She was shown multiple times in the official CPAC video that slaps a number of left-leaning Democrats, including 2020 hopefuls Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand and Cory Booker.

Another video, this one sponsored by the NRA, showed footage of the congresswoman dancing outside her congressional office, but darkened it, making it look more sinister. The video claimed that Ocasio-Cortez wanted to “disarm hard-working Americans, while giving those ‘unwilling to work’ our money.”

Striking a less hysterical tone, Fox News Channel’s Laura Ingraham implored the audience to take Ocasio-Cortez seriously.

“I take people like AOC seriously because she is the thought leader of the Democratic Party right now,” Ingraham told the crowd, pointing out how every 2020 Democratic candidate “jumps” every time Ocasio-Cortez says something.

Hearing of all the attention she was receiving, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted, “GOP defensively say, ‘we’re not scared of dancing women! Yet proceed to use footage of me dancing ‘with the color drained to make it look more ominous,’” she wrote, quoting observations tweeted by Washington Post journalist Dave Weigel.

“Spoiler: The GOP *is” scared of dancing women, because they fear the liberation of all identities taught to feel shame,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Former Secretary of State and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton offered a stark view of the country on Sunday, comparing the current “crisis in our democracy” to the turbulence that occurred amid the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s.

Speaking during a reception in Selma, Ala. to mark the 45th anniversary of "Bloody Sunday” and to receive the International Unity Award at the Martin Luther King and Coretta Scott King Unity Breakfast, Clinton said that the United States is facing a "full-fledged crisis in our democracy."

"This is a time, my friends, when fundamental rights, civic virtue, freedom of the press, the rule of law, truth, facts and reason are under assault," Clinton said, according to the Hill.

Clinton is one of a number of Democratic leaders in Selma this weekend for the ceremonies surrounding the “Bloody Sunday” anniversary.

EX-SANDERS SPOKESMAN CALLS HILLARY CLINTON TEAM CHOICE WORDS IN INTERVIEW

Not to be confused with the “Bloody Sunday” massacre in Northern Ireland in 1972, the events being remembered in Alabama occurred on March 7, 1965, when peaceful demonstrators were beaten back by Alabama state troopers as they attempted to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge. It was a moment that galvanized support for the passage of the Voting Rights Act later that year.

While Clinton did not specifically mention President Trump in her speech, she said that “racist and white supremacist views” have been buoyed by the current administration and warned that civil and voting rights were under attack in the U.S.

"To anyone who has ever wondered what you would have done during those defining moments that we read about in history books -- whether you would have risked arrest to demand votes for women or bled on the Edmund Pettus bridge to demand voting rights for all -- the answer is what you are doing now could be as important as anything that anyone has done before," Clinton said.

Voter suppression emerged as a key issue in the 2018 midterm elections in states such as Georgia and North Carolina, where a Republican congressional candidate was accused of rigging the contest there through absentee ballots. House Democrats signaled they plan to make ballot access a priority in the new Congress, introducing legislation aimed at protecting voting rights in 2020 and beyond.

Clinton, who lost to Trump in the 2016 presidential election and has remained a staunch critic of the current administration, was one of a number of Democrats in Alabama over the weekend. 2020 presidential hopefuls Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. and Cory Booker, D-N.J., are also slated to speak in Selma.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

GOP

Published  1 month ago

Kamala Harris has only been a candidate for a month, but she’s already had an entire campaign’s worth of disasters.

The reasons why are simple: She’s a relatively untested candidate, she had barely been vetted, and she’s obviously faking it on a whole host of policy issues.

Here’s a quick recap:

“Eliminate all that!” Her call for eliminating all private insurance plans – which 177 million Americans have – shook the entire 2020 field. It’s a statement that will follow Democrats through the general election and beyond.

Giggling over Jussie Smollett. Harris rushed to judge the Jussie Smollett hoax, calling it a “modern day lynching.” But when pressed by reporters, Harris couldn’t defend her divisive rhetoric. (Instead, she giggled.)

Suggesting NH reporters were racist. New Hampshire reporters asked Harris why she has barely spent any time in the state, unlike Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, and Bernie Sanders who have made countless stops there. Harris later complained to an audience in New York City that those questions racially-motivated.

Pot-smoking jokes gone wrong. Harris is cracking jokes left and right about her marijuana use. Her father didn’t appreciate it.

“It’s not about a cost.” Harris drew negative headlines for casually dismissing the cost of policies she supports like the “Green New Deal” ($93 TRILLION), and government-run health care ($32 TRILLION). Then she did it again.

Lying about her record. Harris was busted for lying about her record on immigration.

Wavering on issues. As the NYT’s Jonathan Martin, Free Beacon’s Matthew Continetti, and Politico’s Christopher Cadelago have all detailed, Harris has stumbled on a whole host of issues from health care, immigration, and Venezuela, to slavery reparations, antitrust laws, and eliminating the filibuster. It’s left voters saying she’s “evasive” and “lack[s] specifics.”

If there are half as many items on this list next month, it’s going to be a long slog for Kamala Harris.

Elections Election 2020

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) launched his presidential campaign in Brooklyn, New York Saturday, declaring his bid is the best shot at beating President Donald Trump in 2020.

The Democrats in the 2020 race have taken varied approaches to President Trump, with some avoiding saying his name entirely, while others make implicit critiques of his presidency. Sanders has never shied from jabbing the president in stark terms, and during his speech at Brooklyn College, calling Trump “the most dangerous president in modern American history” who wants to “divide us up.”

The Vermont senator positioned himself in opposition to Trump administration policies from immigration to climate change. Beyond the issues themselves, Sanders, who grew up in the heavily Jewish neighborhood of Flatbush in a middle-class family, drew a stark contrast between himself and the billionaire in the White House who hails from Queens.

“I did not have a father who gave me millions of dollars to build luxury skyscrapers, casinos, and country clubs,” Sanders said. “I did not come from a family that gave me a two-hundred-thousand-dollar allowance every year beginning at the age of three. As I recall, my allowance was twenty-five cents a week.”

Sanders also said he “did not come from a family of privilege that prepared me to entertain people on television by telling workers, ‘You’re fired.’”

“I came from a family who knew all too well the frightening power employers can have over everyday workers,” he added.

More than 200 miles away in suburban Washington, President Trump reveled in his 2016 victory and said Republicans “need to verify it in 2020 with an even bigger victory.”

While Trump didn’t mention Sanders explicitly in a two-hour speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), he railed against the policies of “socialism” in a continued attempt to portray Democrats as out of touch with ordinary Americans. Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist.

“Socialism is not about the environment, it is not about justice, it is not about virtue. It is only about one thing – it is called power for the ruling class,” he told attendees. “We know the future does not belong to those who believe in socialism”

Sanders enters the race at a moment that bears little resemblance to when he waged his long-shot bid in 2016. Democrats have been mobilized by the election of Trump and are seeking a standard-bearer who can oust him from office. Many of Sanders’ populist ideas have been embraced by the mainstream of the Democratic party. The field of Democrats that he joins includes a number of liberal candidates such as Sens. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Cory Booker (D-NY), and most notably Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who share similar sensibilities.

Earlier February, Sanders launched a second run for the White House, pledging to run a campaign focused on “transforming” the U.S. and “creating a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice.”

According to Sanders, part of his strategy to transform the country is to forward the policies laid out in the Green New Deal, which was unveiled by self-described Democratic-socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) in recent weeks. Appearing on ABC’s The View Friday, Sanders swatted away criticism surrounding the proposal, denying that it goes “too far” to take on climate change.

“We have, according to the best scientists in the world, we have 12 years to begin substantially cutting carbon emissions before there will be irreparable damage to the planet,” he added. I talked to some folks who were in Paradise, CA, remember the terrible, terrible fire that wiped out the whole community?”

Following his announcement to seek the presidency, Sanders popped six percentage points in a Morning Consult poll gauging support for 2020 Democrat presidential contenders. The polling company said Sanders’s jump in support was the “largest single-week shift for a candidate so far in Morning Consult’s tracking.”

Sanders, who now trails Biden in second place, spiked from 21 percent of the possible primary vote share to 27 percent.

Despite enjoying a jump in the polls, the Sanders campaign suffered early losses at key personnel, who are said to have exited over “creative differences.”

Strategists Tad Devine, Mark Longabaugh, and Julian Mulvey, who run the media consulting outfit Devine Mulvey Longabaugh notified Sanders they would be leaving his 2020 campaign after working on his 2016 bid against Democrat presidential rival Hillary Clinton.

“There were differences in a creative vision,” Longabaugh said in an interview with CNBC. “We want to leave on a very positive note, and we are proud of the work we’ve done on the campaign. It was just clear, however, that we weren’t in sync.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

I don’t think Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., read my column earlier this week in which I cautioned against the potential long-term side effects of chronic marijuana use, which include behavioral problems, problems with memory and judgment, anxiety and depression, paranoia, and yes, even an uncontrollable vomiting disorder known as Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome.

One reader with this condition wrote that it took him over six months to start “mentally feeling normal” after stopping smoking.

If Booker was aware of these and other problems, he and Democratic Reps. Barbara Lee and Ro Khanna of California might have hesitated before introducing the ironically titled “Marijuana Justice Act,” which seeks to remove pot from the list of controlled substances, thereby legalizing it for recreational use.

DR. MARC SIEGEL: HEAVY POT SMOKING HAS NOW BEEN LINKED TO THIS STRANGE SYNDROME

Presidential hopefuls Senators Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., have co-sponsored the bill, which also would expunge the criminal records of those who have been charged with marijuana possession.

I believe this last part is a good thing, but as a practicing physician, I must point out that decriminalization is not the same thing as opening the door wide for recreational use. Critics of my position are quick to point out that alcohol and cigarettes are far more deadly than weed, and that they are both legal and heavily marketed and available regardless of potential health problems.

The problem with this straw man argument is that one harmful chemical being legal is not automatic justification for another one becoming legal.

Widespread recreational use of marijuana leads to two major problems. First, there is an associated loss of awareness that may be harmful. This trend was shown in a disturbing study about the perceptions of pot among eighth- and 10th-graders following the legalization of recreational use in Washington state in 2012.

Keep in mind that it took decades for physicians to convince patients that cigarettes and alcohol are bad for you, because they are legal and readily available. We hardly need to perpetuate the same misconception about marijuana – that if its legal it must be OK to use unchecked.

Second, legalization may lead to widened use of marijuana in an increasing number of products. Ten states have already legalized weed for recreational use, and it is currently under serious legislative consideration in New Hampshire, New York and New Jersey.

The problem in the states where it’s legal is that THC – the active substance in pot – is appearing in everything from cigarettes to food to cosmetics. This means you may end up taking in more THC than you are aware of, which increases your risks for long-term side effects.

Especially problematic is the increasing use of marijuana by pregnant women (roughly 5 percent) for the purpose of treating morning sickness. It has been shown to lead to childhood attention and behavioral problems, low birth weight and premature birth. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against its use.

At the same time, the proper medical use of marijuana is important, and it can be controlled by physicians prescribing it appropriately. There are 33 states (and Washington, D.C.) where medical marijuana is legal, which is very helpful for patients in pain or nauseas from chemotherapy.

CBD (Cannabidiol), found in the flower of the cannabis plant, also has therapeutic effects that are currently being studied, including for treatment of epilepsy, anxiety, PTSD and insomnia. It is currently illegal federally, but legal in 34 states and with a prescription in the remaining 16 states for certain medical conditions such as intractable epilepsy.

CBD does not cause the same intoxicating effects as the THC found in marijuana, nor does it have the same long-term side effects. And it is not combustible. For these reasons I am all for its federal legalization. This would subject CBD to more quality control by the FDA, which is a good thing since there are so many versions around.

The bottom line is this: Thumbs up for medical marijuana and CBD in all 50 states. Thumbs up for decriminalization of marijuana. But thumbs down for widespread unregulated recreational use.

endoftheamericandream

Published  1 month ago

What I am about to share with you is absolutely sickening.  But if we do not shine a light on these practices, they will never stop.  And once you learn what is really going on behind the scenes, you have a responsibility to help do something about it.  Since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, more th

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Democrat Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has said a lot of things about "climate change" while promoting her "Green New Deal." Claim Your Free Trump 2020 Hat - Just Cover Shipping For example, via Federalist Papers: “We’re like, ‘The

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – Ben Carson, in an interview with Fox News on the sidelines of the Conservative Political Action Conference, warned Thursday that the "morality of our society" is at stake in the abortion debate that has surged back onto the floors of state legislatures and Congress.

Speaking to Fox News moments after addressing the conservative gathering, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development said the issue should be at the forefront as the 2020 presidential race starts to take shape.

“I think it’s a critical issue because we are talking about the morality of our society,” Dr. Carson told Fox News.

FOR THE BEST CPAC MOMENTS, GO TO FOX NATION

“Are we going off the deep-end here or are we still loving and compassionate people?”

Asked what he would tell Democrats who voted to block a Republican bill that threatened prison time for doctors who don't try saving the life of infants born alive during failed abortions, Carson said: “I would say please stop and spend a little time educating yourself about what life is all about, and about when babies can feel and when they can respond to external stimulation.”

BEN SASSE: CUOMO 'PERVERTED' COLOR PINK BY LINKING IT TO ABORTION, NOT BREAST CANCER

'We are talking about the morality of our society.'

— Ben Carson, HUD secretary

Carson’s comments come after the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act stalled amid Democratic opposition in Congress. It would have required that "any health care practitioner present" at the time of a birth "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age."

The bill, which would exempt the mother from prosecution, also would have required practitioners to "ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital." It prescribed a possible term of imprisonment of up to five years for violations, not including penalties for first-degree murder that could have applied.

ABORTION SURVIVOR: SENATE DEMS ARE 'WILLING TO SACRIFICE LIVES LIKE MINE TO KEEP ABORTION-ON-DEMAND'

All Democratic 2020 presidential candidates in the Senate opposed the measure, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

Opponents called the bill unnecessary, considering it's already a crime to kill a newborn, and described it as an "attack" on women's health.

In response, President Trump tweeted: "This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress."

The vote came in the wake of New York easing restrictions on late-term abortions, as several other states including Illinois consider similar measures.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

Elizabeth Warren Defends Infanticide: “Women Should Decide What’s Best for Their Health”

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker introduced legislation to end the federal prohibition of marijuana on Thursday, joined by a series of other announced and potential Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls including Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Bernie Sanders, and Kamala Harris.

Harris' support seemingly cemented her full-scale reversal on the issue. In 2010, Harris was among a handful of lawmakers — including then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger — to oppose Proposition 19, a measure to legalize recreational marijuana and allow it to be sold and taxed. Then San Francisco's district attorney, Harris called Proposition 19 a “flawed public policy.”

The move comes as polling increasingly shows widespread national support for legalizing the drug. A Fox News poll last year showed that 59 percent of voters support legalizing marijuana -- up from 51 percent in 2015, and 46 percent in 2013. Only 26 percent favored making “smoking marijuana” legal in 2001.

CALIFORNIA DOCTOR PRESCRIBES WEED COOKIES TO 4-YEAR-OLD FOR TEMPER TANTRUMS, LOSES LICENSES

"The War on Drugs has not been a war on drugs, it’s been a war on people, and disproportionately people of color and low-income individuals,” Booker said in a statement. “The Marijuana Justice Act seeks to reverse decades of this unfair, unjust, and failed policy by removing marijuana from the list of controlled substances and making it legal at the federal level.”

Booker added: “But it’s not enough to simply decriminalize marijuana. We must also repair the damage caused by reinvesting in those communities that have been most harmed by the War on Drugs. And we must expunge the records of those who have served their time. The end we seek is not just legalization, it’s justice.”

Booker's bill was co-sponsored not only by Harris, Sanders, Gillibrand, and Warren, but also by Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Or., Jeff Merkley, D-Or., and Michael Benne, D-Co.

“Millions of Americans’ lives have been devastated because of our broken marijuana policies, especially in communities of color and low-income communities,” Gillibrand said. “I’m proud to work with Senator Booker on this legislation to help fix decades of injustice caused by our nation’s failed drug policies.”

Added Sanders: “As I said during my 2016 campaign, hundreds of thousands of people are arrested for possession of marijuana every single year. Many of those people, disproportionately people of color, have seen their lives negatively impacted because they have criminal records as a result of marijuana use. That has got to change. We must end the absurd situation of marijuana being listed as a Schedule 1 drug alongside heroin. It is time to decriminalize marijuana, expunge past marijuana convictions and end the failed war on drugs.”

For her part, Harris echoed Booker's sentiments and seemingly embraced her changed views on marijuana. Despite her past opposition to legalizing the drug, the former California attorney general recently boasted about smoking weed as a college student on the popular New York City-based radio program "The Breakfast Club," telling hosts DJ Envy, Angela Yee and Charlamagne tha God that she's "inhaled" from a joint "a long time ago."

“I think it gives a lot of people joy. And we need more joy in the world," Harris added, claiming she used to listen to Snoop Dogg and Tupac Shakur — though they didn't release their albums during Harris' college years — while she reportedly got high.

WHOOPS: HARRIS SAYS SHE GOT HIGH LISTENING TO SNOOP DOGG AND TUPAC ... BEFORE THEY MADE MUSIC

In co-sponsoring Booker's bill on Thursday, Harris, like Booker, suggested that prohibitions on the drug disproportionately affect black men.

“Marijuana laws in this country have not been applied equally, and as a result we have criminalized marijuana use in a way that has led to the disproportionate incarceration of young men of color. It’s time to change that,” Harris said. “Legalizing marijuana is the smart thing to do and the right thing to do in order to advance justice and equality for every American.”

Warran, meanwhile, added: “Marijuana should be legalized, and we should wipe clean the records of those unjustly jailed for minor marijuana crimes. By outlawing marijuana, the federal government puts communities of color, small businesses, public health and safety at risk."

Last year, California became the largest legal U.S. marijuana marketplace, Massachusetts opened the first recreational shops on the East Coast, Canada legalized it in most provinces, and Mexico's Supreme Court recognized the rights of individuals to use marijuana, moving the country closer to broad legalization.

New Hampshire lawmakers on Wednesday gave preliminary approval to legalizing recreational marijuana, dismissing public safety and health concerns on a path to join scores of other states that have passed similar cannabis measures.

Ten states have legalized recreational marijuana — including the three bordering New Hampshire — while New York, New Jersey and others are considering it this year.

Fox News' Jennifer Earl and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

On Thursday, three days after Senate Democrats voted to block a bill to stop infanticide, House Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a similar bill to require medical care and treatment for babies who survive abortions.

This is the 12th time Congressional Democrats thwarted an attempt by Republicans to vote on a bill that would provide medical care and treatment for babies who provide survived failed abortions — 10 times in the House and twice in the Senate.

Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-MI) offered the unanimous consent request to allow a vote on the anti-infanticide bill but Democrats, as shown below, ruled him out of order.

Unlike other requests to vote on the bill, Democrats cut off Rep. Mitchell’s microphone right away so he could not be heard responding to their refusal to all a vote on the bill.

After Democrats blocked the vote, Congressman Mitchell tweeted about the denial.

“Today on the House floor, I asked for unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 962, the #BornAlive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which requires medical care be given to babies born alive during failed abortion procedures. For the 11th time now, @HouseDemocrats blocked the vote,” he said.

In a statement, the congressman added: “As many of you know, I believe in the fundamental right to life from conception to a natural death. That’s why yesterday I joined a group of my colleagues in a trip across the Capitol to attend the Senate’s vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would have required medical care be given to babies born alive during failed abortion procedures. While this bill failed to pass on the Senate floor, it is important that we continue trying to pass this important bill and protect life.”

If the Democrats continue to block consideration of H.R. 962, after 30 legislative days, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Wagner plan to file a motion to discharge the resolution from the Rules Committee.

The blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide come even as national polling shows Americans — including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion — oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. And doctors indicate abortions are never needed to protect a woman’s health and women admit having abortions on healthy babies.

And a new poll finds a massive 17 percent shift in the pro-life direction after Democrats have pushed abortions up to birth and infanticide nationally.

H.R. 962, introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), ensures that a baby born alive after a failed or attempted abortion receives the same medical care as any other newborn. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

When it comes to the 2020 presidential election there is no bigger divide between President Donald Trump and the pro-abortion Democrats who want to replace him than the issue of infanticide and abortions up to birth.

While President Trump has taken a strongly pro-life position throughout his presidency and has compiled a strong pro-life record opposing abortion and defunding the Planned Parenthood abortion business, Democrats have promoted killing babies in abortions even in the late term of pregnancy. And yesterday they supported infanticide.

Every single Democrat in the Senate who is running for president voted against a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. That includes Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Amy Klobuchar.

While they all voted to support infanticide, President Trump spoke out against infanticide in two tweets saying that it’s nothing short of “executing” babies to let them die after failed abortions

Between now and the presidential primaries next year and the November 2020 general election, pro-life groups have vowed to hold these pro-abortion presidential candidates accountable for also supporting infanticide.

“Today’s vote exposes beyond all doubt the modern Democratic Party’s extreme agenda of abortion on demand through the moment of birth and even beyond – a deeply unpopular position even within their own rank and file,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “An overwhelming majority of voters are horrified by infanticide and want Congress to protect babies born alive during failed abortions. But when forced to take a position on the record, not a single one of the top Senate Democrats running for president in 2020 could muster the basic decency to outlaw infanticide.”

“President Trump’s pro-life leadership is obviously resonating with the public and could not present a clearer contrast to Democrats’ extremism. SBA List’s army of grassroots pro-life activists will go on offense to hold Democratic presidential contenders accountable for their betrayal of the most vulnerable and for trampling the will of the American people,” she told LifeNews.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue said the Democrats running for president all claim to suport universal health care — except for babies who survive abortions.

The Democratic Party Platform says, “Democrats have been fighting to secure universal health care for the American people for generations, and we are proud to be the party that passed Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act.”

“Yesterday, they walked away from that pledge, finding an exception to its universal coverage,” he said. “If a baby survives an abortion, he is not entitled to health care. The majority of Democrats voted to permit infanticide; only three voted for the bill that would protect the kids. President Trump denounced what the Democrats did.”

“Every Democrat who is either running for president, or planning to run, voted to legalize selective infanticide. The Democrats no longer support universal health care,” he concluded.

Not only do contenders such as Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have 100-percent pro-abortion voting records, they also sponsored a radical pro-abortion bill that would have legalized abortions for basically any reason up to birth.

twitchy.com

Published  1 month ago

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker wants to be your next president.

He also does not believe the United States is the top nation into which a person can be born these days.

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) says that the U.S. is not “the top country” to be born into today during an interview on “Pitchfork Economics” pic.twitter.com/1yUDZx9evq

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) February 26, 2019

What country, pray tell, is the top nation to be born in today, Sen. Booker?

And this man wants to be President? The United States is the most prosperous and wealthy country in the history of mankind. https://t.co/e3k9me1vPD

— Justin Thompson (@jltho) February 26, 2019

Nice! Now let's make him president! #nope #maga2020 https://t.co/Vng1k5hTwI

— Gwendolyn (@wendymadeve) February 26, 2019

If he really hates it that bad…

— #TheZmann❌❌ (@SteveZmann) February 26, 2019

On the other hand, Booker’s comments may be valid considering his party seems laser-focused on making sure United States-born babies can be killed, even after they are alive.

If you can even make it to being born at all… https://t.co/q0R51nua49

— Ann (@anndlark) February 26, 2019

Everyone knows you win the White House by slamming the U.S.

Works every time.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

On Monday, Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act fell short of the 60 votes needed to move the legislation to a floor vote. All 44 of the “nay” votes came from Democrats or supposed independents, including presidential hopefuls Cory Booker, Sherrod Brown, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren.

While the party of Planned Parenthood needed to kill the bill, voting to withhold medical care from an infant lucky enough to escape the womb alive isn’t the best look for a party hoping to win back the Senate and White House in 2020. So yesterday saw the liberal media’s launch of a rehabilitation effort for their party.

But how do you prop up a politician who votes to allow newborn babies to die? Easy: With misdirection and prevarication.

Misleading, Evasive Media Coverage

The New York Times led the charge, publishing Dr. Jen Gunter’s op-ed, “I Didn’t Kill My Baby.” Gunter is an obstetrician and gynecologist who has performed late-term abortions. She lost her son Aidan—one of the triplets she was carrying—when he was born extremely premature at 22 weeks gestation.

Gunter’s loss is tragic. But it has nothing to do with abortion. Gunter didn’t have an abortion; her water broke at 22 weeks and three days gestation. Doctors were unable to delay Aidan’s birth, and he died shortly after Gunter delivered him. Physicians apparently succeeded, however, in delaying Gunter’s delivery of her other two babies, because she notes in passing that Aidan’s two siblings survived.

Gunter does not provide any details, though, because that would not serve her purpose. Her op-ed seeks to attack the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act by portraying her tragic loss as equivalent to an abortion: “If you are going to accuse me of executing my child, then you need to know exactly what happened. It’s not a pleasant story and the ending is terrible. I wouldn’t blame you for not wanting to read it. But you need to know the truth, because stories like mine are being perverted for political gain.”

No one is talking about stories like Gunter’s. No one is accusing Gunter of executing her son. And try as she might to equate her situation to the focus of the legislation, which concerns abortion survivors, Gunter did not have an abortion. The only one perverting anything for political gain is Gunter!

To be clear: The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act speaks only of babies born alive following “an abortion or attempted abortion.” The bill also does not mandate “heroic measures,” or “invasive procedures,” as Gunter implies. It simply requires that health practitioners provide the abortion survivor with the same health care “any other child born alive at the same gestational age” would receive. (The abortion doctor must also immediately transport the baby to a hospital.)

Making Sense of Gunter’s Argument

In fact, Gunter’s entire op-ed perfectly illustrates the need for, and functioning of, the proposed Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The medical team caring for Gunter and Aidan concluded, in their reasonable and conscientious judgment, that Aidan could not survive and that no further health care was medically necessary. Conversely, the medical team caring for Gunter’s other two premature babies concluded that further medical care was appropriate. The bill merely requires a medical team to treat a survivor of abortion the same as Gunter’s doctors treated her three premature babies.

Gunter also makes the incomprehensible claim that the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is “nothing more than a way to warp the reality of perinatal mortality (stillbirth or death within the first week of life) to create confusion about abortion.” Perinatal mortality is a tragic reality, but it has nothing to do with Sasse’s bill. Any confusion between the two stems solely from Gunter’s attempt to manipulate the sympathy the public feels for her loss.

In her op-ed, Gunter adds another dubious but oft-repeated claim, stating that abortions “at or after 24 weeks of gestation, the time largely accepted as viability, are typically performed because of severe fetal anomalies or fetal anomalies combined with maternal health problems.” But a Congressional Research Service report from April 2018 looked at that question and cited an expert in the field (and an abortion apologist) Dr. Diana Greene Foster, who “believes that abortions for fetal anomaly ‘make up a small minority of later abortion.’”

Anecdotally, we also have Beth Vial’s op-ed for Teen Vogue from earlier this month. In “What It Was Like To Get A Later Abortion,” Vial recounted her trip to New Mexico to abort her healthy, viable unborn baby at 28 weeks of gestation. Not quite the typical scenario Gunter would have readers believe, which just goes to show that Vial is too young, too naïve, or too indoctrinated by the “shout your abortion” crowd to realize her story horrifies ordinary Americans.

Gunter knows better, which is why she set herself up as the strawman: the suffering, still-mourning mom. But the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act isn’t about Gunter or her son Aidan, or about any of the other moms who bear children only to bury them. The bill is about the Vials of the world, and the vile doctors who attempt to abort viable fetuses—and when they fail, leave the infants to die.

All the distortion that is fit to print will not change that reality.

Money

Published  1 month ago

Bernie Sanders’ fundraising is blowing the rest of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate field away.

Granted, it’s super early — the 2020 presidential election is more than a year and a half away, and several candidates have been in the running for less than one month — but Bernie Sanders, the independent “Democratic socialist” Senator from Vermont, has a huge lead on the competition.

Less than one week after Sanders officially announced his 2020 candidacy, his campaign has raised $10 million, according to his campaign. Perhaps even more impressive, the New York Times reported on Monday, Bernie Sanders’ fundraising total comes from roughly 360,000 different donors — suggesting true grassroots support, with an average contribution of less than $30 from each person.

Presidential campaigns release fundraising figures at different times, and the information can be selectively announced in order to make a candidate look more compelling — or more urgently in need of donations from supporters. So until all of the 2020 campaigns report their fundraising totals at the end of the first quarter as required by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), it’s difficult to compare fundraising totals in an absolute apples-to-apples manner, in real time.

We’ve reached out to all the campaigns listed below for updates on their fundraising totals. Here’s what we know about some of the 2020 Democratic candidate fundraising efforts so far, to give an idea of how far behind they are compared to the $10 million raised by Bernie Sanders’ campaign:

The 2020 campaign for Elizabeth Warren, U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, has not released any fundraising totals to the public. According to CNN, however, there are indications that Warren’s campaign took in roughly $300,000 in online donations during the first 24 hours after she announced her candidacy on New Year’s Eve. Warren also has $11 million in cash raised from previous election cycles that she has not spent, according to OpenSecrets.org, and that money can be transferred to her presidential campaign.

All of the major Democratic candidates officially in the 2020 race, including Warren, have said that they will not be accepting money from corporate PACs (political action committees). This week, Elizabeth Warren took things a step further by telling supporters in an email that she would be skipping private fundraisers and phone calls seeking money from wealthy donors. Instead, she will focus on campaign events open to the general public and utilize grassroots fundraising from anyone willing to give.

Kamala Harris, the junior U.S. Senator from California, raised $1.5 million from 38,000 individuals within the first 24 hours of announcing her 2020 campaign in January. Her campaign has not released any other fundraising totals since then.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar’s campaign said it raised $1 million in the 48 hours after she announced her run for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination on February 10.

The U.S. Senator from New Jersey has raised roughly $26 million between 2013 to 2018, according to OpenSecrets.org. But Cory Booker’s 2020 presidential campaign has not released any specific fundraising totals since his candidacy was officially launched on Feb. 1.

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has not released any fundraising totals since she entered the 2020 race as of mid-January. Gillibrand did, however, say that her campaign had received donations from all 50 states within a day of throwing her hat into the ring.

Andrew Yang, the entrepreneur and extreme-long shot presidential candidate running on a promise to pay every American adult a universal basic income of $1,000 per month, raised $180,000 in 2018 for his 2020 campaign, according to the FEC. Yang also recently Tweeted that his campaign raised $400,000 over the past two weeks, with donations coming from 20,000 individuals.

How important is fundraising for the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates? It’s been estimated that a candidate will need $150 million or more in order to remain viable in the race through Super Tuesday on March 3, 2020.

Fundraising will become an even bigger issue if and when more than one billionaire enters the 2020 presidential campaign. People associated with Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City who has a net worth of $58 billion, say he could very well spend $500 million of his own money if he winds up running for president.

Then there’s our billionaire president. Donald Trump’s disclosures from the 2016 election season indicated that he used $66 million of his own money for his campaign against Hillary Clinton. It’s not clear how much of President Donald Trump’s own money (if any) he might spend on a reelection run in 2020.

What we do know is that Donald Trump has never really stopped fundraising, even after he won the 2016 election and took over as president. Between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018, according to FEC reports, Trump’s presidential campaign took in nearly $28 million in contributions and received $35 million in transfers from other committees, for a total over $65 million.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Abortion survivor Melissa Ohden blasted Senate Democrats for voting down a bill that would have threatened prison time for doctors who don't attempt to save the life of infants born alive after a failed abortion: "I'm living proof this is necessary."

Ohden, the founder of the Abortion Survivors Network, has said she was "accidentally born alive" after a saline-infused abortion. She met with Senators prior to the Monday night vote and was outside the chamber doors when the votes were cast against the bill, The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.

DEMS BLOCK 'BORN ALIVE' BILL TO PROVIDE MEDICAL CARE TO INFANTS WHO SURVIVE FAILED ABORTIONS

"I was disappointed," Ohden told "Fox & Friends" Tuesday morning, "but I'm certainly not surprised. The Democrats who voted last night against this bill really showed us that they're willing to sacrifice lives like mine to keep abortion-on-demand right there."

She added that it's unfortunate to see pro-abortion legislation sweep across the nation as Democrats blocked the bill.

"No child should have their lives left in the hands of the abortionist or a medical professional to somehow decide to provide them medical care," Ohden said. "We need this bill, not only to ensure we're provided medical care, but that there's penalty for when there's failure to do so."

ABORTION SURVIVORS ON NEW LATE-TERM ABORTION BILLS: 'WHERE WERE MY RIGHTS IN THE WOMB?'

Ohden remains hopeful despite the bill dying.

"We're going to continue to see bills like this introduced, and I have great hope because we have great Republican legislators who are committed to life, the president is so committed to life, and really our nation is full of people who identify as being pro-life and are wanting to do something about it."

President Trump agreed said Monday "will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress."

"Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children," Trump wrote. "The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth."

All prominent Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls in the Senate voted down the measure, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The final vote was 53-44 to end Democratic-delaying tactics -- seven votes short of the 60 needed.

Three Democrats joined Republicans to support the bill -- Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Doug Jones or Alabama. Three Republicans did not vote, apparently because of scheduling issues and plane flight delays -- including Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Tim Scott of South Carolina.

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., the bill's sponsor, told "The Story with Martha MacCallum" Monday night that each opponent "constantly" lied with "blatant nonsense" claiming the bill "would end abortion," when in reality "this shouldn't be about politics...this should be about having heart."

The legislation was introduced after Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, a Democrat, appeared to endorse post-birth abortions while discussing The Repeal Act, a state bill which sought to repeal restrictions on third-trimester abortions:

"If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," he said. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Satan’s party.

On Monday evening Senate Democrats once again blocked a cloture measure that would prohibit infanticide.

Senators voted 53-44 on a bill from Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) that would penalize doctors who fail to “exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.

The bill did not pass its cloture vote.

2020 Democrat presidential candidates Senators Kamala Harris (CA), Bernie Sanders (VT), Cory Booker (NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Amy Klobuchar (MN), and Elizabeth Warren (MA) all voted “NO” on this bill that would have required doctors to provide proper degree of care to babies born alive after attempted abortion.

President Trump lashed out at Democrats after they failed vote to protect newborn babies from murder.

On Monday night Planned Parenthood director Leana Wen, M.D., attacked President Trump for defending babies.

The President of the United States is lying to the American people about the Sasse bill. What @RealDonaldTrump is saying has no basis in medicine—or reality.

— Leana Wen, M.D. (@DrLeanaWen) February 26, 2019

We should all speak up and fight back when @RealDonaldTrump is spreading lies & deliberate misinformation. The Sasse bill is about criminalizing doctors and taking away the right to safe, legal abortion. #ProtectProviders

— Leana Wen, M.D. (@DrLeanaWen) February 26, 2019

Dr. Wen and Planned Parenthood have no shame in supporting the slaughter of babies before birth and after birth.

And Democrats support this.

Pure evil.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Every single Democrat running for president in 2020 voted against a major piece of legislation this week that would save newborn babies.

On Monday, Senate Democrats blocked a bill that would prevent newborn babies from being killed if they were born alive after surviving an abortion.

Get Your FREE ‘Build The Wall’ Coin While Supplies Last

All but three Democrats voted against a procedural motion on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, tanking the bill because it needed 60 votes in the Senate to pass.

The final vote count was 53 in favor and 44 opposed.

Only three Democrats voted for the bill: Sens. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones of Alabama.

Here are the six Democratic senators who are running for president who voted against the bill: Cory Booker (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), and Bernie Sanders (Vermont).

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act essentially sought to make it a law that doctors attempt to save born-alive infants rather than allowing them to die.

VOTE NOW: Should Pelosi Be REMOVED From Office?

The bill amends the criminal code to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

“If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” the legislation states.

“Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care,” it adds.

Trump took to Twitter on Monday night and fired off two powerful tweets that quickly went viral with over 200,000 combined likes and retweets.

“Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth,” Trump wrote.

“This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress,” Trump continued. “If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.”

….This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 26, 2019

Like Trump, many Americans are furious that Democrats refused to support a measure that literally sought to protect innocent babies.

Almost every single Democrat voted against the measure, and that could come back to haunt all of them, especially those running for president in the upcoming election.

With the 2020 presidential election just around the corner, voters will remember this when they go to the voting booths.

Conservative News Today

Published  1 month ago

Chris White, DCNF

House Republicans scuttled a climate change hearing Tuesday before it began after too few Democrats showed up to contest adjournment.

The House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations adjourned the hearing after Republicans secured a majority of votes. Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas excused the members after determining the subject matter of the hearing was outside of committee jurisdiction.

“Based on the title of today’s hearings, it seems the majority is focused on science and public health issues, which are great. We just don’t have that jurisdiction,” Gohmert said, noting the hearing was the seventh the Oversight Committee held on climate change in February.

He added: “It can be inferred from the hearing’s title that there is industry denial about climate change. It appears today’s tittle is well within our committee’s jurisdiction. I move that we adjourn.”

Democrats were outvoted 4-2, with several members of the majority party missing from the House Committee. Those who were present bickered briefly over whether the hearing could be adjourned.

Reps. TJ Cox of California and Debbie Dingell of Michigan were the only two Democrats to vote against dismissal. The hearing was titled “The Denial Playbook: How Industries Manipulate Science and Policy from Climate Change to Public Health” and included an eclectic variety of witnesses.

One witness was retired NFL player Chris Borland, who retired from the San Francisco 49ers after sustaining several concussions. He was there to discuss the dangers of chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a neurological condition football players sometimes experience after repeated blows to the head.

Conservatives were surprised at the lack of Democratic attendance.

“This is classic Democrat behavior,” Rachel Bovard, a policy director at the Conservative Policy Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“They introduce sweeping resolutions and then don’t want to vote on them,” she said. “They shame everyone for using fossil fuels while jetting around in Suburbans and private planes. And now, when faced with an opportunity to actually engage in a substantive policy discussion on the issue, they can’t be bothered to even show up.”

Democrats have been pushing the climate change narrative hard leading up to the 2020 election. Three Democratic 2020 presidential candidates gave a preview of how aggressively they will push global warming policies on the campaign trail during Andrew Wheeler’s confirmation hearing to be President Donald Trump’s EPA administrator.\

Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Bernie Sanders of Vermont sparred with Wheeler over the urgency of global warming and rolling back Obama-era regulations.

“You are the nominee to be head of the Environmental Protection Agency and you just in your opening statement did not mention the word climate change,” Sanders said during the hearing.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

Hannah Bleau

As I mentioned earlier, Senate Democrats failed to support the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” which is pretty self-explanatory. It would’ve forced doctors to save babies who survived their attempted abortions.

Only three Democrats sided with Republicans– Bob Casey Jr., Joe Manchin and Doug Jones. All of the Democratic senators running for president– Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Amy Klobuchar– voted against it.

They can’t even support saving a living, breathing baby. It’s disgusting.

Cue President Trump:

Amen to that.

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

GOP Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) said on Monday that he will support a resolution to block President Trump's national emergency declaration on the U.S.-Mexico border.

"I would vote in favor of the resolution disapproving of the president’s national-emergency declaration, if and when it comes before the Senate," Tillis wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.

Tillis's decision comes a day before the House is expected to take up the resolution to block Trump's national emergency declaration. Because Democrats control that chamber, it's expected to pass and kick the fight to the Senate.

Tillis's decision puts Democrats on the brink of being able to block Trump's emergency declaration in the Senate. If the resolution of disapproval passes the Senate it will go to the president's desk, where he has said he will use his first veto.

If all 47 Democrats for the resolution they would need to flip four Republican senators in order for the resolution to pass the Senate. The vote needs a simple majority.

GOP Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) are both viewed as likely yes votes, which would make Tillis the third Republican defector. Both Tillis and Collins are up for reelection in 2020 and viewed as targets as Democrats look for ways to pick up seats.

Collins told reporters in Maine last week that she would vote for a "clean" resolution to block Trump's emergency declaration.

Murkowski told an Alaska TV station on Friday that she would "probably" vote for it, adding that "if it's what I have seen right now, I will support the resolution to disapprove."

Trump declared the national emergency earlier this month that he said allows him to pull from funds that were not appropriated by Congress for the border wall.

He has threatened to veto the resolution if it makes it to his desk.

Trump's decision came in face of pushback from top Republicans on Capitol Hill, who have fretted about the precedent a national emergency declaration for this purpose could set for a future Democratic president.

Tillis, in his op-ed, wrote that there was "no intellectual honesty" for Republicans if they previously criticized President Obama's executive actions but don't oppose Trump's on the border wall.

He also noted that several of his Democratic colleagues are running for president and floated that they could use Trump's precedent to try to ram through proposals Republicans are opposed to.

Conservatives "should be thinking about whether they would accept the prospect of a President Bernie Sanders declaring a national emergency to implement parts of the radical Green New Deal; a President Elizabeth Warren declaring a national emergency to shut down banks and take over the nation’s financial institutions; or a President Cory Booker declaring a national emergency to restrict Second Amendment rights," Tillis wrote.

He added that while he supports Trump on border security the emergency declaration decision was about the separation of powers between the executive branch and Congress.

"As a U.S. senator, I cannot justify providing the executive with more ways to bypass Congress. As a conservative, I cannot endorse a precedent that I know future left-wing presidents will exploit to advance radical policies that will erode economic and individual freedoms," Tillis wrote.

-Updated 7:34 p.m.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

Presidential hopeful Kamala Harris wants to force every American to give up his private health insurance, but she can’t get herself to support legislation that compels doctors to give an infant who survives an abortion attempt the same care they would provide any other human being. She’s merely one of 44 Democrats who voted to keep negligent homicide legal against babies marked for termination. Presidential candidates Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders all voted against Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, as well.

Senate Democrats unsurprisingly struggled to find an effective way to lie about opposing a bill that prohibits euthanasia. Some of them maintained that Sasse’s bill was superfluous because all the things in it were already illegal. Others claimed the bill would “restrict doctors from making case-by-case decisions about what is best for infants and mothers.” Still others claimed the practice never ever happens. Other Democrats, who support government intervention in every nook and cranny of human existence, argued that tough choices should only be the domain of women and their doctors, not the state. Many of them saw no conflict between these ideas and argued all these things at the very same time.

Sen. Patty Murray claimed the bill was “clearly anti-doctor, anti-woman and anti-family” and that “proponents claim it would make something illegal that is already illegal.” This is untrue, regardless of a full-court press from Democrats and the media. As bills in both Virginia and New York clearly illustrate, the practice isn’t illegal. Both bills specifically provide legal protections for doctors who terminate babies who survive abortion attempts.

This was the practice Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia hamfistedly explained to us on video, accidentally neglecting the standard euphemisms used to hide the horrific specifics of the procedure. In New York, abortion—and post-birth termination—of a viable, once-healthy infant is legal through the entire pregnancy, and after, for virtually any reason. The rite of abortion is so intrinsic to progressive ideology (and coffers) that not one major player on the left had the moral spine to condemn either.

Leana Wen, the president of the state-funded abortion mill Planned Parenthood, argued that the Sasse legislation was “based on lies and a misinformation campaign, aimed at shaming women and criminalizing doctors for a practice that doesn’t exist in medicine or reality.” Why would Wen oppose criminalizing a procedure that doesn’t exist in medicine or reality? And if it did exist, would Wen support banning the practice? Has anyone in truth-seeking media asked her?

The reality is that Sasse’s bill exempted mothers from prosecution, and would have merely required medical professionals to “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

Nothing in the bill would have inhibited the doctors from making choices about critically ill infants. Of course, conflating the experience of couples who lose a sick child to those who terminate a healthy one is fraudulent and immoral. Then again, a bill that asks doctors to fulfill their oath of keeping babies alive is in direct competition with Wen’s professional mission.

As National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis points out, the media did its customary job of running interference for Democrats. Take this Politico piece, for example, which is teeming with the usual deceptive language, referring to Sasse’s bill as “anti-abortion”—as did many other outlets, including the Associated Press—though the bill would not stop anyone from performing a single abortion in this country.

Most of the media portrayed the debate as a cynical election ploy, an “effort to squeeze Democrats ahead of the 2020 campaign.” The bill was filibustered, with three Democrats voting for it. Every Republican would surely want to see it passed. President Trump would surely sign it.

Is it cynical to put politicians on the record for their beliefs? Is it cynical it point out that the majority of elected Democrats are, judging from polling numbers, embracing an extremist position? Although polls have consistently shown that large majorities of Americans oppose all third-trimester abortions, I can’t find one that asks if they support the practice of aborting infants who had the temerity to survive a third-trimester abortion. I wonder what the numbers would look like on that question.

One of most durable talking points for abortion has to do with the notion that if a thing is in a woman’s body then it is a woman’s choice what do with that thing, even if that thing happens to be a unique and viable human being. Now Democrats have expanded their position to argue that even if a baby escapes death, then the mother (and, often, the father)—in consultation with a doctor, as if this made it any more morally palatable—can still terminate the baby’s life for any reason they fit.

These babies are the only human beings in the United States who have no person or law representing their interests. And so it remains.

National Review

Published  1 month ago

By a vote of 53-44, the Senate has failed to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would have required doctors to provide medical care to infants born alive after an attempted abortion procedure. The bill — sponsored by Senator Ben Sasse (R., Neb.) and cosponsored by 49 of his fellow Republican senators — needed 60 votes to overcome the legislative filibuster.

Just three Democratic senators crossed the aisle to vote with Republicans in favor of the legislation: Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.), and Doug Jones (Ala.).

All six of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker (N.J.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), along with Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Three Republican senators did not vote on the bill: Kevin Cramer (N.D.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), and Tim Scott (S.C.). According to their communications directors, both Cramer and Scott missed the vote due to flight delays.

During the floor debate over the bill this afternoon, several Democratic senators said they planned to oppose the legislation because they believe it limits women’s health-care options. “That is the actual intent of this bill, reducing access to safe abortion care would threaten the health of women in Hawaii,” said Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii).

“This bill is just another line of attack in the ongoing war on women’s health,” said Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.).

Tina Smith, Democrat of Minnesota, said the born-alive bill “would override physicians’ professional judgment about what is best for their patients, and it would put physicians in the position of facing criminal penalties if their judgment about what is best for their patient is contrary to what is described in this bill.”

But nothing in the legislation forces doctors to provide any particular treatment to infants; it merely requires that they provide medical treatment. It mandates that doctors “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

In other words, the born-alive bill would’ve done nothing more than insist that health-care providers treat children born alive after attempted abortions the same way that they’d treat any other infant.

Several Republican senators pushed back against the Democrats’ efforts to portray the bill as an attack on women’s health care. “I know a lot of opponents of this bill sincerely believe the talking points that they read from their staffs,” Sasse said. We’ve heard speech after speech after speech that have nothing to do with what’s actually in this bill.”

“My colleagues across the aisle are debating a bill that’s not in front of us. They are talking about health care for women, which is abortion,” said Joni Ernst (R., Iowa). “This bill does not address abortion. . . . What this bill does is address the health care of a baby that is born alive after a botched abortion. We’re not talking about abortion, folks. We’re talking about the life of a child that is born.”

“I urge my colleagues to picture a baby that’s already been born, that’s outside the womb gasping for air,” Sasse added. “That’s the only thing that today’s vote is actually about. We’re talking about babies that have already been born. Nothing in this bill touches abortion access.”

Editor’s note: This post will be updated with details from the vote and from today’s floor debate as they become available.

LifeNews.com

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump took to Twitter late Monday to criticize Senate Democrats for blocking a bill to stop infanticide.

As LifeNews reported, Senate Democrats blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions. The vote to stop the Democrat filibuster needed 60 votes but Democrats stopped the chamber from getting enough.

“Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth,” he tweeted. “This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.”

Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 26, 2019

….This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 26, 2019

The language is similar to the comments President Trump made during a rally earlier this month condemning the Virginia Governor Ralph Nortam for promoting infanticide.

Trump castigated Northam, saying, “the governor stated that he would even allow a newborn baby to come out into the world, and wrap the baby and make the baby comfortable, and then talk to the mother and talk to the father, and then execute the baby. Execute the baby!”

The remarks drew massive boos from the large audience.

“Millions of innocent, beautiful babies are counting on us to protect them, and we will,” Trump said.

The Senate voted 53-44 against ending the filibuster and allowing a debate and vote on the bill itself. Every Republican present voted to end the filibuster, along with Democrats Joe Manchin, Bob Casey and Doug Jones, while all other Democrats voted agaisnt the bill. Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who supports abortion, did not vote — hurting the effort to collect the 60 votes necessary. Pro-life Republican Senators Tim Scott and Kevin Cramer were unable to attend the vote due to flight delays but would have voted to support the bill.

Some of President Trump’s opponents voted against stopping infanticide.

Every Democrat senator running for president — Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders — voted to block the anti-infanticide bill.

POLITICO

Published  1 month ago

The Senate on Monday rejected a bill making it a felony for a doctor to harm or neglect an infant who survives an “attempted abortion,” part of a Republican effort to squeeze Democrats ahead of the 2020 campaign.

The vote split mainly along party lines, 53-44. Democratic Sens. Bob Casey, Doug Jones and Joe Manchin crossed the aisle to vote for it and no Republicans broke ranks. Sixty votes were required for the bill to advance.

“Evidently the far left is no longer convinced that all babies are created equal,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Ahead of the vote, the bill’s Republican sponsors and outside anti-abortion groups lobbying for its passage made it clear that the intent of Monday’s vote was to undermine the growing pool of Senate Democrats running for president.

In a speech just before the vote, bill author Sen. Ben Sasse quoted campaign stump speeches by Democratic Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders vowing to look out for society’s “voiceless and vulnerable” and accused them of hypocrisy for opposing his bill’s regulations for the care of newborns.

"Was that all just clap track for the campaign trail and for soundbites? Or do people mean the stuff that they say around here?" he said of his colleagues with White House aspirations.

Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion group closely allied with Hill Republicans and the Trump administration, said Monday that they were “watching this vote closely to see whether leading Democratic candidates for president in 2020 will go on the record for or against infanticide.”

"This bill is important in itself but it‘s also important as a set up for the coming election, where there will be a stark contrast between the president of the United States and any one of the Democratic nominees," SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in an interview. She stood just outside the Senate chamber lobbying senators as they entered to cast their votes.

Sanders, Harris, Warren, Booker and Gillibrand all voted against the measure. Sen. Sherrod Brown, another Democratic senator exploring a White House bid, complained to POLITICO that the vote was held in bad faith.

"This is pure Mitch McConnell. It's all aimed at keeping his base in line while the president grows increasingly unpopular," the Ohio Democrat said. "We're not doing infrastructure, we're not doing health care. We're not doing anything that matters to help our country. It's just votes on abortion and other kinds of divisive votes he's going to bring."

Democrats and reproductive rights advocates blasted the bill, saying it's already a felony to harm or neglect an infant and that the “medically irresponsible” bill would restricts doctors from making case-by-case decisions about what is best for infants and mothers.

"This bill is not about protecting infants, as Republicans have claimed—because that is not up for debate and it is already the law," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). "This bill is government interference in women’s health care, in families’ lives, and in medicine on steroids."

The bill was previously introduced in the House by now-Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.). Sasse first tried to force a vote on it earlier this month, capitalizing on a wave of outrage among conservatives after New York loosened its restrictions on third-trimester abortions and embattled Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam gave an interview defending similar efforts in his state.

Democrats led by Murray objected to that fast-track procedure and blocked a floor vote, prompting Republicans to vow to try again.

Susan B. Anthony list said earlier this month that even though the Senate lacks the votes to pass abortion restrictions, they should continue to hold votes to put pressure on Democrats and divide the caucus. The move is part of a larger strategy designed to maintain current abortion restrictions while revving up the GOP’s conservative base ahead of 2020 and courting independents who may be turned off by Democrats' position on abortion rights.

"We're seeing a gradual movement to hammer a wedge right into the middle of the Democratic Party, and at some point soon here, they're just going to have to cry mercy," Dannenfelser said.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

Hannah Bleau

You know it’s bad if Democrats can’t even vote in favor of something called “The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.”

Yep. Dems killed it. It failed 53-44. It would have forced doctors to save babies who survive abortions. It needed 60 votes. Only three Democrats voted with Republicans: Bob Casey Jr., Joe Manchin and Doug Jones.

It wouldn’t have passed with their votes anyway.

It should be noted that every single one of the Democratic senators running for president voted against it.

All six of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker (N.J.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), along with Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Pathetic, isn’t it? They can’t even vote to save a baby who survives a botched abortion. They don’t care. They want to let a living, breathing baby die, because it’s a “woman’s choice.”

That’s not a choice. That’s MURDER.

You can’t. This is the left.

Washington Free Beacon

Published  1 month ago

The "Green New Deal" would cost up to $94.4 trillion, or over $600,000 per household in the United States, according to a new study.

The American Action Forum study offers a conservative estimate of the costs of providing every resident in the country a federal job with benefits, "adequate" housing, "healthy food," and health care.

Though Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D., N.Y.) plan is vague on specifics, it calls for the "economic transformation" of the United States, a complete overhaul of transportation systems, and retrofitting every single building. A supplemental document explaining the plan, since deleted from her website after it was widely mocked on social media, called for economic security for everyone, even those "unwilling to work," the elimination of air travel, and "farting cows."

However, the American Action Forum was able to calculate estimates for several items the plan does propose, including guaranteed green housing, universal health care, and food security. Estimates of specific goals identified in the Green New Deal would cost each household in America between $36,100 and $65,300 every year.

"The American Action Forum's analysis shows that the Green New Deal would bankrupt the nation," said Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

"On the upper end, every American household would have to pay $65,000 per year to foot the bill," he said. "The total price tag would be $93 trillion over 10 years. That is roughly four times the value of all Fortune 500 companies combined. That's no deal."

Barrasso said the focus should be on innovation, rather than costly federal programs.

"Instead, we should promote innovation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Promising new technologies like advanced nuclear power, carbon capture, and carbon utilization hold the key to significant emissions reductions," he said. "We can lower our emissions without crashing our economy."

The United States is already leading the world in carbon emissions reduction. The first year of the Trump administration emissions were reduced by 2.7 percent.

The American Action Forum calculated guaranteed green housing would cost between $1.6 trillion and $4.2 trillion; a federal jobs guarantee between $6.8 trillion and $44.6 trillion; a net zero emissions transportation system between $1.3 trillion and $2.7 trillion; a low-carbon electricity grid for $5.4 trillion; and "food security" for $1.5 billion.

Enough high-speed rail "to make air travel unnecessary," would cost roughly $1.1 to $2.5 trillion. Universal Health Care, or a Medicare-for-all type plan, would cost $36 trillion over 10 years, totaling $260,000 per household in the United States.

Many of the figures are conservative estimates. For instance, researchers assumed obtaining a low-carbon electricity grid would require no new construction of transmission assets, when in actuality, such a grid would require new infrastructure.

"The Green New Deal is clearly very expensive," the American Action Forum said. "Its further expansion of the federal government's role in some of the most basic decisions of daily life, however, would likely have a more lasting and damaging impact than its enormous price tag."

In all, the plan would cost between $52.6 trillion and $94.4 trillion, over 10 years. The burden to the taxpayer would amount to between $361,010 and $653,010 for each household over 10 years.

Electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket under such a plan. Barrasso's office previously calculated the Green New Deal would increase electric bills by up to $3,800 per year.

Taking the lead of Ocasio-Cortez, who recently suggested people should stop reproducing because climate change will end the world in 12 years, Democratic 2020 hopefuls have lined up to endorse the Green New Deal.

Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.) has said the planet "simply can't sustain" people eating meat, and compared the Green New Deal to landing on the moon and fighting World War II.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) called the Green New Deal "practical," during an interview Sunday, adding "of course we can afford" the plan because climate change is "an existential threat to us."

"It's not about a cost," Harris said. "It's about an investment."

True Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Presidential hopeful Kamala Harris wants to force every American to give up their private health care insurance, but she can’t get herself to support legislation that compels doctors to give an infant who survives an abortion attempt the same care they would provide any other human being. She’s merely one of 44 Democrats who voted to keep negligent homicide legal against babies marked for termination. Presidential candidates Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders all voted against Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, as well.

Senate Democrats, unsurprisingly, struggled to find an effective way to lie about opposing a bill that prohibits the practice of euthanasia. Some of them maintained that Sasse’s bill was superfluous because all the things in it were already illegal. Others claimed that the bill would “restrict doctors from making case-by-case decisions about what is best for infants and mothers.” Still others claimed the practice never ever happens. Other Democrats, who support government intervention in every nook and cranny of human existence, argued that tough choices should only be the domain of women and their doctors, not the state. Many of them saw no conflict between these ideas and argued all these things at the very same time.

Sen. Patty Murray claimed that bill was “clearly anti-doctor, anti-woman and anti-family” and that “proponents claim it would make something illegal that is already illegal.” This is untrue, despite a full-court press from Democrats and the media. As the bill in both Virginia and New York clearly illustrate, the practice isn’t illegal. Both bills specifically provide legal protections for doctors who terminate babies who survive abortion attempts. This was the practice Governor Ralph Northam of Virginia hamfistedly explained to us on video, accidentally neglecting the standard euphemisms used to hide the horrific specifics of the procedure. In New York, abortion—and post-birth termination—of a viable, once-healthy infant is legal through the entire pregnancy, and after, for virtually any reason. The rite of abortion is so intrinsic to progressive ideology (and coffers) that not one major player on the left had the moral spine to condemn either.

Daily Wire

Published  1 month ago

Report AdxReason: --Select please--

On Monday evening, Senate Democrats blocked their Republican counterparts from protecting infants born alive after botched abortion procedures. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which is sponsored by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), failed to pass the Senate with a vote of 53-44, seven votes shy of the required 60.

The bill would mandate doctors attempt to save born-alive infants instead of allowing them to die.

"This bill amends the federal criminal code to require any health care practitioner who is present when a child is born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion to: (1) exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) ensure that such child is immediately admitted to a hospital," reads the legislation.

"The term 'born alive,'" the bill explains, "means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut."

Only three Democrats voted for the bill: Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA), Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), and Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL), reported National Review's Alexandra DeSanctis.

DeSanctis noted: "All six of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker (N.J.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), along with Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont."

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, representing Alaska, declined to vote on the bill. According to DeSanctis, Republican senators Tim Scott (SC) and Kevin Cramer (ND) did not vote on the bill due to flight delays, per their communications directors.

The bill also states that anyone "who commits an overt act that kills a child born alive is subject to criminal prosecution for murder" and allows the mother in question to "file a civil action for damages against an individual who violates this bill."

The past few months have highlight the Democrats' abortion radicalism. As previously reported by The Daily Wire, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Catholic Democrat, recently signed and celebrated the passing of the euphemistically-named Reproductive Health Act, which legalizes abortion up to the moment of birth, loosens restrictions on who can perform abortions, and strips the murder of the unborn (including the murder of wanted babies) from the state's criminal code.

After the bill failed, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who was an original sponsor of the bill, blasted Democrats, saying it was “unconscionable” that “protecting innocent, newborn abortion survivors is now a partisan issue. Every infant that is born alive despite a botched abortion deserves the same proper medical care and treatment that doctors are required to give to other newborns.” He added that the vote “made it crystal clear” that Democrats “support the legalization of infanticide” and “openly embraced the growing extremism” in the Democratic Party.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Satan’s party. Monday evening Senate Democrats once again blocked a measure that would prohibit infanticide. Senators voted 53-44 on a bill from Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) that would penalize doctors who fail to “exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion. A few weeks […]

Live Action News

Published  1 month ago

Today, the United States Senate voted on an anti-infanticide bill introduced by Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The legislation needed 60 votes to pass, and it failed by a vote of 53 in favor and 44 against. The bill stated that “if an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws.”

Every Democratic presidential hopeful — Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Sherrod Brown, Amy Klobuchar, and Elizabeth Warren, along with Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont — voted against this common-sense bill. Democrats Doug Jones, Joe Manchin, and Bob Casey Jr. voted in favor of the bill. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) did not vote on the bill.

The 2002 Born Alive Infants Protection Act, signed into law by President George W. Bush, established that any child born alive — even as the result of an abortion — is to be legally considered a “person”, “human being,” “child”, and “individual” in federal law. However, that law contained no penalties for those who choose not to follow it. Senator Sasse’s bill included penalties for abortionists who break the law, including a fine and/or imprisonment for up to five years.

READ: Poll: 77 percent of Americans want Congress to protect abortion survivors

The bill would also have allowed a woman to take legal action against an abortionist who breaks this law. The bill states that any child who accidentally survives an abortion must be treated with “the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age” and would make certain that “the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.” In addition, the bill requires the mandatory reporting of violations.

Currently, there are 19 states which afford no protections to abortion survivors. According to the Centers for Disease Control, infants are still born alive every year. Between 2003 and 2014 alone, at least 143 babies died after being born alive during abortions. And according to a press release from Live Action News, “In 2018, 16 infants in Florida alone were born alive after surviving abortion attempts.”

Adult survivors of abortion have formed The Abortion Survivors Network. On the group’s website, it states, “a government report in Canada from 2012 reported that 491 children survived abortions there over the nine-year period of 2000-2009. There’s also this report that identifies 766 children survived abortions in the five-year period from 2013-2018. Additionally, there are similar government reports from the U.K. and states inAustralia.”

READ: 10 babies born alive after abortions in 2015 – in only 3 states

Abortion survivors Melissa Ohden, Gianna Jessen, Claire Culwell, and others have spoken out publicly regarding what it’s like to have survived abortions. A group of these survivors appeared on FOX News recently to tell their stories:

Recent polling indicates that just since radical pro-abortion legislation was signed into law in New York in January, more Americans are identifying as pro-life, including Democrats. Other polling indicates that the vast majority of Americans oppose the killing of children who survive abortions. However, the pro-abortion legislators in Congress have largely been deaf to public opinion on this issue.

Live Action president Lila Rose responded to the news of the vote in a press release, stating:

Live Action has documented on camera how abortionists in our country’s notorious late-term abortion facilities talk about survivors of abortion. Washington, D.C. abortionist Cesare Santangelo told our undercover investigators that he would make sure babies “do not survive” if they were born alive at his facility. A New York abortion worker told our Live Action investigator to “flush” the baby down the toilet or “put it in a bag” if she’s born alive. In Arizona, an abortion worker told us there “may be movement” after the baby is outside of the mother and that they would refuse to provide help and instead let her die. Dr. DeShawn Taylor, former medical director for Planned Parenthood, told a Center for Medical Progress investigator that identifying “signs of life” after a baby survives an abortion is contingent upon “who’s in the room.”

There is no difference between infanticide and abortion: both kill the same child….

Today should have been a time of unity in protecting life, but instead, Democrats continue to push for the brutality of abortion and infanticide. With Congress failing to do its job, every state should take this issue up for themselves, ensuring care for these innocent children that are often left to die, and work to eradicate abortion altogether.

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Democratic presidential hopeful Kamala Harris repeatedly declined in an interview broadcast Sunday to put a price tag on the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, proposals she has endorsed wholeheartedly even as Republicans cite cost estimates of trillions of dollars for each unprecedented proposal.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

Democrats have found a sneaky way to tilt the political playing field in their favor without having to reform the immigration system.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) lectured school children and their teachers in a meeting Friday when asked to support the Green New Deal.

SARAH PALIN

Published  1 month ago

President Trump's name may not appear on the presidential ballot in all 50 states next November as at least one state is threatening to withhold his name. As the Daily Caller reports, the New Jersey state Senate

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

While promoting her "Green New Deal" on Showtime's Desus & Mero, freshman Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Americans need to start watching their hamburger intake. You can't make this up. Get Your FREE 'Build The Wall' Coin

American Liberty Report

Published  1 month ago

Senator Cory Booker appears to come from the same clan of crazy-eyed socialists as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC). Both of them have off the wall ideas that could never work, and a messiah complex. Worse still, both of them want to impose their half-baked morality on you.

AOC wants to force Americans to pay for universal income for people who don’t want to work (umm isn’t that all of us? Aren’t we all just doing it for the money???), and to build a global high-speed rail system in order to eliminate all those awful cars and airplanes. Even high ranking Dems have looked at her New Green Deal and dismissed it as the work of a kook.

Not to be out-crazied, Cory Booker—who missed all the backlash from the New Green Deal even though he co-sponsored that crazy train with AOC—has come out with his Vegan New Deal. Just kidding, he didn’t call it that. But he should. The Democrat senator from New Jersey kicked off his 2020 campaign for the White House by saying that anyone who eats meat is going to have their dinners yanked out from in front of them. Yoink!

Booker believes that the meat industry is ruining the climate. How, you ask? Cow farts. He says he hasn’t touched any non-vegan food since Election Day in 2014. So, if he’s not misremembering then it would seem that Booker’s personal life revolves around election cycles.

He claims that the dairy industry, the part related in particular to cows, is the biggest offender. He says, “The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does… because we just don’t have enough land.”

He says that if the rest of the world, China and Africa in particular (for some reason), gets a taste for the western diet- the world will be in serious trouble. We don’t know how to break it to him, but McDonald’s is already international.

Booker wants to redesign the entire agricultural industry. He said that one of his major campaign promises will be, “to continue supporting bills that are about public health, whether it is pumping in all these antibiotics into animals that are literally threatening the safety of Americans.”

Booker isn’t wrong when he says that industrial agricultural methods like pumping cows full of antibiotics are not good for the people who drink the affected milk and eat the affected meat. These and other methods make it easier for farmers to produce more meat and milk while lowering the quality of those products.

Among the side effects of consuming these products are reduced immune function, altered hormonal cycles, and the development of drug resistant bacteria. But the answer isn’t telling Americans that they can’t eat meat.

In fact, the answer is already in place. At most grocery stores, people can buy grass-fed, organic cow milk and hamburger meat. It’s more expensive, but that’s not because the natural dairy products are over priced. They are priced appropriately for products grown in the natural, non-accelerated way.

Industrial farming methods are less healthy. But they make food cheaper making it more accessible to the poor. At this point, Booker might say everyone has a right to better quality food. And he may be correct, but just because you have a right to have something does not make it readily available. By overthrowing the existing food infrastructure Booker would cast millions of people into food poverty.

But Booker isn’t backing down. He has lent his support to the Green New Deal, which is estimated to cost upwards of $100 trillion and takes aim at such evils as combustion powered vehicles, bovine flatulence, and racism. Seriously.

If Booker had his brain plugged in straight, he would be working to make Americans more prosperous so that they could afford grass fed cow meat and other organic agriculture products. But this soy boy isn’t interested in humans flourishing. It’s interested in relegating Americans to cubical housing and an anemic diet.

When asked if he would ever consider going back to eating animal products he told VegNews magazine, “I am Spartacus.”

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

Hillary Clinton has been meeting with many of the Democrats running – or gearing up to run – for the White House in 2020, a Clinton aide confirmed to Fox News on Friday.

Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, met with former Vice President Joe Biden to discuss 2020 in early February at Biden’s request. Biden has been considering a run, but has not yet made an announcement about his plans.

.BIDEN ALMOST CERTAIN TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2020, SOURCE SAYS

Meanwhile, Clinton huddled separately with several other Democrats who have announced presidential campaigns, including California Sen. Kamala Harris, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, the aide said. She also spoke by phone with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, though they didn’t meet.

Other Democrats Clinton has met with about the 2020 race include former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, the aide said. Hickenlooper is believed to be considering a run, though Garcetti has since said he will not run.

VINTAGE BERNIE FOOTAGE SHOWS NOW-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE PRAISING BREADLINES, COMMUNIST NATIONS

Clinton herself has not ruled out a run again for the White House, though she has not signaled she is gearing up for another campaign. During an October speaking event, Clinton was asked if she wanted to run again. Clinton responded “no” but then added, "I’d like to be president."

New York Post

Published  2 months ago

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scolded media outlets for reporting that she lives in a luxury high-rise building in Washington, DC, around the time she and other high-profile Democrats appeared on a hit list compiled by a Maryland man arrested for allegedly planning a mass terror attack.

“Journalists are sharing stories about where I live the same day it’s shared that myself + others were targeted by a mass shooter,” the New York Democrat tweeted late Wednesday. “All this paired w/ amplifying unvetted conspiracy theories. It’s reckless, irresponsible & puts people directly in danger. This isn’t a game.”

Court documents show Coast Guard Lt. Christopher Hasson, who was arrested last Friday, drafted a list of politicians and media members whom he was targeting.

The list included Ocasio-Cortez, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, among others.

Hasson, who had an arsenal of 15 firearms in his Silver Spring, Md., home, searched on the internet for “Where in DC do Congress live?” and “Best place in D.C. to see Congress people,” according to police officials.

A number of outlets reported in the past week that the freshman lawmaker, whose congressional salary is $174,000, lives in a tony section of the capital in a building where rents range from $2,000 for a studio apartment to more than $5,000 for a three-bedroom.

While most of them did not give an address, they did provide identifying information and photographs about which stores were in the neighborhood and the amenities offered by her complex, which is under construction.

The articles pointed out Ocasio-Cortez’s platform as a champion of the poor and took her to task for living in an upscale building that they claimed didn’t offer affordable housing.

The building developer told The Post that they participate in the District of Columbia’s housing voucher program and have low-income people living there.

Asked to provide a specific number, the developer said: “We cannot disclose any more specific details about our residents.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s office pushed back against the notion that it was hypocritical for the congresswoman to live in upscale digs.

A spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon that her office also uses a car with an “internal combustion engine that runs on fossil fuels,” even though she thinks their use should be eliminated.

The Federalist

Published  2 months ago

Democrats have found a sneaky way to tilt the political playing field in their favor without having to reform the immigration system.

americanthinker

Published  2 months ago

After garnering a host of press attention for a supposed anti-black, anti-gay attack from supposed random supporters of President Trump, involving a noose, Hollywood actor Jussie Smollett looks pretty washed up now that a couple of Nigerians have been implicated by the Chicago cops in the perpetration of a hoax, supposedly to garner sympathy.

But another Hollywood guy, a film producer named Tariq Nasheed, who also goes by hip-hop rapper-like names of 'K-Flex' and 'King Flex,' thinks this isn't the end of the story. He smells a political rat.

His series of tweets raises suspicions that the political response to the matter, led by Democratic presidential candidates Kamala Harris (and Cory Booker), is suspicious, real suspicious, and there might have been a staged set-up in order to get a law passed and rack up voter points.

Here are his tweets making the argument:

1. Let me do a quick thread about this Jussie Smollett hoax. Because we need to ask questions about who else was involved in this hoax. I have always been critical of the deceptive tactics of the white LGBT community.

Now as we know, Jussie has campaigned with Kamala Harris pic.twitter.com/Ji5IN2DrXA

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

2. Kamala Harris was one of the people who authored the Anti Lynching Bill. Remember, these people below are funded by certain groups with certain agendas that has nothing to do with helping ADOS. That’s why whenever we bring up a Black agenda, Kamala & Cory changes the subject pic.twitter.com/5qzx45R62K

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

3. That anti Lynching Bill Kamala introduced snuck in some LGBT language at the last minute. The white LGBT community has always tried to attached themselves to the plight of Black Americans to give the false impression that they have had a comparative historic struggle pic.twitter.com/6oYW52jx36

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

Go here if you can't see all seven of the tweets, you won't be wasting your time. And the comments that follow from people in Nasheed's Hollywood entertainment industry circles are also pretty impressive.

Up until now, it appeared that politicians such as Harris (and Booker) couldn't have known much about the phony plot and probably just glommed onto the controversy for political advantage the way a lot of politicians do. But Nasheed has pictures of them campaigning together, and even more important, notes that Harris and Booker brought out an anti-lynching bill just coincidentally timed ahead of the attack, as if to ensure passage as the momentum built from public outrage (until the attack was exposed as phony). With Smollett a black and gay supposed victim and everyone slathing sympathy on him, who could refuse to vote for the anti-lynching bill, which just happens to have had some gay language inserted at the last minute? Trump lynchers were simply everywhere, according to the narrative, even in zero degree Chicago cold weather, lurking and looking for someone black and gay to assault and of course it was a national problem just waiting for Harris to pass a law as the person who "fixes problems" which is how she is repeatedly identified herself to voters. (Here's another coincidence: she made that claim in the Chicago press.)

Nasheed isn't buying that and thinks the involvement of others goes a lot further than the mere imported Nigerians. Plotwise, it is pretty interesting, given that an actor was chosen for the role of the victim, the Nigerian bit players were whisked in and out, the red caps were purchased (they couldn't actually find real ones but they needed to make sure they seemed like Trump hats), and there were these anti-lynching laws with both black and gay victims being inserted in, written by Harris and others all set to be passed a month earlier. The end game was to pass the measures to set a political narrative of raging racism among Trump supporters as whole staged attack occurred.

It is political all right. And quite the political theatre. Oh, and what a coincidence, it happened in Chicago, home of the famous Chicago/Obama political machine that supports Booker and Harris with a vengeance.

Meanwhile, back in Hollywood, it's pretty obvious that Nasheed knows the ways of Hollywood and its leftist establishment very very well, so this is what leaped out at him. Actor, staged attack, Chicago political machine, presidential campaign, new anti-lynching law and pin it all on Trump. Nasheed's suspicions are well worth a closer look, because they seem to fit together very well.

If he's right about them, then this whole farce is a doozy and one can only hope will politically finish Harris and Booker off, taking them down with Stollett.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Communist lawmaker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) says Americans should eat less hamburgers otherwise the world will end. Ocasio-Cortez recently unveiled her plan to help combat climate change (hoax), dubbed the ‘Green New Deal.’ The resolution is completely radical and called for the elimination of airplane travel and took the fight to cow flatulence. Ocasio-Cortez, just like […]

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Two leading Democratic presidential candidates -- U.S. Sens. Kamala Harris of California and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts -- have reportedly said they support reparations for black Americans affected by slavery, reflecting a shift in the importance of race and identity issues within the party.

The New York Times reported Thursday that Harris doubled down on her support for reparations after agreeing with a host on the popular radio show “The Breakfast Club” that the race-conscious policy was necessary to address the legacies of slavery and discrimination in the United States.

"We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities," Harris said in the statement to the Times. "I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities."

Warren also supports reparations.

DEM MOCKED FOR IGNORING SLAVERY, CLAIMING 'NEVER IN HISTORY' HAVE PEOPLE WORKED WITHOUT PAY IN US

“We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country that has had many consequences, including undermining the ability of black families to build wealth in America for generations,” she told the Times. “We need systemic, structural changes to address that.”

"We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country that has had many consequences."

— U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

Julian Castro, another Democrat running for president, has indicated that he would support reparations.

Fox News reached out to all three campaigns but did not immediately hear back late Thursday.

Reparations would involve the federal government’s acknowledgment of the ongoing legacy of slavery and discrimination and providing payment to those affected. Policy experts say it could cost several trillion dollars.

Scholars estimate that black families earn just over $57 for every $100 earned by white families, according to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who is also running for president, has proposed helping poor children by giving them government-funded savings accounts that could hold up to $50,000 for the lowest income brackets, the Times reported. U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., supports a plan to allow Americans without checking accounts bank at their local post office.

Other prominent Democrats have stopped short of backing reparations, including U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who dismissed the idea in 2016. Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama have also expressed reservations.

Supporting reparations could come with much political risk. Republicans have long attempted to paint Democrats who support policies aimed at correcting racial inequalities as anti-white, according to the Times, and polling shows reparations for black Americans remains unpopular.

InformationLiberation

Published  2 months ago

The Jussie Smollett alleged hate hoax is the gift that keeps on giving

TheWrap

Published  2 months ago

Chicago Police superintendent Eddie Johnson called out celebrities, news commentators and even presidential candidates on Thursday for their decision to amplify coverage of what he said was the “phony attack” against “Empire” star Jussie Smollett.

“The accusation within this phony attack received national attention for weeks,” Johnson told reporters during a press conference. “Celebrities, news commentators and even presidential candidates weighed in on something that was choreographed by an actor.

“This announcement today recognized that ‘Empire’ actor Jussie Smollett took advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career,” Johnson continued, adding that the star had staged the attack because he was unhappy with his salary on the Fox show.

Cops: 'Empire' Star Jussie Smollett Staged Attack Because He Was 'Dissatisfied With His Salary'

“I am left hanging my head asking ‘why?’ Why would anyone — especially an African American man — use the symbolism of a noose to make false accusation,” Johnson added. “Bogus police reports cause real harm. They do harm to every legitimate victim who is in need of support by police and investigators as well as the citizens of this city … I’m offended by what happened and I am also angry.”

See Jussie Smollett's Mug Shot (Photo)

In the weeks after the attack was reported, major journalists and Hollywood figures seized on the story to suggest the incident was reflective of a broader trend.

“This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate,” Sen. Kamala Harris said at the time.

“To those in Congress who don’t feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime — I urge you to pay attention,” added Sen. Cory Booker.

Both are running for president in 2020.

Smollett turned himself into police early Thursday morning after being charged by authorities with filing a false police report.

“Jussie Smollet is under arrest and in custody of detectives,” the department’s chief communications officers Anthony Guglielmi said on Twitter Thursday morning. “At 9am at #ChicagoPolice Headquarters, Supt Eddie Johnson, Commander of Area Central Detectives Edward Wodnicki will brief reporters on the investigation prior to the defendants appearance in court.”

The arrest capped a three week investigation during which Smollett started as a victim but later evolved into the prime suspect behind the assault.

“Like any other citizen, Mr. Smollett enjoys the presumption of innocence, particularly when there has been an investigation like this one where information, both true and false, has been repeatedly leaked,” Todd Pugh and Victor Henderson said. “Given these circumstances, we intend to conduct a thorough investigation and to mount an aggressive defense.”

20th Century Fox did not immediately respond to a request for comment from TheWrap. Just hours before the charges were revealed however, the network reiterated their support for the actor.

“Jussie Smollett continues to be a consummate professional on set and as we have previously stated, he is not being written out of the show,” the company said.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

Democrats running for president in 2020 say the rapid job growth and low unemployment under President Trump is not enough and insist America needs to strive for a "moral" economy.

Their calls reflect a growing consensus among Democrats over how to deal with a healthy economy that is creating jobs and the rising influence of socialist candidates and lawmakers in the Democratic Party.

The U.S. economy added 304,000 new jobs in January, and the unemployment rate held steady at 4.0 percent, according to the Department of Labor. The country's gross domestic product increased last quarter by 3.4 percent.

Less than a year before the first primaries, Democrats seem to have settled on an argument that says the economic gains seen over the last two years aren't being "shared" with others.

"What happened to a moral responsibility, to a moral capitalism?" former Vice President Joe Biden asked an audience of students Tuesday during an event at the University of Pennsylvania.

The possible 2020 contender recalled his work with General Motors as part of the automobile industry bailout and criticized the corporation for not investing in worker training and modernizing when its fortunes improved.

"I'm not looking for charity. Business is not in business to be in charity, it's to make money. But the last dime does not dictate what corporate responsibility should be," the former 36-year longtime senator from Delaware said.

"And look, I don't begrudge anybody making a million or hundreds of millions of dollars, I really don't. But I do think there's some shared responsibility, and it's not being shared fairly for hard-working, middle-class, working-class people."

Sen. Kamala Harris of California, also running for president, made a similar pitch in New Hampshire. The former California attorney told the business-oriented attendees their success shouldn't be "vilified" because it was created in the "pursuit of the American Dream."

But she also accused those praising the Trump economy of valuing job quantity over the quality of those jobs.

"Yeah, people are working. They are working two or three jobs," Harris said. "We have to address these truths and do it in a way that recognizes that there is some course correction that needs to happen."

Pressed on Trump's economic record last weekend, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a declared 2020 candidate, said: "Well, working Americans would tell you that the dignity of work is being stripped from them.

"Working Americans would tell you they're working harder than their parents and falling further behind. Working Americans will tell you that while their salaries may moderately have gone up, what's gone up more is the cost of prescription drugs, cost of child care, the cost of college."

Booker's answer was similar to that of another Democrat likely to run in 2020: Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who is currently on a "Dignity of Work" bus tour as a way of reaching people in early-voting states.

The message from the candidates reflect that of the Democratic Party hierarchy. "What Democrats are fighting for is prosperity that is shared. What Democrats are fighting for is a moral capitalism, a capitalism that understands that, when we all succeed, we all succeed," Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez told NBC News last weekend.

In the 2016 race, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont targeted very wealthy Americans in his rhetoric and is set to ramp up criticism of billionaires during his 2020 run.

"You got three people who own more wealth than the bottom half of America. That is wrong. That's morally wrong, in my view. That is bad economics," he told CBS News this week.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has led attacks on wealthy potential 2020 rivals like former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, arguing that using their own money to fund their campaigns undermines democracy.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story indicated that there were 200,000 new jobs in January, and the unemployment rate was 4.1 percent. It has since been corrected to note that there were 304,000 new jobs alongside a 4.0 percent unemployment rate. The Washington Examiner regrets the error.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

CNN anchor Don Lemon offered his perspective of the growing controversy surrounding “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett.

Three weeks after Smollett claimed he was the victim of a racist and homophobic hate crime, he turned himself in to police on Thursday morning on a felony charge for filing a false police report as various leaks from the Chicago PD have indicated that he may have orchestrated the attack.

During his opening monologue, Lemon told his viewers that the story was “personal” since he and Smollett had been acquaintances and were in constant communication since the alleged incident and that Smollett told Lemon what he said had happened to him, which he admitted raised lots of questions.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT ARRESTED, IN CUSTODY OF CHICAGO POLICE

He stressed that while Smollett is “innocent until proven guilty,” he still “squandered the good will of a whole lot of people” if his story wasn’t true.

“He even lied to a lot of people… including me. And that’s not cool,” Lemon said to his viewers. “He squandered the good will of very high-profile people who one day may be running this country like Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and people like President Trump.”

During a panel discussion, Lemon argued that appearing on morning shows “no longer works” when it comes to handling a PR crisis. And because it was a “political” story and not an entertainment one, he should have taken his case to “cable news or on social media.”

“Nothing against morning shows, I love all of my colleagues there, I think they do a great job, but that’s not where it is now,” Lemon said. “Come on a show like this or any of my colleagues and sit down with us live for an hour or however long it takes, answer the questions that need to be answered from real journalists — I shouldn’t say that, from journalists who don’t have to worry about the entertainment arm of their particular company.”

Lemon insisted that Smollett has already “lost the fight in the court of public opinion,” he hesitated to blame him for that defeat.

“He lost because — not his fault. Maybe people were — I don’t know what they were saying to him, maybe because of his representatives. Who knows? But it was handled poorly,” Lemon told the panel.

'GMA' HOST ROBIN ROBERTS: JUSSIE SMOLLETT'S ATTACK STORY WAS CREDIBLE AT TIME OF INTERVIEW

CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson pushed back, saying Smollett “went out and gave the interview” for "Good Morning America."

The CNN anchor later complimented "GMA" host Robin Roberts, saying she did a “terrific job” with her interview with Smollett. But also doubled down, telling his panel that handling a crisis with morning show appearance is “old school.”

NBC4 Washington

Published  2 months ago

Coast Guard Lt. Accused of Plotting Attack

A lieutenant at U.S. Coast Guard headquarters in Washington, D.C., is under arrest for weapons violations but also stands accused of plotting a major attack and creating an apparent hit list of Democrats and media personalities.

In charging documents first posted by George Washington University’s Seamus Hughes and the News4 I-Team, federal prosecutors say 49-year-old Christopher Paul Hasson, of Silver Spring, Maryland, had illegal weapons and was collecting a list of names when he was arrested Friday.

Prosecutors wrote Hasson is a domestic terrorist who “intends to murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country” and must be detained.

The feds shared images of a firearms stockpile in Hasson’s basement apartment.

(Published Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2019)

They say internet searches show he was targeting top Democrats and created an Excel spreadsheet list of names, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Sens. Tim Kaine, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Richard Blumenthal, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke. The list also included top names in media, like MSNBC’s Chris Hayes and Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Don Lemon.

Law enforcement sources told NBC News the feds caught on to Hasson because of searches made on his work computer.

He is accused of searching the following phrases on Google the morning of Jan. 17: “what if trump illegally impeached,” “best place in dc to see congress people,” “where in dc to congress people live,” “civil war if trump impeached” and “social democrats usa.”

His search history also included searches for pro-Russian and neo-fascist literature.

Hasson routinely read portions of a manifesto written by Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik that prosecutors said instructs would-be assailants to collect firearms, food, disguises and survival tools, court papers said. Breivik, a right-wing extremist, is serving a 21-year sentence for killing 77 people in a 2011 bomb-and-shooting rampage.

Prosecutors allege that Hasson visited thousands of websites that sold guns and researched military tactical manuals on improvised munitions.

In a deleted email subfolder, authorities found a draft by Hasson saying, “I am dreaming of killing almost every last person on the earth. I think a plague would be most successful … Start with biological attacks followed by attack on food supply.”

In a draft of a letter apparently intended for a known white supremacist leader, Hasson identified himself as a white nationalist for more than 30 years who advocated “focused violence” to create a “white homeland,” according to charging documents.

The chief at the federal defender's office in Maryland, which is representing Hasson, declined to comment on the allegations. The Coast Guard did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Hasson's arrest. No one answered the door Wednesday at the home address for Hasson listed in public records.

Hasson also is charged with possession of a controlled substance. He appeared to be a chronic user of the opioid painkiller Tramadol and had purchased a flask filled with four ounces of "synthetic urine" online, prosecutors said. Authorities suspect Hasson had purchased fake urine to use in case he was randomly selected for a drug test.

He is scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt Thursday afternoon.

Copyright Associated Press / NBC4 Washington

The Clover Chronicle

Published  2 months ago

She may have helped Smollett orchestrate the hoax to make Trump supporters look bad. Read more...

americanthinker

Published  2 months ago

After garnering a host of press attention for a supposed anti-black, anti-gay attack from supposed random supporters of President Trump, involving a noose, Hollywood actor Jussie Smollett looks pretty washed up now that a couple of Nigerians have been implicated by the Chicago cops in the perpetration of a hoax, supposedly to garner sympathy.

But another Hollywood guy, a film producer named Tariq Nasheed, who also goes by hip-hop rapper-like names of "K-Flex" and "King Flex," thinks this isn't the end of the story. He smells a political rat.

His series of tweets raises suspicions that the political response to the matter, led by Democratic presidential candidates Kamala Harris (and Cory Booker), is suspicious, real suspicious, and there might have been a staged setup in order to get a law passed and rack up voter points.

Here are his tweets making the argument:

1. Let me do a quick thread about this Jussie Smollett hoax. Because we need to ask questions about who else was involved in this hoax. I have always been critical of the deceptive tactics of the white LGBT community.

Now as we know, Jussie has campaigned with Kamala Harris pic.twitter.com/Ji5IN2DrXA

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

2. Kamala Harris was one of the people who authored the Anti Lynching Bill. Remember, these people below are funded by certain groups with certain agendas that has nothing to do with helping ADOS. That’s why whenever we bring up a Black agenda, Kamala & Cory changes the subject pic.twitter.com/5qzx45R62K

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

3. That anti Lynching Bill Kamala introduced snuck in some LGBT language at the last minute. The white LGBT community has always tried to attached themselves to the plight of Black Americans to give the false impression that they have had a comparative historic struggle pic.twitter.com/6oYW52jx36

— Tariq Nasheed 🇺🇸 (@tariqnasheed) February 17, 2019

Go here if you can't see all seven of the tweets. You won't be wasting your time. The comments that follow from people in Nasheed's Hollywood entertainment industry circles are also pretty impressive.

Up until now, it appeared that politicians such as Harris (and Booker) couldn't have known much about the phony plot and probably just glommed onto the controversy for political advantage the way a lot of politicians do. But Nasheed has pictures of them campaigning together, and even more important, she notes that Harris and Booker brought out an anti-lynching bill just coincidentally timed ahead of the attack, as if to ensure passage as the momentum built from public outrage (until the attack was exposed as phony). With Smollett a black and gay supposed victim and everyone slathering sympathy on him, who could refuse to vote for the anti-lynching bill, which just happens to have had some gay language inserted at the last minute? Trump-lynchers were simply everywhere, according to the narrative, even in zero-degree Chicago weather, lurking and looking for someone black and gay to assault, and of course it was a national problem just waiting for Harris to pass a law as the person who "fixes problems," which is how she has repeatedly identified herself to voters. (Here's another coincidence: she made that claim in the Chicago press.)

Nasheed isn't buying that and thinks the involvement of others goes a lot farther than the mere imported Nigerians. Plot-wise, it is pretty interesting, given that an actor was chosen for the role of the victim, the Nigerian bit players were whisked in and out, the red caps were purchased (they couldn't actually find real ones, but they needed to make sure they seemed like Trump hats), and there were these anti-lynching laws with both black and gay victims being inserted in, written by Harris and others, all set to be passed a month earlier. The endgame was to pass the measures to set a political narrative of raging racism among Trump-supporters as a whole staged attack occurred.

It is political, all right. And quite the political theater. Oh, and what a coincidence: It happened in Chicago, home of the famous Chicago-Obama political machine that supports Booker and Harris with a vengeance.

Meanwhile, back in Hollywood, it's pretty obvious that Nasheed knows the ways of Hollywood and its leftist establishment very, very well, so this is what leaped out at him. Actor, staged attack, Chicago political machine, presidential campaign, new anti-lynching law, and pin it all on Trump. Nasheed's suspicions are well worth a closer look, because they seem to fit together.

If he's right about them, then this whole farce is a doozy, and one can only hope it will politically finish Harris and Booker off, taking them down with Smollett.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Actor Jussie Smollett had recently hosted an episode on lynching for the documentary series “America Divided.” The Epix network has since pulled the episode featuring the embattled actor after the actor was arrested and charged of disorderly conduct for filing a false police report.

Jussie Smollett appeared in a documentary that specifically touched upon the topic of lynching last May, according to a report by Variety. The Empire actor was a narrator and correspondent in an episode of the Epix documentary series, “America Divided.”

The episode’s director, Lucian Read, told Variety that he was horrified when Smollett’s story initially came out, adding that for him, it was “hard to get away from the coincidence.”

“Of course in this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty and all that,” said Read, “but assuming the allegations are true, I wonder whether coincidence is the right word — to take this truth and turn it into a fiction like that, it’s remarkable.”

Smollett had initially reported that he had been attacked by two men wearing masks, who threw bleach on him and put a rope around his neck.

The actor’s story caused many members in Hollywood, the mainstream media, and the Democrat Party to immediately and uncritically react, spurring a national frenzy.

Newly announced Democrat 2020 presidential candidates, such as Sen. Kamala Harris and Sen. Cory Booker, quickly reacted by calling Smollet’s unverified story an “attempted modern day lynching,” and demanding that Congress pass an anti-lynching bill.

Now, the actor has been arrested and charged with one count of felony disorderly conduct for filing a false police report, as Chicago police say that new evidence suggests that Smollett had staged his own attack.

Read told Variety that the actor had been “a pleasure to work with,” and that he and the producers are still “very proud” of the episode that had been hosted by Smollett, despite the “crazy” and “strange” recent developments.

“We really believed it was the strongest episode in the series and explored issues that need to be discussed in this country,” said Read, “Jussie and all of us were extremely committed to making a great show.”

The network has since reportedly pulled the episode, stating, “In light of – and with respect to – the sensitivities around recent events, we can confirm that Epix is no longer making available the episode of ‘America Divided’ featuring Jussie Smollett.”

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo and on Instagram.

Military.com

Published  2 months ago

A photo of weapons reportedly seized from Coast Guard Lt. Christopher Paul Hasson. Twitter photo 20 Feb 2019 Military.com | By A Coast Guard lieutenant assigned to the service's headquarters in Washington, D.C., has been arrested on drug and gun possession charges, a nd is accused of plans to "murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country," according to documents filed in Maryland District Court. Lt. Christopher Paul Hasson, an acquisitions officer for the National Security Cutter

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Chicago Police held a press conference Thursday morning on the Jussie Smollett hate hoax after the actor’s arrest. The Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said he’s “offended and angry” over Jussie Smollett’s hate hoax crime while he delivered an emotional press conference. Mr. Johnson blasted Smollett’s staged attack as “shameful” then ripped into the Democrat […]

The Lutchman Review

Published  2 months ago

Kamala Harris & Al Sharpton in the same story… Yikes, can’t get much more scary than that.

But seriously, these two were one of the first to comment on the Jussie Smollett “hate crime” that turned out to be a hoax.

Their initial reaction was to run to the defense of Jussie and condemn Trump and his supporters. Now that everything has been discovered to be staged, reporters caught them outside and started asking questions. They’re response says it all.

From The Hill:

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) was peppered with questions about the actor Jussie Smollett on Thursday when leaving a meeting with the Rev. Al Sharpton in Harlem, N.Y.

Video captured after the event showed Harris briskly walking to a car while ignoring shouted questions regarding the Smollett case about which she had previously commented.

Smollett was arrested early Thursday and charged with one count of disorderly conduct in connection with filing a false police report over his claim that he was attacked in a Chicago neighborhood by two men yelling racist and homophobic slurs.

Harris was among the first 2020 Democratic presidential candidates to weigh in on Smollett’s case last month after he claimed to be the victim of a hate crime. Harris called the alleged attack a “modern-day lynching” in late January. President Trump also condemned the incident at the time, saying “it doesn’t get worse.”

On Monday, as questions regarding the credibility of Smollett’s story began to surface in media reports, Harris told reporters that the case needed further investigation.

“I will say this about that case,” she said Monday. “I think that the facts are still unfolding, and I’m very concerned about the initial allegation that he made about what might have happened.”

“And it’s something we should all take seriously whenever anyone alleges that kind of behavior, but there should be an investigation,” Harris added. “And I think that once the investigation has concluded then we can all comment, but I’m not going to comment until I know the outcome of the investigation.”

Thursday’s meeting with Sharpton at the Harlem soul food legend Sylvia’s Restaurant was meant to focus on “criminal justice reform and other critical issues,” Sharpton’s National Action Network told the New York Post.

Harris is vying for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination amid a crowded field of competitors including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.), among others.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The father of Sen. Kamala Harris is trying to distance himself from the 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful after she said her pot smoking in college stemmed from her Jamaican heritage.

Harris, D-Calif., told the nationally syndicated radio show "The Breakfast Club" earlier this month that she supports marijuana legalization at the federal level, and acknowledged that she's smoked pot in the past, saying: “I have. And I inhaled. I did inhale.”

KAMALA HARRIS, PUSHING LEGAL MARIJUANA, SAYS SHE SMOKED POT IN COLLEGE: 'AND I INHALED'

The senator re-emphasized her use when asked by the hosts about rumors that she opposes marijuana legalization.

“That’s not true. Look, I joke about it, I have joked about it. Half my family is from Jamaica, are you kidding me?” Harris said, laughing.

Harris' father, Donald, disapproved of the comments, which he told the Jamaica Global Online constituted "identity politics."

"My dear departed grandmothers ... as well as my deceased parents, must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics," he said

Donald Harris continued: "Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.”

The senator told the radio program added: “We need to research the impact of weed on a developing brain” and said measuring how marijuana impairs people who are driving needs to be addressed."

Harris supports a bill — introduced Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a rival for the Democratic presidential nomination — that would end the federal marijuana prohibition.

Fox News' Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

POLITICO

Published  2 months ago

A coordinated barrage of social media attacks suggests the involvement of foreign state actors.

chicagotribune.com

Published  2 months ago

Jussie Smollett's amazing story draws the attention of politicans and more than 20 police detectives, while the shooting of a 1-year-old boy is set aside

GOP

Published  2 months ago

Having moved the Democrat Party to the far-left, Bernie Sanders is back with fresh new plans to spend the country into oblivion and scandals to defend.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

The Green New Deal blueprint introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was crafted by three far-left organizations and is being pushed by a coalition of well-funded professional progressive groups and known leftist agitators. | Politics

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

The entry of Sen. Bernie Sanders and 11 other White House challengers has not changed the gambling odds on the expectation that President Trump will win re-election.

Medium

Published  2 months ago

In a show of home-state strength, over 50 New Jersey Democratic officials announce their endorsement of Cory Booker for president.

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is jumping into 2020’s presidential race according to a video announcement Tuesday. Sanders joins other 2020 Democratic hopefuls including Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar. This not Sanders’ first rodeo, in fact, he ran a 2016 presidential campaign.

Taking Down Trump

In his campaign announcement video, Sanders called President Trump “The most dangerous president in modern American history.” Sanders also called Trump a ‘pathological liar, a fraud, a racist, a sexist, a xenophobe, and an authoritarian.’

According to the newly launched campaign site, “No one candidate, not even the greatest candidate you could imagine, is capable of taking on Donald Trump and the billionaire class alone. There is only one way we win — and that is together.”

Trump told members of the press Tuesday that he likes “Bernie.”

“Personally, I think he missed his time. I wish Bernie well. It will be interesting to see how he does. He was not treated with respect by Clinton,” said Trump.

Trump: "I like Bernie." https://t.co/aJwJCumhJD

"Personally, I think he missed his time. I wish Bernie well. It will be interesting to see how he does. He was not treated with respect by Clinton." pic.twitter.com/YqX3p7pqYb

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) February 19, 2019

The Socialist Revolution

Sanders’ campaign will focus on social, economic, and environmental justice. Sanders is a longtime opponent of the “top 1%”, referring to the American rich. The campaign is a grassroots movement with volunteers in all 50 states. His site explicitly says “Paid for by Bernie 2020 (not the billionaires)”

“They may have the money and power, we have the people,” said Sanders. The campaign has already raised $1 million in its first day.

Powerful special interests may have the money, but we have the people. Supporters from all 50 states have donated to our unprecedented grassroots campaign. Say you're in: https://t.co/4YhCuNlKEk pic.twitter.com/d32UxxRi9q

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 19, 2019

Following Sexual Assault Allegations

The campaign announcement comes on the heels of sexual assault allegations from the 2016 campaign.

A Politico report highlighted that over two dozen 2016 campaign staffers requested a meeting to “discuss the issue of sexual violence and harassment on the 2016 campaign, for the purpose of planning to mitigate the issue in the upcoming presidential cycle,” according to a letter obtained by Politico.

.@BernieSanders on reports of sexism & sexual harassment in 2016 campaign: "I learned that that was true and it breaks my heart… In this campaign for president, we are going to have the strongest protocols to protect women and anybody else against any form of harassment." pic.twitter.com/xBf2FjDogT

— CBS This Morning (@CBSThisMorning) February 19, 2019

Sanders told CBS This Morning, “I learned that that was true and it breaks my heart… In this campaign for president, we are going to have the strongest protocols to protect women and anybody else against any form of harassment.”

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Late on Tuesday night, it was revealed that the state attorney for Cook County, Illinois decided to recuse herself from the heat hoax involving Jussie Smollett. Why? Get Your "Build The Wall" Coin For 50% Off And

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

As the race for the Democratic presidential nomination heats up, the candidates have engaged in an escalating competition to claim the most radical policy agenda.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

The Green New Deal blueprint introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was crafted by three far-left organizations and is being pushed by a coalition of well-funded professional progressive groups and known leftist agitators. | Politics

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

A U.S. Coast Guard lieutenant arrested last week on gun and drug charges is a white nationalist who apparently had a hit list of Democratic lawmakers and activists as well as prominent media personalities, federal prosecutors said Wednesday.

In a motion for pretrial detention filed in federal court in Baltimore, authorities said Lt. Christopher Paul Hasson was arrested Friday and charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and an opioid called Tramadol.

However, the filing described the charges as "the proverbial tip of the iceberg," and referred to Hasson as "a domestic terrorist" who meant to "murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country."

The filing was first noted by researchers from George Washington University's Program on Extremism.

Prosecutors say Hasson regularly read a manifesto written by Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian far-right extremist who killed 77 people in a pair of 2011 terror attacks, and stockpiled weapons and ammunition. According to the documents, federal agents recovered 15 firearms and "conservatively" more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition from Hasson's "cramped basement apartment" in Silver Spring, Maryland.

According to the document, Hasson organized a spreadsheet of so-called "traitors" that he subdivided into three categories: A,B, and C. So-called "Category A" traitors included Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut (referred to as "Sen blumen jew" in the spreadsheet), Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts (referred to as "poca warren") Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California.

Also listed in "Category A" were House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Rep. Alexandria Oscasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., MSNBC personalities Joe Scarborough, Chris Hayes, and Ari Melber as well as CNN host Don Lemon. Names in the "Category B" list included Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., CNN personalities Chris Cuomo and Van Jones, and the Democratic Socialists of America.

Prosecutors say Hasson Googled topics including "what if trump illegally impeached," "best place in dc to see congress people," and "civil war if trump impeached" roughly a month before his arrest.

The filing said Hasson had "espoused extremist views for years" and quoted a letter he drafted to "a known American neo-Nazi leader" in September 2017, nearly two months after the deadly violence at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. In the letter, Hasson described himself as "a long time White Nationalist, having been a skinhead 30 plus years ago before my time in the military." Hasson added that "I fully support the idea of a white homeland ... We need a white homeland as Europe seems lost. How long we can hold out there and prevent n-----ization of the Northwest until whites wake up on their own or are forcibly made to make a decision whether to roll over and die and to stand up remains to be seen."

Three months earlier, prosecutors say Hasson drafted an email to "friends" in which he said he was "dreaming of a way to kill almost every last person on the earth. I think a plague would be most successful but how to I acquire the needed/ Spanish flu, botulism, anthrax not sure yet but will find something."

In the same email, Hasson mused: "Start with biological attacks followed by attack [sic] on food supply ... Two pronged [sic] attack seems it might before successful. Institute a bombing/sniper campaign."

Prosecutors said Hasson was an acquisitions officer for the National Security Cutter Acquisition Program who had been assigned to the Coast Guard's headquarters in Washington since June 2016. He previously served in the Marine Corps and the Army National Guard.

A detention hearing for Hasson is scheduled for 1 p.m. Thursday.

Fox News' Jake Gibson contributed to this report.

BuzzFeed News

Published  2 months ago

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. — Sen. Kamala Harris told a crowd here Monday that she would push for the federal government to rename Columbus Day “Indigenous Peoples’ Day,” a focal point for some progressives who say the holiday should emphasize the history of Native Americans instead of the European conqueror.

“Sign me up,” Harris said in response to a voter’s question of whether she would support the initiative to rename the holiday. She spoke of her own efforts in the Senate to make lynching a federal crime.

Harris, who officially launched her campaign for president last month in Oakland, drew an overflow crowd on her first town hall in New Hampshire, the site of the country’s first presidential primary. They spilled out of a church and into the snowy streets of Portsmouth to hear her deliver a campaign message of “speaking truth” and “fighting for justice,” a refrain that focuses in part on her past as a prosecutor and law enforcement official.

Harris also committed to passing a “new Voting Rights Act” that would make Election Day a federal holiday and emphasize same-day voter registration.

“I was impressed that she answered specific tough questions in the affirmative,” said Chip Noon, a real estate photographer from Durham, New Hampshire, who came to Harris’s event with his daughter, Jen Hess.

“I was expecting her to wiggle out of the question,” Hess said. “I think people are tired of that kind of thing. Our B.S. meter is pretty high.”

Harris’s competitor in the Democratic primary, Sen. Cory Booker, was asked the same question in New Hampshire Sunday but did not commit to renaming the holiday.

“I’d like to talk more about why you think it’s important on a federal level,” Booker told voters. “My commitment to you and indigenous peoples is to tell the truth, to work to address the issues, and to find a way to have real recognition and healing.”

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

A Democratic lawmaker who called the alleged hate crime attack against Jussie Smollett a “modern-day lynching” now says that he is withholding judgement in the case amid reports that authorities believe the “Empire” actor orchestrated a hoax.

“Well, the information is still coming out, and I’m going to withhold until all the information comes out,” New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, a 2020 presidential candidate, told reporters Sunday when asked about his past remarks on the Smollett case.

Booker’s remarks are a far cry from a tweet he posted in the hours after Smollett’s alleged attack was reported.

NEW: Booker said he is waiting for more info on the new reports of Jussie Smollet’s attack potentially being a planned hoax. He called it a “modern-day lynching” when first reported. pic.twitter.com/rHNNJtNvCs

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has recently deleted a tweet that showed sympathy for actor Jussie Smollett who staged an attack on himself. Pelosi wasted no time to jump to Smollett’s defense after the actor claimed he was attacked by two Trump supporters.

On January 29th, Smollett told law enforcement that he was attacked at 2am in Chicago by two Trump supporters who screamed racist and homophobic slurs as they put a noose over his head and poured bleach on his face.

Smollett, who is gay and black, also told police his attackers yelled racial and homophobic slurs at him as well as told him, “This is MAGA country.”

Politicians and celebrities alike rallied around Smollett, including Pelosi, who tweeted on January 29, “The racist, homophobic attack on [Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love.”

However, as the case unfolded over the past two weeks more questions arose as to whether Smollett was telling the complete truth about the January 29 incident.

VOTE NOW: Should Pelosi Be REMOVED From Office?

This was the tweet that Nancy Pelosi released on the day of the attack that has recently been deleted.

Nancy Pelosi wasn’t the only politician to jump to conclusions. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker both tweeted in defense of Smollett after he came out with his outlandish claims.

Booker was asked questions about the recent revelations concerning Smollett and he stated that he was not going to make any statements until there was more information. This statement from Booker is very interesting considering he didn’t seem to wait for any information when he jumped to Smollett’s defense when Smollett claimed he was attacked by Trump supporters.

According to ABC News, two Nigerian brothers, initially arrested by Chicago Police in connection to the assault against Smollett were later released after telling law enforcement that Smollett paid them to stage the attack.

One of the brothers is Smollett’s personal trainer, according to a statement to ABC News from Smollett’s attorneys. They had decided to cooperate after investigators revealed that they had evidence the brothers had bought the rope that was put around Smollet’s neck at a local hardware store.

With growing evidence against him, Smollett is standing by his story. This is the statement that his attorney released.

“As a victim of a hate crime who has cooperated with the police investigation, Jussie Smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that the perpetrators are individuals he is familiar with. He has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack. Nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying.”

When Smollett originally made his claims that he was attacked at 2am in negative four degree weather by two Trump supporters, the common sense individual would immediately question his claims. But Democrats like Cory Booker and Nancy Pelosi decided to jump to his defense because his story made President Trump and his supporters look bad.

What are your thoughts? Comment below…

[RELATED: WHERE’S NANCY? Pelosi’s Office Raided By Patriots With One Powerful Message]

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

On January 29th, actor Jussie Smollett went to the Chicago Police Department and told them that he was attacked by two male Trump supporters who put a noose around his neck and poured bleach on his face while screaming homophobic and racist slurs. Recent revelations suggest that Smollett paid two men to stage the attack on himself.

The story that Smollett shared went viral and got attention from many prominent Democrats including Nancy Pelosi and Cory Booker:

The story received unending press. The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), tweeted, “The racist, homophobic attack on [Smollett] is an affront to our humanity.” Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) called it a “modern-day lynching.” Congresswoman and Fresh Face™ of the Democratic Party Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slammed anyone who questioned the story, tweeting, “The attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack.”

VOTE: Should Jussie Smollett Get PRISON TIME For Orchestrating The “MAGA Hoax”?

These liberals seemed to jump on the bandwagon because they saw it as an opportunity to trash President Trump and his supporters.

Good Morning America even hosted Smollett where he attacked anyone who even questioned his story. Many other celebrities rushed to Smollett’s defense even though none of his claims had been validated.

One tiny problem. The story was a hoax that was completely made up by Smollett.

There was a hate crime that actually happened on the same exact night that got zero media attention. A Jewish man was beaten up by three men in New York. Watch the video below.

A Jew brutally beaten last night in Brooklyn. Nothing stolen. Antisemitism is alive and well in NYC. Time for a hard look at who is doing it and its cause. This has been going on in NY long before Charlottesville or 2016 just ask anyone visibly Jewish. pic.twitter.com/z86dz32YBL

— Motti Seligson (@mottiseligson) January 30, 2019

Check out what Ben Shapiro had to say about it:

This isn’t the only story of anti-Semitism in New York. Not by a long shot. Two weeks before that beating, a Jewish man, 19, was “violently assaulted” as he walked past a local laundromat by a group of teenage black males. In December, a 16-year-old Jewish teen spent a week in a hospital after being beaten by two other teens; witnesses said that the teens screamed “Kill the Jew.” The NYPD categorized the attack as “gang related” rather than a hate crime, angering Jews in the area. This weekend, vandals shattered the window of a Chabad in Bushwick as the rabbi and his family slept inside.

Why didn’t this get any media attention? Well besides the fact that the media seems to ignore almost every anti-Semitic attack these days, the reason why the attack doesn’t appeal to them is because there is no way for the media to twist the story to make it Trump’s fault like they were able to do with the Smollett “attack.”

Ben Shapiro added this:

Indeed, the narrative the Left wishes to push is that America is deeply discriminatory and bigoted, rife with hate. But by statistics, Jews are by far the most likely group to be targeted in America on a per capita basis. This is a problem for the intersectionality-oriented Left, which sees Jews not as victims but as part of the power hierarchy in the United States. How can the Left uphold its hierarchy of victimhood if Jews are the chief targets of hate crime – and furthermore, if such hate crime is largely perpetrated by non-white supremacists, people who supposedly lie higher on the victim hierarchy than Jews?

Furthermore, Jews are inordinately successful and well-treated in the United States; outside of Israel, there is no more philo-Semitic country on earth. So if Jews, the most statistically victimized group in America, aren’t particularly victimized, what does that say about the narrative of America as racist, bigotry-ridden hellhole?

At the end of the day, all the Left cares about is having the ability to claim “victimhood” while pointing fingers at President Trump and his supporters. They want to continually drive the point that America is not a safe place for gays and black people because Donald Trump is president. The Smollett accusations allowed them to do this. Anti-Semitic attacks don’t.

What are your thoughts? Comment below…

CNS News

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Cory Booker is proposing a plan—the American Opportunity Accounts Act—that he calculates will provide $46,215 to every 18-year-old in the lowest income bracket by giving them annual subsidies in a federally managed saving account.

Booker cited his plan in a Tweet he sent out this morning.

“We must close the wealth gap that’s undermining equal opportunity in our country,” Booker said in his Tweet. “My baby bonds will help level the playing field by creating a savings account for every U.S. child—to invest in themselves through things like paying for higher education.”

Booker’s Tweet retweeted an article Tweeted by prosperitynow.org. The article was headlined: “Cory Booker’s America Opportunity Accounts Act is a Bold Step Towards Wealth Equality.”

“Today, with the announcement of the American Opportunity Accounts Act, we’re excited to see Senator Cory Booker (D.-N.J.) take a concrete step to help level the wealth-building playing field and ensure that all children—especially those who come from low- and moderate-income families—have a fair shot to reach financial security and prosperity,” said the article.

It linked to an article at Vox, entitled: “An exclusive look at Cory Booker’s plan to fight wealth inequality: give poor kids money.”

“America has a massive, growing racial wealth gap,” Vox said. “The median white family today holds nearly 10 times the wealth of the median black family.

“Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.),” Vox continued, “is introducing a bill aimed at closing that gap. His idea is to give low-income kids a sizable nest egg (nearly $50,000 in some cases) that they could use for wealth-building purchases, like a down payment on a house or college tuition.”

“It would be a dramatic change in our country to have low-income people break out of generational poverty,” Booker told Vox. “We could rapidly bring security into those families’ lives, and that is really exciting to me.”

Vox explained how Booker’s plan would work:

“His American Opportunity Accounts Act would give each child born in the United States a savings account with $1,000. Each year, until the child turns 18, the government would deposit as much as $2,000 into that account. The size of the annual payment would depend on the child’s family income, with lower-income families receiving larger checks. …

“Booker’s office estimates that a child who remains in the lowest income bracket of the program (meaning she gets the largest, $2,000 payment each year) would accrue $46,215 by her 18th birthday. A child in the highest income bracket of the program (above 500 percent of the poverty line, or $147,100 for a family of four) would end up with $1,681—just the original $1,000 payment plus earnings accured from the government investing it in low-risk funds.”

Please support CNSNews today! [a 501(c)(3) non-profit production of the Media Research Center]

Or, book travel through MRC’s Travel Discounts Program! MRC receives a rebate for each booking when you use our special codes.

BOOK NOW

Daily Wire

Published  2 months ago

On January 29, 2019, Chicago Police opened a hate crime investigation into the alleged assault of Empire actor Jussie Smollett. Smollett, who is black and gay, alleged that two men approached him at 2 a.m. in Chicago, where they shouted “f*****” and “n*****,” tried to wrap a noose around his neck, and poured bleach on him. He also told TMZ that the men shouted, “This is MAGA country.”

The story received unending press. The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), tweeted, “The racist, homophobic attack on [Smollett] is an affront to our humanity.” Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) called it a “modern-day lynching.” Congresswoman and Fresh Face™ of the Democratic Party Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slammed anyone who questioned the story, tweeting, “The attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack.”

The media ran with the story. Good Morning America hosted Smollett, where he maligned anyone who asked questions as a racist and a homophobe. CNN’s Brooke Baldwin stated, “This is America in 2019.” Celebrities parroted their support for Smollett, with many blaming President Trump and Vice President Pence for the attack.

The story was a hoax.

That same night, a Jewish man in New York was beaten by three thugs. Nothing was stolen. The attack was caught on video.

Outside of a report in The Jerusalem Post, the story received virtually no attention.

This isn’t the only story of anti-Semitism in New York. Not by a long shot. Two weeks before that beating, a Jewish man, 19, was “violently assaulted” as he walked past a local laundromat by a group of teenage black males. In December, a 16-year-old Jewish teen spent a week in a hospital after being beaten by two other teens; witnesses said that the teens screamed “Kill the Jew.” The NYPD categorized the attack as “gang related” rather than a hate crime, angering Jews in the area. This weekend, vandals shattered the window of a Chabad in Bushwick as the rabbi and his family slept inside.

This list goes on.

In fact, according to NBC New York, “The city has seen a sharp increase in reported hate crimes so far in 2019, the NYPD said. Police had investigated 42 hate crimes through Feb. 4, compared with 19 at the same point last year. Most of those were anti-Semitic.” The New York Times reported in October of last year that “there have been four times as many crimes motivated by bias against Jews — 142 in all — as there have against blacks. Hate crimes against Jews have outnumbered hate crimes targeted at transgender people by a factor of 20.”

None of this has received media attention comparable to the Smollett situation. Why? Because, as the Times also admitted in October, “anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York … because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy.” In other words, it doesn’t fit the narrative.

Indeed, the narrative the Left wishes to push is that America is deeply discriminatory and bigoted, rife with hate. But by statistics, Jews are by far the most likely group to be targeted in America on a per capita basis. This is a problem for the intersectionality-oriented Left, which sees Jews not as victims but as part of the power hierarchy in the United States. How can the Left uphold its hierarchy of victimhood if Jews are the chief targets of hate crime – and furthermore, if such hate crime is largely perpetrated by non-white supremacists, people who supposedly lie higher on the victim hierarchy than Jews?

Furthermore, Jews are inordinately successful and well-treated in the United States; outside of Israel, there is no more philo-Semitic country on earth. So if Jews, the most statistically victimized group in America, aren’t particularly victimized, what does that say about the narrative of America as racist, bigotry-ridden hellhole?

The United States is an amazing place. But the media and much of the Left don’t like that narrative. That’s why they cover Jussie Smollett. And that’s why they won’t cover Jews being attacked on the streets of New York.

National Review

Published  2 months ago

The Jussie Smollett debacle shows, yet again, that the media are more interested in pushing a left-wing agenda than sticking to facts.

This week, the story of the Jussie Smollett hoax gripped the national media. The story, for those who missed it, went something like this: The Empire actor, who is both black and gay, stated that on a freezing January night in Chicago, in the middle of the polar vortex, he went to a local Subway store to buy a sandwich. On his way back, he was accosted by two men wearing red hats who called him the f-word and the n-word. They then tossed a clothesline around his neck, poured bleach on him, and shouted, “This is MAGA country!”

There were some obvious problems with the story. First, Chicago is not exactly MAGA country — Trump won 12.5 percent of the vote in the city precincts. Second, it seems unlikely that people would stake out Smollett in the middle of the night in below-freezing temperatures. Third, Smollett somehow retained hold of his sandwich after the alleged assault. Fourth, he strolled through his apartment complex without notifying the doorman of the incident. Fifth, he waited 40 minutes to call the police. Sixth, when the police arrived, he was still wearing the clothesline around his neck. Seventh, Smollett claimed that his manager had been on the phone with him at the time of the alleged hate crime; when asked to turn over his phone to the Chicago Police Department to verify this, he refused to do so.

Initially, the media ran with the story without taking such questions seriously. The Washington Post’s Eugene Scott stated, “To many, the Smollett incident — and the political nature of the assault — is yet another reminder for many black gay Americans that this president’s vision of a ‘great America’ does not appear to include them.” Jamil Smith of Rolling Stone tweeted, “The brutal attack on him in Chicago appears to be yet another example not just of further moral decay, but of the brand of terrorism that still doesn’t seem to spark enough response by Americans.” CNN’s Brooke Baldwin simply lamented, “This is America in 2019.”

Celebrities weighed in, too. Actress Ellen Page went on Stephen Colbert’s late-night show where she blamed Vice President Mike Pence for the attack. Cher tweeted, “VILLAINY, RACISM, HOMOPHOBIA, PROMOTED BY MOST INFAMOUS [clown emoji] IN [world emoji], IS THE POISON THAT KILLS [American flag emoji].” Singer Katy Perry tweeted, “Standing with and sending love to @JussieSmollett today . . . this is a racist hate crime and is disgusting and shameful to our country.” Director Rob Reiner added, “The horrific attack on Jussie Smollett has no place in a decent human loving society. . . . No intolerance! No DT!”

Then there were the Democratic politicians. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “The racist, homophobic attack on [Smollett] is an affront to our humanity.” Senator Cory Booker (D., N.J.), who is running for president, called the Smollett incident a “modern-day lynching.” Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slammed anyone willing to question Smollett’s account, stating, “The attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack.”

Why did so many on the political Left buy into the obviously incredible story from the moment that it broke? Because it perfectly fit narratives that the Left loves: the narrative of America as racist, homophobic hellhole; the narrative of Trump supporters as violent bigots; the narrative of Trump himself as an inspirational figure for such violent bigots. The story was too good to be true. So no one cared whether it was or not.

That phenomenon doesn’t exist only on the Left. Confirmation bias is a universal human concern. But in the past six months, we’ve seen the media run with uncorroborated, unverifiable accounts of sexual assault by Judge Brett Kavanaugh decades ago; false accounts of Trump-supporting high-schoolers harassing an elderly Native American man; and now the Smollett case. This isn’t a coincidence. The real message of the past few months is that the media are dominated by those who align with the political Left. That doesn’t mean that everything the media report is fake news. But it does mean that they themselves are too often fake newspeople. They’re actually motivated actors willing to put aside the strictures of journalistic objectivity in order to run with stories that back a preferred narrative. Then, when called on their bias, they run stories about conservatives “pouncing” — as though the story isn’t media bias itself but conservatives’ anger at media bias.

That’s absurd. But so was Smollett’s story from the outset. Either our media will learn to fact-check themselves, or they’ll continue to lose credibility. And either political partisans will learn to stick to the facts, or they’ll continue to tear the country apart on behalf of the narratives they prefer to truth.

The Babylon Bee

Published  2 months ago

U.S.—The nation’s liberals were struck by a devastating blow this week after finding out a hate crime, reported by Empire actor Jussie Smollet, didn’t actually happen.

“I needed this to be true,” said liberal columnist Hanna Spalding. “When I first heard the news of this attack, I was filled with so much hope. I felt so validated. Then that was taken away. Now I just want to cry into my pillow.”

The attack had been called “a modern-day lynching” by democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker but after Chicago police reported that the “trajectory of the investigation” into Smollet’s story had shifted, Smollet was stripped of his victim status. Booker became irate, phoning the Chicago police chief and shouting repeatedly, “Check it again! CHECK IT AGAIN!”

After some deep breathing exercises, Booker spoke with reporters. “How are we supposed to intentionally turn the nation against each other and exploit these divisions for political power if people won’t commit a simple hate crime once in a while?”

Candlelight vigils are being arranged in liberal cities across the country as millions mourn the loss of one of the most potentially divisive crimes in the last decade. “There was so much promise there. Now there’s just emptiness,” said one mourner in Berkley, CA.

“While Smollet’s attack may have been a hoax, our emotions have undergone a modern-day lynching,” said activist Andrea Jones at a vigil in Chicago. “If you think about it, this is even worse than if the crime had actually happened. A lot of people put a lot of hope into Smollet’s story. Our expectations have been violently assaulted. Yesterday we thought one man had been attacked. Today, our narrative is the one in a hospital bed, sucking Jell-O through a straw and fighting for its life.”

Conservative News Today

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Cory Booker’s declaration that he was withholding judgement on the alleged attack on actor Jussie Smollett would be commendable if he hadn’t already called it out as “an attempted modern-day lynching.” The Democratic presidential candidate told reporters Sunday that he was now waiting until the facts came in on the alleged hate crime against the “Empire” […]

vpr

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Bernie Sanders has confirmed to VPR that he is seeking the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

Daily Wire

Published  2 months ago

Report AdxReason: --Select please--

She said it was a modern-day lynching; she said it without evidence; now that the evidence disproved her assumptions, she has nothing to say.

2020 presidential candidate Kamala Harris was literally speechless when confronted by reporters about recent revelations that "Empire" star Jussie Smollett may have staged a hate crime in order to allegedly gain attention. Upon initially hearing about the alleged hate crime, Harris accepted it at face-value despite the obvious holes in Smollett's initial story.

"Jussie Smollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery," she said on Twitter. "This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate."

Since then, evidence shows that Smollett may have paid two Nigerian brothers to pull off an elaborate hate crime hoax allegedly because the actor did not appreciate the lack of media attention over a racist letter he received in the mail. When confronted by a reporter on Monday if her opinions regarding the Smollett incident have changed in light of the new evidence, Kamala Harris struggled to utter a phrase before side-stepping the issue.

"Which tweet? What tweet?" Harris asked as the reporter questioned her about the "modern day lynching" comment.

"Um ... I ... I ... Okay, so I will say this about that case, the facts are still unfolding, and, um, I’m very, um, concerned about obviously, the initial, um, allegation that he made about what might have happened," she said. "And it’s something we should all take seriously whenever anyone, um, alleges that kind of behavior, but there should be an investigation. And I think that once the investigation has concluded then we can all comment, but I’m not going to comment until I know the outcome of the investigation."

It is important to note that Harris has not deleted her poorly-aged tweet in support of Smollett as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did. The California senator's deflection echoes that of Cory Booker over the weekend; he told people to withhold judgment until more facts came out.

"The information is still coming out. I'm going to withhold until all the information actually comes out from on the record sources," Booker said over the weekend.

Like Kamala Harris, Cory Booker took Smollett's allegation at face-value without waiting for all the facts to come out.

"The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe," Booker tweeted in response to the attack. "To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime– I urge you to pay attention."

While it's nice that both Harris and Booker believe that evidence and due process should decide someone's guilt, they were singing a completely different tune during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearing, during which they immediately believed Christine Blasey Ford's accusation of sexual assault against the judge without a shred of evidence or a corroborative witness.

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Bernie Sanders praised communism and “breadlines” from the start of his political activism career. Despite the hardships suffered in socialist nations, the 2020 presidential hopeful said in the video that bread lines are “a good thing.

Ironically, Sanders says he’s always supports American workers but opposes the “top 1%” of Americans, primarily wealthy business owners, who hire those workers.

I’m running for president because we need leadership that will fight for the interests of workers, not just the 1 percent. We must:

-Raise the minimum wage to a living wage of $15

-Provide pay equity for women

-Guarantee all workers paid family and medical leave

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 22, 2019

In a video from 1985, Sanders reveals he advised the government of Nicaragua.

Submit Your Survey ResponseDo you support the President's wall on the

border with Mexico?Donald J. Trump Action

“As a socialist, the word socialism does not frighten me and I think it’s probably fair to see the government of Nicaragua is primarily a socialist government,” he said.

Sanders also looked at the then USSR as a model for American governance.

He announced his 2020 run on Tuesday. So far, Sanders is up against Sens. Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, and Elizabeth Warren in the pool of Democrats, many who espouse socialist ideologies.

Click here to read the full story.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

A Democratic lawmaker who called the alleged hate crime attack against Jussie Smollett a “modern-day lynching” now says that he is withholding judgement in the case amid reports that authorities believe the “Empire” actor orchestrated a hoax.

“Well, the information is still coming out, and I’m going to withhold until all the information comes out,” New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, a 2020 presidential candidate, told reporters Sunday when asked about his past remarks on the Smollett case.

Booker’s remarks are a far cry from a tweet he posted in the hours after Smollett’s alleged attack was reported.

“The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I’m glad he’s safe,” Booker wrote on Jan. 29.

NEW: Booker said he is waiting for more info on the new reports of Jussie Smollet’s attack potentially being a planned hoax. He called it a “modern-day lynching” when first reported. pic.twitter.com/rHNNJtNvCs

— Bo Erickson (@BoKnowsNews) February 17, 2019

Smollett, who is black and gay, claimed that he was attacked on Jan. 29 by two white men who hurled racist and homophobic insults at him while he was walking in Chicago. The actor also claimed that his assailants placed a rope around his neck during the attack. (RELATED: Here Are All The Politicians Who Rushed To Judgement In The Smollett ‘Hate Crime’)

Democratic lawmakers and left-wing activists jumped to Smollett’s defense. In addition to Booker, California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris called the incident a “modern-day lynching.” New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Speaker Nancy Pelosi asserted it was a “racist, homophobic attack.”

Chicago police now suspect that Smollett paid two acquaintances to stage an attack against him, according to reports from numerous outlets. The two men, who are U.S. citizens of Nigerian descent, were arrested Wednesday but released from custody Friday. They are reportedly cooperating with investigators.

Instead of backtracking on his earlier comments in the Smollett case, Booker shifted Sunday to a discussion of other hate crimes in the U.S.

“We know in America that bigoted and biased attacks are on the rise, in a serious way,” Booker told reporters.

Asked whether Smollett should comment publicly in the face of new information in the case, Booker said: “Again, I’m following this case as you are. We’ll see this happen.”

Booker was also asked whether Smollett’s apparent hoax undercuts an anti-lynching bill that the Democrat introduced earlier this week.

Booker dodged the question.

“We have seen painful realities surge in our country, a rise in anti-Semitism, anti-Islamic attacks,” he said. “We’re seeing just vicious, horrific, cruel violence that’s motivated by bias and hate. We need to do more to protect all Americans and make sure all neighborhoods and communities are safe.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Former President Barack Obama has been working behind the scenes and met with four top 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

While he has not commented publicly on the field of candidates vying for the 2020 Democratic nomination, a new report from The New York Times states that Obama has been privately speaking with some of the leading contenders on how to defeat President Donald Trump.

Get Your “Build The Wall” Coin For 50% Off And We’ll Send Nancy Pelosi A Foam Brick!

The Times reports that Obama-era advisers have been holding “auditions” with presidential hopefuls like “Senators Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, and Sherrod Brown” about how they are planning to run their 2020 campaigns.

The former president is apparently using his advisers to serve as third-party interviewers, meaning they meet with a candidate and then report back to Obama.

Obama reportedly plans to sit back and “let the primary unfold as a contest of ideas” before making any official endorsements.

As noted by The Daily Wire, that doesn’t mean Obama will stay on the sidelines during the Democratic primaries, which will kick off in a few months.

Like failed 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, Obama has been taking audiences with prospective nominees and giving them advice on how to handle a national campaign. So far, he’s believed to have spoken to Harris, Booker, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and some more unfamiliar potential candidates, like his former Attorney General, Eric Holder, who says he’s waiting until later in the process to decide whether to toss his hat into the ring.

Former Texas Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke admitted to Oprah, in his landmark interview with the daytime talk queen, that he’d pursued Obama’s advice in a sit down last year.

“During these informal conversations, usually at his office in Washington, Mr. Obama has offered a combination of supportive advice and sober warnings, cautioning candidates that running for president is a more punishing process than they could ever imagine, according to seven people who have spoken with him directly or were briefed in detail on the meetings,” the Times reports.

He’s mostly concerned, some sources told the Times, that candidates be ready and willing to “push back” on Donald Trump’s economic rhetoric, which Obama’s friends refer to as “bleak.” He’s still surprised, they say, that Trump won with a message of turning back the clock on Obama’s agenda, and doesn’t really understand how such an anti-Obama message resonated with Americans.

PETITION: Tell Mueller To STOP Wasting Our Taxpayer Dollars On The Phony Russia Probe!

Obama’s current close aides admitted to the Times that the former president will speak to any 2020 Democratic contender who comes seeking his advice.

Wow, how arrogant!

While Obama certainly could help a candidate draw bigger crowds and get more attention on their campaigns, the former president is likely still reeling from his defeats in the 2019 midterm elections.

Obama campaigned with and fought hard for Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams and Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum — both of which suffered bitter defeats.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

When Jussie Smollett claimed he was assaulted by two men wearing “Make America Great Again” hats, many Democratic politicians quickly came to his defense.

Those Democrats included Sens. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, and Reps. Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, among others.

Waters blamed the attack on President Donald Trump and asked, “Why all of a sudden do we have people unable to study while black, unable to mow a lawn while black, unable to have picnic while black, and being attacked?”

Pelosi tweeted, “The racist, homophobic attack on [Smollett] is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love.”

Kamala Harris tweeted that the attack was a “modern-day lynching,” while her fellow senator and presidential candidate Cory Booker used the same term to describe the alleged attack.

Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted that the attack was not “possibly” a racist and homophobic attack, but that “it was a racist and homophobic attack.”

Smollett, who is gay, claimed that his attacker shouted racist and homophobic slurs at him. However, additional details later added a cloud of doubt to Smollett’s story, including the fact that Smollett was later seen walking to his house in the early hours of the morning with a subway sandwich in his hand. (RELATED: Jussie Smollett On MAGA Hats: ‘I Never Said That!’)

On Thursday, reports emerged that the Chicago Police Department now believe that the incident was a hoax and that Smollett staged the attack to garner sympathy because his character was being written off the show “Empire,” a report which 20th Century Fox denied, calling the claims “patently ridiculous.”

On Wednesday, two Nigerian brothers were arrested in connection with the case, and on Saturday CNN reported that the brothers are “now cooperating fully with law enforcement.”

Chicago police now believe that Smollett paid the two brothers to stage the assault.

Follow William Davis on Twitter

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris appeared to be caught off guard Monday when she was asked about the latest developments in the alleged attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett.

During an appearance at a bookstore in Concord, N.H., a female reporter asked the senator from California if she wanted to amend a tweet from Jan. 29, in which she said Smollett was the victim of "an attempted modern day lynching" and called the actor "one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know."

"Which tweet? What tweet?" Harris asked. As the reporter specified the tweet in question, Harris appeared to look around for a campaign staffer before responding.

"OK, so, I will say this about that case," she said. "I think that the facts are still unfolding, and, um, I’m very, um, concerned about obviously, the initial, um, allegation that he made about what might have happened.

CORY BOOKER 'WITHHOLDING' JUDGMENT ON SMOLLETT CASE AFTER CALLING IT 'ATTEMPTED MODERN DAY LYNCHING'

"And it’s something we should all take seriously whenever anyone, um, alleges that kind of behavior, but there should be an investigation," Harris added. "And I think that once the investigation has concluded then we can all comment, but I’m not going to comment until I know the outcome of the investigation."

On Sunday, Harris' fellow senator and Democratic presidential candidate, Cory Booker, told reporters he would "withhold" judgment on the matter "until all the information actually comes out from on-the-record sources." Booker also referred to the alleged Jan. 29 attack on Smollett as "an attempted modern-day lynching" and pushed Congress to pass legislation making lynching a federal hate crime.

Smollett, who is black and openly gay, claimed he was assaulted by two men who yelled racist and anti-gay slurs-- as well as the phrase "This is MAGA country!" -- as Smollett was walking to his Chicago apartment. Chicago police arrested and questioned two Nigerian brothers in the alleged attack, but released them on Friday without charges. Investigators said they've requested a follow-up interview with Smollett, but the actor's representatives said there have been no plans to meet with police for the time being.

The Chicago Police Department repeatedly has declined to confirm local media reports that the attack was staged.

Fox News' Mariah Haas contributed to this report.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  2 months ago

Remember what Sen. Cory Booker called the news of the alleged attack on Empire actor Jussie Smollett shortly after the news broke?

He called it a “modern-day lynching” and used it as an argument to push an anti-lynching bill which he is trying to get through Congress.

So what did he say now after reports that Smollett may have been involved in helping to stage the attack?

AP reporter Elana Schor asked him.

And now, all of a sudden, he says he’s going to wait to comment. “The information is still coming out and I’m going to withhold until all the information comes out.”

You were quick to jump in right after it happened, so why the hesitancy now?

He then tries to avoid the subject, saying bigoted and biased attacks are on the rise and that they are primarily from “right-wing” or “white supremacists.” Then he cites South Carolina which happened under Barack Obama.

He doesn’t say it’s wrong to falsely make a hate crime claim or note the multiple false hate crime claims against Trump supporters/MAGA hat wearing people as was alleged in this case, with the “MAGA country” claim, or the Covington Catholic kids. He just tries to deflect.

Yes, you should call out and condemn all hate crimes.

But you should also call out fake hate crimes and not further cause divisiveness, as he did, by jumping on a case before you actually know the facts, particularly when there were questions from the beginning.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

Democratic presidential candidates jockeying for position in 2020 had a lot to say when actor Jussie Smollett said he was attacked in Chicago by two white men who shouted racist and homophobic slurs as they beat him.

But they were silent on Saturday, when law enforcement sources said that Chicago Police believed "Empire" star Smollett, 36, who is gay, paid two black men to set up the assault. Police arrested the men, who are brothers from Nigeria, on Wednesday but released them Friday after discovering "new evidence."

A Chicago police spokesman said: "We can confirm that the information received from the individuals questioned by police earlier in the Empire case has in fact shifted the trajectory of the investigation." He added that police wanted to speak to Smollett again.

When news of the "attack" broke last month, Democratic presidential contenders clamored to denounce it as a horrific manifestation of racism and bigotry in America.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., called it a “modern-day lynching.”

“No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin,” said Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., called the incident “a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it's the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color.”

Asked about the incident, President Trump also condemned it, saying “it’s horrible,” and “It doesn’t get worse.”

Smollett said his attackers were white and that his story would not have been doubted if an attacker had been "a Muslim, or a Mexican, or someone black." He stated that they had punched and kicked him, abused him with homophobic epithets and shouted: "This is MAGA country."

The actor claimed that the men placed a rope around his neck and threw bleach at him from a hot sauce bottle. Police seized bottles of bleach, a red hat, laptops, and an "Empire" script from the home of the brothers.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Senator Cory Booker says that he is now “withholding judgement” about the Jussie Smollett case — after originally calling the likely-hoax a “modern-day lynching.”

Democratic politicians and celebrities are now unsurprisingly silent after it was reported that the men who allegedly attacked Smollett claim that they were paid by the Empire actor — and even rehearsed the “assault” prior to the incident taking place.

Speaking to reporters in New Hampshire, Booker said that he will now reserve judgment “until all the information actually comes out from on-the-record sources.”

The AP reports, “the Democratic presidential candidate turned his focus back to combating hate crimes broadly. Booker called for a unified pushback against ‘attacks on people because they’re different.’”

.@eschor asks @CoryBooker to respond to reports that the Jussie Smollett attack may have been planned by the actor.

He called the attack a "modern day lynching" when the news broke. pic.twitter.com/8Zf8y7vhrv

— Megan Pratz (@meganpratz) February 17, 2019

“We know in America that bigoted and biased attacks are on the rise in a serious way,” Booker said. “We actually even know in this country that since 9/11 a majority of the terrorist attacks on our soil have been right wing terrorist attacks, a majority of them white supremacist attacks,” Booker said.

The two brothers who were considered persons of interest in the case have now been released and are working with Chicago law enforcement. The department acknowledged over the weekend that the focus of the case has “shifted” and Smollett is no longer considered a victim.

Smollett’s attorneys have continued to claim that their client did not orchestrate a hoax.

“(Smollett) has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack,” the statement read. “Nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying,” Smollett’s lawyers said in a statement on Saturday.

Mail Online

Published  2 months ago

Chicago police want to speak to Jussie Smollett as investigators believe he paid two men - Olabinjo Osundairo (top inset) and Abimbola Osundairo (bottom inset) - to stage an assault against him.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The Democratic presidential candidates are, with only a few exceptions, shunning the 'moderate' label as they court the party base.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

It now appears as though "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett orchestrated a "hate crime" against himself. More on that below. 2020 presidential candidate Cory Booker (NJ) immediately jumped to conclusions after the initial report came out

Townhall

Published  2 months ago

Can we blame U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), really?

Being ambitious and bold are not usually considered bad things. And her most ambitious, boldest proposal is not exactly without precedent. A decade of quantitative easing, along with trillion-dollar annual deficits run up recently by congressional Republicans, have laid the debt-ridden tracks upon which she hopes her massive Green New Deal will glide.

Oh, sure, we can derisively point to the now-withdrawn FAQ, which the congresswoman’s staff “accidentally” posted onto the Web and sent out to reporters. Keep your balance near those computer keyboards, folks.

Remember, those answers to a ton of questions about this complete re-making of the economy and society as a whole were “unfinished,” and “erroneously” said things, such as that the Green New Deal (GND) would be “guaranteeing . . . Economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

Cut the green congresswoman some slack?

Slack or no, a reading of the actual totalitarian-esque not-yet-withdrawn House Resolution — calling for “a new national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal era” and labeling it “a historic opportunity” — makes it all clear. You cannot tell me that silly FAQ wasn’t spot on.

View Cartoon

Timing wasn’t helpful to Ocasio-Cortez’s rollout of the GND, either. Who knew that, days after the GND offered to Americans the notion that high-speed train travel could be a human (almost religious) right, deepest blue-state Governor Gavin Newsom stopped California’s high-speed train projects in their tracks, looking at costs and declaring, “Let’s be real.”

Nonetheless, the Green New Deal enthusiastically promises to “create millions of good, high-wage jobs . . . provide unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people . . . and . . . counteract systemic injustices.”

But what about afterlunch?

The GND must produce a plethora of new positions in its trumpeted new Green economy, of course, after wiping out millions of jobsin private health insurance (500,000) and the fossil fuel industry (10 million) and who knows where else.

Meanwhile, more than 100 Democrats in Congress, including four declared presidential candidates — Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — have rushed in to endorse the Green New Deal resolution for Uber-unlimited government.

The Republican reaction provides a different kind of comedy. Kindly old Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that he will generously bring the GND to a vote in the U.S. Senate, helping Ocasio-Cortez in the upper house — and putting Senate sponsor Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, and all other senators squarely on the record. Just as it should be.

Has Sen. McConnell turned over a new green leaf? Or is the Senate’s “Napping Turtle” merely maniacally morphing the GND from a harmless progressive virtue-signaling prop into a weaponized boomerang to bop Dems in their too-Bolshevikian behinds? The comeuppance would come, according to this rationale, when the public realizes just how humongously big Big Government would be if only Democrats were voting.

So let’s vote.

“I’m going to stand up for Ocasio-Cortez,” announced Sean Hannity on his Fox News program, responding to charges the GND wasn’t serious. “I think she’s probably the most honest extreme radical democratic socialist in the country, in that she’s saying what they have wanted to do, incrementally, for years.”

Give AOC her due. Just when Big Brother most needed a facelift, she has brought fresh young energy to tired, old-fashioned socialism.

And leading Democrats out of the shadows.

News One

Published  2 months ago

ew Jersey’s Democratic Sen. Cory Booker has pointed to the racist and homophobic attack on actor Jussie Smollet to show the necessity for Congress to finally pass an anti-lynching law, which cleared a key hurdle Thursday as it winds its way through the legislative process.

SEE ALSO: Senate Votes To Outlaw Lynching For The First Time In History

The U.S. Senate passed an anti-lynching bill on Thursday, which was announced Sen. Kamala Harris, one of the three senators who introduced the measure in 2018.

BREAKING: Our anti-lynching bill, which would make lynching a federal crime, just unanimously passed the Senate. Lynching is a dark, despicable part of our nation's history and I'm hopeful this measure will swiftly pass the House.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) February 14, 2019

“Our anti-lynching bill, which would make lynching a federal crime, just unanimously passed the Senate. Lynching is a dark, despicable part of our nation’s history and I’m hopeful this measure will swiftly pass the House,” Harris tweeted.

In December, the Senate made history by passing the same bill. However, it had to be re-introduced in the Senate this year because the Republican-controlled House of Representative failed to bring it up for a vote before the year ended.

Now that the Democrats have a majority in the House, the anti-lynching bill that the Senate passed Thursday will likely sail through the House without any problems. The final stop will be President Trump’s desk for signature.

Booker dispelled any notion that there was no need for an anti-lynching law in the 21st century.

“The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching,” Booker tweeted in January.” I’m glad he’s safe. To those in Congress who don’t feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime– I urge you to pay attention.”

On Feb. 9, while walking to a Subway, two men reportedly yelled racial and homophobic slurs at Smollett after he exited the restaurant, investigators told The Hollywood Reporter. They allegedly punched and poured bleach on him while one of the suspects put a rope around his neck. As they fled the scene, Smollett told police they said, “This is MAGA country.”

Sen. Kamala Harris celebrates the Senate's historic passage of an anti-lynching bill after nearly 200 failed attempts…https://t.co/igpiN4tAFi pic.twitter.com/lVxWionc0n

The Senate’s vote in December was historic because it was the first time that senators passed an anti-lynching bill after almost 200 failed attempts over more than a century. During that time, the House passed several anti-lynching bills only to have them die in the Senate.

The Senate’s three Black senators—Harris, Booker and Republican Sen. Tim Scott—introduced the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act of 2018 in June. It calls for a life prison sentence for those found guilty on federal anti-lynching charges.

The Senate bill underscores statistics — including that more than 4,700 people were lynched between the years 1882 and 1968 — supported by research compiled by Tuskegee University, according to NPR. About 75 percent of the victims were African-Americans while “99 percent of all perpetrators of lynching escaped from punishment by state or local officials.”

SEE ALSO:

FBI Reportedly Investigating Attack On Jussie Smollett And Kamala Harris Says It’s A ‘Modern Day Lynching’

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

BET.com

Published  2 months ago

On Thursday, the Senate unanimously passed historic legislation to make lynching a federal crime.

The Justice for Victims of Lynching Act was first introduced by Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), who was also joined by Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.). The bipartisan bill is the first piece of legislation to make lynching punishable as a hate crime.

In December 2018, the bill previously passed the Senate; however, when it was introduced to the then-GOP controlled House, it was not cleared.

“According to data from the Equal Justice Initiative, lynching was used as an instrument of terror and intimidation 4,084 times during the late 19th and 20th centuries. From 1882 to 1986, Congress failed to pass anti-lynching legislation 200 times,” read an official press release from the office of Kamala Harris.

During her address on the Senate floor, the 2020 presidential candidate led a call to make the horrendous act of lynching a federal crime.

“Lynchings were acts of violence—they were horrendous acts of violence, and they were motivated by racism,” said Harris. “With this bill, we finally have a chance to speak the truth about our past and make clear that these hateful acts should never happen again. We can finally offer some long overdue justice and recognition to the victims of lynching and their families.”

Booker also explained how "lynching is not a relic past," which was made abundantly clear during the recent homophobic and racist attack on Empire actor Jussie Smollett in Chicago.

“Today’s Senate passage of the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act is a historic step towards acknowledging a long and painful history and codifying into law our commitment to confronting bias-motivated acts of terror in all of its forms. I urge the House of Representatives to take up this bill so that after over 100 years and 200 attempts, we can finally make lynching a federal crime,” Booker said.

Republican Senator Tim Scott, who is the only other Black Senator, also spoke on the monumental bill.

“Today the Senate sent a strong signal that this nation will not stand for the hate and violence spread by those with evil in their hearts,” said Scott. “I look forward to this important legislation ending up on the President’s desk for signature.”

The measure will now go to the House, where it is expected to be passed by the Democratic majority.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

The "Jussie Smollett Saga" just keeps getting crazier and crazier by the day. Not only did he fake the "MAGA Attack"...lie about it...but it has now been confirmed that he PAID two Nigerian brothers to cooperate

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The House of Representatives on Thursday night approved the border security package to avert another government shutdown that was passed overwhelmingly by the Senate earlier in the day -- even as another legal showdown looms over the White House's plan to declare a national emergency to secure more wall funding.

Diamond & Silk

Published  2 months ago

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are certainly an interesting bunch and it remains to be seen who will rise to the top and grab the nomination.

But Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) already has something that makes him stand out from the others.

He’s the only vegan.

And he believes that ‘this planet simply can’t sustain’ millions of people eating meat.

Booker told the vegan magazine VegNews earlier this month that he became vegan after coming to the realization that eating eggs “didn’t align with my spirit.”

While claiming he does not want to lecture Americans on their diets, Booker says Americans need to be nudged into fake cheese because the planet cannot sustain the “environmental impact” of the food industry.

“You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet,” Booker said. “We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry.”

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact,” he said. “It’s just not possible.”

Booker says the “devastating impact” of greenhouse gases produced by the meat industry is “just not practical.”

Booker has endorsed the Green New Deal because he said it was like fighting the Nazis in World War II or going to the moon.

“I found the data that began to reaffirm my vegetarianism,” Booker said. “In fact, it led me to more about our environment and cruelty to animals. I began saying I was a vegetarian because, for me, it was the best way to live in accordance to the ideals and values that I have. My veganism started then.”

The final straw was eating eggs that did not “align” with his spirit.

“I think so many of our likes and dislikes are childhood memories or family traditions, and you associate the foods you’re eating often with such good emotions—but now, suddenly, eating those eggs for me was something that didn’t align with my spirit, and I could feel it,” Booker said. “I finally just made a decision that I was going to become vegan. I remember my last non-vegan meal was Election Day, November 2014.”

LifeNews.com

Published  2 months ago

Voters should not expect any political moderates on abortion among the prominent 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

Not only do contenders such as Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have 100-percent pro-abortion voting records, they also sponsored a radical pro-abortion bill that would have legalized abortions for basically any reason up to birth.

The Free Beacon reports the bill is radically out of touch with voters, and it failed to pass in 2017; but that did not stop prominent Democrats from supporting it.

The so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act” was introduced in Congress in 2017, with dozens of Democrat sponsors, including likely presidential candidates Harris, Warren, Booker, Beto O’Rourke, Kristen Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders.

Nicknamed the “Abortion Without Limits Until Birth Act” by pro-life groups, the bill would have invalidated nearly all state and federal abortion regulations, including waiting periods, informed consent requirements, bans on late-term abortions and sex-selection abortions and more.

Polls indicate that legislation like the bill, which was similar to New York’s radical new pro-abortion law, is strongly opposed by voters. A new Susan B. Anthony List poll found that 77 percent of likely voters support legislation to protect infants born alive after botched abortions. It also found that 62 percent oppose bills to expand late-term abortions. Polls by Gallup and Marist have found similar results.

Here’s more from the report:

The bill—first introduced in the Senate in 2017—was cosponsored by Democrats like Kamala Harris (Calif.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Cory Booker (N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), and independent Bernie Sanders (Vt.). Likewise, the House version was backed by Democratic representatives Eric Swalwell (Calif.), Seth Moulton (Mass.), Tim Ryan (Ohio), and former congressman Beto O’Rourke (Texas).

None of those individuals, who are now either running for president or weighing a run, responded to questions from the Washington Free Beacon concerning their support for the legislation in light of the new polling numbers from SBA List.

While polls consistently show that a majority of Democrats support abortion restrictions, Democrat political leaders do not.

In the past few years, they have voted against bills to protect infants born alive after botched abortions, to defund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood and to prohibit late-term abortions on pain-capable unborn babies. Right now, pro-abortion Democrats are blocking bills in the U.S. House and Senate to protect newborns from infanticide. The Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act requires that babies born alive after failed abortions receive the same basic medical treatment as any other baby born at that gestational age.

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidates do not represent voters, but they do support the Democratic Party platform, which calls for legalized abortion without restriction and taxpayer-funded elective abortions, and the abortion industry, which donates millions of dollars to Democratic candidates.

National Review

Published  2 months ago

There’s an obvious answer to the question, “Why would Jussie Smollett do something like that?”

On January 29, tabloid news site TMZ broke the shocking story that Jussie Smollett, a gay black entertainer and progressive activist, had been viciously attacked in Chicago. Two racist white men had fractured his rib, poured bleach on him, and tied a noose around his neck. As they were leaving, they shouted the ominous words: “This is MAGA country” — a reference to President Trump’s campaign slogan. MSNBC reported the rumor that they were even wearing MAGA hats.

Leaks from the Chicago police over the weekend, however, indicate that Smollett likely paid two Nigerian-American brothers he knew to orchestrate the attack. Smollett denied any wrongdoing through a statement released to the media by his lawyers.

That the original story broke days just after the Covington narrative fell apart last month didn’t stop it from spreading quicker than a wildfire. Within hours of TMZ’s report, some of America’s most influential politicians and celebrities amplified the story — and the belief that America is a dangerous place for minorities — to millions across the world.

2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Cory Booker described the attack as “an attempted modern-day lynching.” He used the incident to press for more hate-crime legislation. California senator Kamala Harris, who is leading the polls for the 2020 race, repeated Booker’s words. Speaker Nancy Pelosi described the attack as “an affront to our humanity.” Freshman congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez castigated media for describing the incident as a “possible” hate crime. Her colleague Rashida Tlaib wrote that “the right wing is killing and hurting our people.”

Jussie Smollett is the lead actor on the Fox drama Empire and has deep roots in Hollywood and the Democratic party. Celebrities, many of them friends with Smollett, pounced on the story. Pansexual pop star Janelle Monae shared a (now-deleted) photo of her and Smollett on social media, writing that “it is still a risk daily to be a black, out and proud human being.” Smollett’s co-star Grace Bryers wrote that “hatred, inequality, racism and discrimination continue to course through our country’s veins.” Rapper T.I. condemned the attack on “OUR PEOPLE” and said “the hits won’t stop until we hit back!” He warned that a “revolution is imminent.”

Numerous media outlets exploited the incident. GQ published an essay by Joshua Rivera arguing that the racist, homophobic attack on Smollet is white America’s “endgame.” The Bay area’s Mercury News ran a report implying that those who voiced skepticism were peddling a “conspiracy theory.”

When news leaks from the Chicago police painted an image of Smollett being generally uncooperative, a second phase of reactions were weaponized against doubters. Black Lives Matter activist Deray McKesson tweeted to his million followers that Fox 32 Chicago reporter Rafer Weigel was “responsible for much of the misinformation disseminated by Chicago PD ‘sources.’” Weigel was one of the local journalists who reported leaks that turned out to be accurate. McKesson did not respond to me when I asked if the source of his accusation was Smollett. The president of the Human Rights Campaign, Chad Griffin, echoed McKesson, saying that “this is exactly the treatment that victims of hate crimes fear and why they often stay silent.” Griffin also did not respond when I asked if he was in contact with Smollett.

On February 14, Smollett gave his first sit-down interview about the alleged attack on Good Morning America. A credulous Robin Roberts gave a softball interview that highlighted his emotions rather than evidence. At this point, Smollett was already receiving the services of high-profile crisis PR firm Sunshine Sachs (who also represents Harvey Weinstein) — and it showed. “It feels like if I had said [the suspect] was a Muslim, or a Mexican, or someone black, I feel like the doubters would have supported me much more,” he said.

The strategy was clear: If you doubt him, you are motivated by racism.

Now that Smollett’s story has all but fallen apart, some of the loudest voices two weeks ago are suddenly quiet. Yesterday Senator Booker wouldn’t respond to the recent developments in Smollett’s story despite having been one of the first to express outrage. Instead, he pivoted to talking about right-wing terrorism and white supremacy.

Now many are asking, “Why would Jussie do this?” To me it’s all but clear.

Jussie Smollett’s hoax is symptomatic of America’s illness. Because of the mainstreaming of academia’s victimhood culture, we are now in a place where we place more value on being a victim than on being heroic, charitable, or even kind. Victims or victim groups high on intersectionality points are supposed to be coveted, treated with child gloves, and believed unreservedly. Their “lived experience” gives them infinite wisdom. Those who urge caution are treated as bigots.

Outside of the rare prosecution for faking a hate crime, the incentives for being a victim — real or imagined — are endless.

Anyone not blinded by bias or panic should have been skeptical of Smollett’s story from the beginning. He openly harbors an intense hatred for Donald Trump and his supporters, going so far as comparing them to klansmen. That his alleged attackers perfectly fit this description should have raised eyebrows across the political spectrum. The cartoony, screenplay-villain portrayal of white Trump supporters was outrageously comical. But to insulated urban progressives who have little to no experience interacting with conservatives, a Trump supporter may as well be synonymous with evil.

“Hate-crime hoaxes are found in collective conflicts,” Jason Manning tells me. Manning is a sociologist at West Virginia University and coauthor of the 2018 book The Rise of Victimhood Culture. “Perpetrators might not even think of them as [false] accusations since in many cases they see it as an attempt to draw attention to a real problem. To the extent that modern society increasingly valorizes victimhood, claiming victim status through outright lies will become more attractive.”

While I can only speculate as to Smollett’s motives, perhaps a clue can be found in his bioline on Twitter. Smollett writes: “I am simply here to help save the world.”

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

The Senate on Thursday cleared legislation to make lynching a federal crime.

The bill, introduced by Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), makes lynching punishable as a hate crime.

The bill previously passed the Senate in December, but it did not clear the then-GOP controlled House before the end of the 115th Congress. It passed the vote on Thursday by a voice vote.

Booker said that "lynching is not a relic past," pointing to the attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett in Chicago.

"Justice for the victims of lynching has been too long denied and as we look forward we must collectively in this body make a strong, unequivocal statement," he added.

Harris, speaking from the Senate floor, added that lynching is part of the country's "uncomfortable history" that had never been "truly acknowledged" or "reconciled" with.

"We must confront hate in our country. ... We are now making clear there will be serious, swift and severe consequences," said Harris, who along with Booker is running for the party's 2020 nomination for president.

Congress has tried but failed to pass anti-lynching legislation roughly 200 times since 1918, according to Harris's office. In 2005, the Senate passed a resolution apologizing to lynching victims.

But, addressing the 2005 vote, the Senate legislation says that while an apology "moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged," legislation criminalizing lynching is still "wholly necessary and appropriate."

The measure will now go to the House.

Conservative Tribune

Published  2 months ago

Imagine you’re Joe Biden. You’re sitting there at night, eating a Swanson’s frozen dinner and drinking a Tab, aimlessly circling episodes of “Family Feud” in the TV guide. You casually reach for “the clicker,” start flipping through the channels, and you land on CNN. You’re saddened to learn that Larry King isn’t on anymore, and you’re about to switch over to reruns of “Maude,” but then you hear something you can’t quite believe.

Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren are all running for President.

“Man, that job was supposed to be mine,” you mutter. “But they told me it was Hillary’s turn. Now these crackpot hacks are going after it? Well…. NOT ON JOE BIDEN’S WATCH!”

You have name recognition, old allies, a magnificent toothy grin, internal party popularity, and you’re absolutely crushing all these far-left loons in the early polling. There’s only one thing you can do. It’ time to run for President…. almost.

As the Hill reports, Biden’s all but in.

TRENDING: Awesome: McConnell schedules Senate floor vote on AOC’s bonkers ‘Green New Deal’

“It’s pretty clear he’s jumping in,” said one source with direct knowledge of the would-be campaign’s moves, adding that Biden is “95 percent there.”

In recent days, Biden has sought to build support from grass-roots activists and is specifically asking donors for their help in the lead-up to an announcement, according to sources. In phone conversations, Biden has been making the case for why he’d be the best candidate in what is already a crowded field.

“Here are the facts: He’s coming off a great midterm,” said Robert Wolf, the Democratic mega-donor who confirmed he spoke to Biden on a 25-minute call on Wednesday.

“He has been the most popular surrogate during the midterms and one of the only surrogates that can play in all 50 states, and that has given him a lot of confidence that he can do well in a national election,” Wolf said.

“He can campaign everywhere and that’s certainly what many people would say is an incredible strength for him.”

As I’ve argued in the past, Joe Biden is currently the only Democrat who poses any sort of legitimate 2020 threat to the President. He’s easy to dismiss, but he’s someone that the GOP should be worried about. I’m not saying he’ll win, but he’s the one guy who can mount anything approaching dangerous campaign.

Conservatives may laugh at “Crazy Uncle Joe,” but the broader voting public views him favorably. He knows how to talk to the very same blue-collar voters who broke for Trump, and he has the air (if not the reality) of being a centrist at a time when people are sick of extremes. He can also, probably, find Wisconsin and Pennsylvania on a map, which is a bonus.

Yes, he has exploitable negatives, but so did Trump. Any limited baggage that Biden brings to the table pales in comparison to the steamer trunks our current President was hauling around. If Trump could overcome his less-dignified side, so can Biden.

Should the former VP pick a hard-left running mate, he could unite his fractured party and emerge as a genuine contender.

Don’t underestimate him.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website.

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will allow a vote on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) radical Green New Deal.

Yesterday, McConnell told reporters, “I’ve noted with great interest the Green New Deal. And we’re going to be voting on that in the Senate. We’ll give everybody an opportunity to go on record and see how they feel about the Green New Deal.”

The Green New Deal proposal has come under fire by many on the right for its unrealistic and radical agenda and embarrassing “frequently asked questions” (FAQ) paper.

The FAQ document–which has since been scrubbed from Ocasio-Cortez’s website–promised to make air travel “unnecessary,” guaranteed a job for every person in America, and “economic security” for those “unwilling” to work.

The FAQ document also tackled the dire issue of “farting cows.” It states, “We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.”

Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) seemed dismissive of the plan, telling Politico last week, “It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive. The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”

Fox News points out that the Senate vote will have implications for Democrats running in the 2020 presidential race:

“But McConnell’s move to bring the plan to a vote on the Senate floor will be a key test for Democratic presidential candidates such as Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, who are running on the progressive platform in 2020.

While backing of the far-left proposal will ultimately improve their liberal bona fides and their support from the Democratic base, the support of the plan will undoubtedly be the target of attacks during the general election.”

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer on Thursday ripped into Republicans for planning to force a vote on the Green New Deal, calling the plan a "stunt," a "cheap, cynical ploy" and "a game of political gotcha."

“The Republican leader announced he's going to bring up a resolution he intends to vote against,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. “Now that is what the American people hate about Congress -- the pointless partisan games.”

MCCONNELL TO BRING GREEN NEW DEAL TO VOTE, FORCING 2020 DEMS TO GO ON RECORD ON RADICAL PLAN

Schumer is the latest Democrat to criticize Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for calling a vote on the plan that many in the party have already rallied behind. Still, Schumer, joined by colleagues on the Senate floor, said: "Bring it on." He said Democrats "believe that we need to do something about climate change" and added: "Do Republicans?"

Earlier this week, McConnell said Tuesday that the Senate will vote on the Green New Deal – endorsed by nearly all top 2020 Democratic presidential candidates – in an effort to force Democrats to officially go on the record for the radical proposal.

“I’ve noted with great interest the Green New Deal,” McConnell told reporters. “And we’re going to be voting on that in the Senate. We’ll give everybody an opportunity to go on record and see how they feel about the Green New Deal.”

The proposal, put forward by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., aims to transform the country's economy in a bid to combat climate change. It recently came under scrutiny after revelations that a related FAQ document included passages promising a job to “all people of the United States” – including those “unwilling to work” – and suggesting air travel could be made obsolete.

“We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast,” the now-deleted document also read.

But McConnell’s move to bring the plan to a vote on the Senate floor will be a key test for Democratic presidential candidates such as Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, who are running on the progressive platform in 2020.

While backing of the far-left proposal will ultimately improve their liberal bona fides and their support from the Democratic base, the support of the plan will undoubtedly be the target of attacks during the general election.

President Trump has already begun attacking the Green New Deal, claiming it would “shut down American energy” and describing it as “a high school term paper that got a low mark” during a rally Monday in El Paso, Texas.

Corbin Trent, a spokesman for Ocasio-Cortez, said that McConnell’s plan to bring the plan to the vote will only show “just how out of touch Republican politicians are with the American people.”

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass, a co-sponsor of the plan, also decried McConnell’s move.

“Don’t let Mitch McConnell fool you: this is nothing but an attempt to sabotage the movement we are building. He wants to silence your voice so Republicans don’t have to explain why they are climate change deniers. McConnell wants this to be the end, this is just the beginning,” Markey said.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and Lukas Mikelionis and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker told reporters Sunday that he would withhold judgment on the alleged attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett after calling the incident "an attempted modern-day lynching" when it was first reported last month.

"I’m gonna withhold until all the information actually comes out from on-the-record sources," the senator from New Jersey said after meeting with voters in Rochester, N.H. "We know in America that bigoted and biased attacks are on the rise in a serious way, and we actually even know in this country that since 9/11, the majority of the terrorist attacks on our soil have been right-wing terrorist attacks -- the majority of them white supremacist attacks."

Booker cited the deadly shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue this past October as well as the June 2015 shooting at a historically black church in Charleston, S.C.

"What we're seeing is attacks on people because they're different and we all need to join together and condemn those attacks and the hatred and the bigotry that sources them," Booker said.

Smollett, who is black and openly gay, has claimed he was attacked by two masked men early on Jan. 29 as he walked to his Chicago apartment from a Subway restaurant. Smollett alleged he was assaulted by two masked men who shouted racial and anti-gay slurs at him.

'NEW EVIDENCE' PROMPTS RELEASE OF TWO MEN QUESTIONED IN JUSSIE SMOLLETT CASE, CHICAGO PD SAYS

Hours after reports of the attack surfaced, Booker tweeted: "The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching. I'm glad he's safe." In the same message, Booker advocated the passage of legislation making lynching a federal hate crime.

Last week, Chicago police questioned two Nigerian brothers in the reported attack but released them Friday without charges. Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said the pair had given officers information that had "shifted the trajectory of the investigation" and confirmed that police had reached out to Smollett's attorney to request a follow-up interview.

Guglielmi also said local reports that the attack was a hoax were unconfirmed.

"While we are not in a position to confirm, deny or comment on the validity of what's been unofficially released," Guglielmi tweeted Sunday, "there are some developments in this investigation and detectives have some follow-ups to complete which include speaking to the individual who reported the incident."

David Harris Jr

Published  2 months ago

There is now a report from multiple sources that say police now believe Jussie Smollett paid Olabinjo and Abimbola Osundairo $3,500 to participate in a fake attack on him. Police suspected the brothers of perpetrating the attack, but after questioning them, police let them go and requested another interview with Smollett. This has gotten serious for Smollett, as faking the attack can now land him to up to 3 years in prison for his false police report. Smollett’s lawyers now claim that their client is not guilty of any crime, but that doesn’t explain why he hired one of the top criminal lawyers in the country.

Law enforcement sources with knowledge of the Smollett investigation told CNN on Saturday that police believe that Smollett hired two men to stage the attack on him.

And considering the amount of attention Smollett’s original report received from liberal celebrities and top Democrats like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, a candidate for the Democratic nomination, the latest development could be more than a little embarrassing for the country’s liberal political and entertainment establishment.

The men, identified by ABC News as brothers Olabinjo and Abimbola Osundairo, were arrested on Wednesday as persons of interest in the investigation into Smollett’s claim that he had been attacked on Jan. 29.

The Osundairos were released 48 hours later without being charged, due to Chicago law enforcement’s discovery of “new evidence,” CNN reported.

ABC News reported that Chicago police said they were “eager to speak to Jussie Smollett” after they released the Osundairos.

According to CBS News Chicago sources, the brothers told detectives that Smollett rehearsed the attack with them in the days leading up to Jan. 29.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democratic Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who launched her presidential bid at a snow-covered address in Minneapolis on Sunday, told Fox News' "Special Report with Bret Baier" on Tuesday that the "Green New Deal" proposal is merely "aspirational" and that she would likely oppose specific elements of the plan if they came up for a vote.

Morning Consult

Published  2 months ago

Drop in support comes as top Democrats hash out details of government-sponsored health care proposals.

The elimination of private insurance causes half of ‘Medicare for all’ supporters to rethink their position.

While top Democrats prepare to release health reform bills offering different iterations of single-payer systems and public insurance options and as Democratic presidential hopefuls begin building their health care platforms, “Medicare for all,” a long-cherished dream of progressive lawmakers and advocates, has come under increased fire from opponents who warn voters that they are at risk of losing their private insurance.

The laser focus on expanding the government’s role in health care has coincided with a double-digit slide in net support for “Medicare for all” among voters from January to February, according to new data from a Morning Consult/Politico poll.

Although “Medicare for all” enjoyed net support of 27 percentage points (calculated by subtracting the share of opponents from the share of supporters) among registered voters at the onset of 2019, that share dropped 15 points in the Feb. 7-10 survey, to 12 points.

The poll, which surveyed 1,991 voters and has a margin of error of 2 percentage points, found opposition to a system in which all Americans get their health insurance from the government grew among voters of both political parties, with net support sinking 11 points among Democrats and 21 points among Republicans.

The last few weeks have found 2020 Democratic candidates and hopefuls — many of whom have historically backed different variations of a universal health care system — fielding demands for clarity on exactly what the pursuit of universal coverage entails.

After Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), one of the top Democratic presidential contenders, embraced the possibility of enacting a “Medicare for all” health system that would completely eliminate the private insurance market, “Medicare for all” rapidly crystallized as the first major policy test for Democrats eyeing the nomination.

“Medicare for all” has enjoyed majority support since November, thanks to the widespread, bipartisan popularity of the Medicare program. A Morning Consult survey in July 2018 found 62 percent of adults more likely to vote for a candidate who backed establishing a government-run health system for all Americans.

But with the latest poll showing that 50 percent of voters support “Medicare for all” — now shy of a majority — Democrats are likely to find that turning “Medicare for all” from pipe dream to policy will be an uphill climb.

Under a single-payer system true to the textbook definition, the federal government acts as that single payer, ultimately shuttering the private insurance market with the exception of non-duplicative private insurance. While different Democratic proposals offer varying timelines for the eventual elimination of employer-sponsored health plans, both Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) “Medicare for all” bill and the legislation to be introduced by Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and the Progressive Caucus this week do eventually phase out duplicative insurance plans offered to Americans at work, while guaranteeing coverage for all Americans.

But the possibility of losing private insurance cuts support for “Medicare for all” in half. In the latest survey, when “Medicare for all” supporters were subsequently asked whether they would still back a government health system that eliminated the private insurance market, about 1 in 2 respondents (49 percent) reaffirmed their position, but just over one-fifth — or 22 percent — withdrew their support outright. Another 29 percent said they no longer knew or had no opinion.

Though more Republican voters overall opposed “Medicare for all,” 42 percent of GOP supporters of this system would still back a system that cuts out private insurers, along with 54 percent of Democrats and 46 percent of independents.

Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both supporters of Sanders’ “Medicare for all” bill, have stopped short of calling for the immediate elimination of private insurance. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who is weighing a bid for president, called pushing for a system that would pull the plug on employer-sponsored coverage “a bad opening offer.”

Instead, Bennet — alongside Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — is proposing a public health insurance option, in which a federally run health plan would compete with, rather than replace, private insurers. Their “Medicare X” plan does not require a tax increase nor guarantee coverage for all Americans, but public plan enrollees would continue paying premiums.

Unlike the “Medicare for all” system, the popularity of the public health insurance option transcends party lines. About three-fourths of all voters (76 percent) support a system offering them the choice to purchase coverage either from the government or the private market.

Historically, public option proposals win broad appeal because they fulfill the promise long sought after by opponents of single-payer systems and the Affordable Care Act: If you like your plan, you can keep it.

Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Reps. Brian Higgins (D-N.Y.) and Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) plan to announce a bill today giving adults between the ages of 50 and 64 the option to buy into Medicare.

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

New Jersey Senator and vegan Presidential Candidate Cory Booker issued a dire warning in a recent interview: Meat-eaters will destroy the planet.

Speaking to VegNews.com, the former Newark mayor said the Earth simply cannot sustain itself on the evil meat-consuming “Standard American Diet” taking over the world.

“You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet. We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry. The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact,” said the Senator.

“It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don’t have enough land…The devastating impact is just not practical. The numbers just don’t add up. We will destroy our planet unless we start figuring out a better way forward when it comes to our climate change and our environment,” he added.

Despite these dire warnings, Booker then added that he didn’t want to “preach” to anyone about their diet or ban meat.

“None of us want our government or elected officials preaching to us and telling us what we can or can’t eat. This is the United States of America, and I, for one, believe in our freedom to choose. So, I don’t want to preach to anybody about their diets,” he said.

Daily Wire

Published  2 months ago

All politicians are egomaniacs and narcissists. They’re all searching for love and adulation — even (or especially) from strangers. And they’re all pathological — and prolific — liars.

The Washington Post has been keeping track of President Trump’s lies. As of December 21, Trump had "made 7,645 false or misleading claims over 710 days," the Post wrote. President Obama was a prodigal liar, too — although the Post never bothered to tally up all his lies.

They’re all liars. Every last one of them. Take this lie, told just Monday by Sen. Kamala D. Harris, California Democrat. The 2020 hopeful was trying to be hip and cool, so she said she smoked weed back in college, chilling with friends and listening to Snoop Dogg and Tupac. But she graduated in 1986. Tupac didn’t release his first album until 1991, and Snoop’s first record hit the shelves in 1993.

Then there’s Sen. Elizabeth Warren. For decades, the Massachusetts Democrat and the 2020 candidate claimed she was American Indian, putting the designation on all sorts of employment and government forms. But a DNA test she took to prove it showed she’s 98.4 percent to 99.9 percent white. So, liar.

Politicians sometimes tell completely pointless lies. It’s like the joke by comedian Norm MacDonald: "You ever lie for no reason at all? Just all of sudden, a big lie spills out of your evil head? Like a guy will come up to you, 'Hey, did you ever see that movie with Meryl Streep and a horse?' And you go, 'Yes.' In the back of your head, you’re like, 'What in the hell am I lying about over here? I stand to gain nothing by this lie.'"

Like Sen. Cory Booker, another presidential candidate. The New Jersey Democrat often cited a guy named "T-Bone," a drug dealer, saying he once told him, "If you ever so much as look at me again, I'm going to put a cap in your ass." Turns out he "was a 'composite' of various people Booker knew in Newark," Reason wrote this month.

Politicians lie especially to each other’s faces — even when they hate each other’s guts. "To my good friend from Arkansas, let me say…" one senator will bluster, even though it’s clear he can’t stand the guy. "With all due respect to the gentle lady from Missouri, whom I greatly admire, I must say that …" another will say, even though privately he loathes her.

Trump is changing all that. He doesn’t pretend to like someone he clearly hates, even if he has to work with them on important issues. He calls Warren "Pocahontas." To the Democratic House speaker, he tweeted: "Nancy Pelosi has behaved so irrationally & has gone so far to the left that she has now officially become a Radical Democrat." And he makes no pretense of being able to stomach Senate Minority Leader "Cryin" Chuck Schumer.

Members of his own party — and even his Cabinet — are not immune: "Who should star in a reboot of 'Liar Liar' — Hillary Clinton or Ted Cruz?" he said, referring to the Texas Republican senator whom he defeated in the 2016 primaries. Of his former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Trump tweeted: "The Dems all hated him, wanted him out, thought he was disgusting — UNTIL I FIRED HIM! Immediately he became a wonderful man, a saint like figure in fact. Really sick!"

Trump has even taken aim at one of the most famous actresses in the world. "Meryl Streep, one of the most over-rated actresses in Hollywood, doesn’t know me but attacked last night at the Golden Globes. She is a Hillary flunky who lost big."

The former reality TV show host is making other politicians get real. During Trump’s State of the Union address, Pelosi acted just how she feels: She mockingly applauded Trump — and liberals nationwide loved it.

Newcomer Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is also part of The New Honesty. On Monday, she said Trump is "a man who can’t even read briefings written in full sentences." She deeply detests Trump, and she says so. That is because Trump, who also abhors Ocasio-Cortez, has made no bones about his feelings.

So Trump — the crude and petty and vindictive little man — has done at least this: He has gotten rid of the false camaraderie that has colored so much of politics for eons.

And in the end, that’s really not a bad thing.

* A version of this article ran previously in The Washington Times.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Since Democrats took control of the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in nearly a decade, the Democrats have been riding high.

National Review

Published  2 months ago

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Tuesday that the Senate will vote on the Green New Deal resolution introduced last week by a coalition of progressive lawmakers vowing to eliminate all greenhouse-gas emissions within ten years, while simultaneously creating millions of jobs in a government-subsidized green-energy sector.

“I’ve noted with great interest the Green New Deal. And we’re going to be voting on that in the Senate. Give everybody an opportunity to go on record and see how they feel about the Green New Deal,” McConnell said with a sly smile during a Tuesday press conference.

.@Senatemajldr: "I've noted with great interest the Green New Deal. And we're going to be voting on that in the Senate. Give everybody an opportunity to go on record and see how they feel about the #GreenNewDeal." pic.twitter.com/1HP5lSDjzM

— CSPAN (@cspan) February 12, 2019

The resolution, which was introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Senator Ed Markey (D., Mass.) on Friday, provides a sweeping list of climate-change- and social-justice-related measures including the refurbishing of every structure in the country with renewable-energy technology and the creation of millions of federally funded jobs in the green-energy sector.

A “frequently asked questions” document that accompanied the resolution referenced the complete elimination of air travel and farting cows. Ocasio-Cortez has since disavowed the FAQ, which was posted on her website, and suggested her political enemies disseminated the document to sabotage the proposal.

McConnell and Trump are reportedly united in their desire to tie Democrats to the bill’s socialist policy framework ahead of the 2020 elections — an endeavor that should prove simple since virtually the entire 2020 Democratic presidential field endorsed it as soon as it was introduced.

When confronted with the multi-billion-dollar price tag most experts place on the proposal, its allies have argued that climate change is an existential threat that necessitates a national mobilization effort unseen since World World War II.

“There’s a lot of people now going back on the Green New Deal, they’re like ‘Oh it’s impractical, oh it’s too expensive, oh it’s all of this,’” Senator Cory Booker (D., N.J.), one of the many Democratic presidential hopefuls, said during a speech in Mason City, Iowa Friday. “If we used to govern our dreams that way, we would have never gone to the Moon. ‘God, that’s impractical. See that ball in the sky? That’s impractical.’”

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Labor Unions are voicing skepticism that the "Green New Deal" proposed by Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is workable in practice, signaling that the progressive proposal may be in for even more turbulence following a rocky rollout last week.

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.) said the planet “can’t sustain” people eating meat, as the 2020 hopeful aims to become the first vegan president.

Booker told the vegan magazine VegNewsearlier this month that he became vegan after coming to the realization that eating eggs “didn’t align with my spirit.”

While claiming he does not want to lecture Americans on their diets, Booker says Americans need to be nudged into fake cheese because the planet cannot sustain the “environmental impact” of the food industry.

“You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet,” Booker said. “We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry.”

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact,” he said. “It’s just not possible.”

Booker says the “devastating impact” of greenhouse gases produced by the meat industry is “just not practical.”

TheBlaze

Published  2 months ago

He also told a vegan magazine that eating eggs 'didn't align with my spirit'

Presidential candidate and avowed vegan Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said in an interview that Earth "can't sustain" the current rate at which Americans consume meat. While he insisted that he was not going to tell people what to eat, he said that "[w]e will destroy our planet" unless Americans change their carnivorous ways.

What did he say?

During an interview with Veg News, a vegan magazine, Booker said:

The tragic reality is this planet simply can't sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It's just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don't have enough land. The number-one reason for rainforest destruction now is animal grazing land. We see greenhouse producing gases produced; the devastating impact is just not practical. The numbers just don't add up. We will destroy our planet unless we start figuring out a better way forward when it comes to our climate change and our environment.

Booker insisted that his plans for the future of the environment did not mean he would get rid of animal farming, but that he was going to fight "industrial agriculture."

He said that while "American consumers should not be told what to eat," he thought Americans would move on from eating meat if they were provided with "viable alternatives" that he said "in some cases...taste even better."

"None of us want our government or elected officials preaching to us and telling us what we can or can't eat," he reiterated again later in the interview. "This is the United States of America, and I, for one, believe in our freedom to choose. So, I don't want to preach to anybody about their diets; that's just not how I live. "

What else?

Booker added that he personally loved to talk about his dietary habits, and planned to continue doing so.

Despite saying that he did not want to tell Americans what to eat, he said later that "we have a real environmental challenge if more and more people are going to be eating what is considered now to be the Standard American Diet."

Booker said his own path to veganism started out being for health reasons. However, he realized five years ago that "eating those eggs for me was something that didn't align with my spirit" and became a full vegan.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Vegan soy boy Cory Booker is now attacking meat eaters — because that’s a winning strategy when you’re running to be president of a country full of bacon lovers.

Senator Cory Booker just launched his 2020 presidential bid and now he’s aiming to be the first vegan US president.

Cory Booker told VegNews recently that he became a vegetarian in 1992 because he believed it was “the best way to live in accordance to the ideals and values” that he has.

Booker then described his transition from vegetarianism to veganism — vegans do not eat any animal products whatsoever. Very strict vegans don’t even consume honey.

The far left Democrat Senator said he stopped eating eggs when he first transitioned into becoming vegan because it “didn’t align” with his spirit. Booker said his last non-vegan meal was Election Day, November of 2014.

While Booker claims he doesn’t want to lecture Americans on what to eat and insists consumers should not be told what to eat, he said the planet can’t sustain eating meat.

“I think it has to be a part of it. You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet. We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry. The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact,” Booker said.

Booker said the meat industry is having a “devastating impact” of greenhouse gases produced.

“The numbers just don’t add up,” Booker said. “We will destroy our planet unless we start figuring out a better way forward when it comes to our climate change and our environment.”

The answer? Vegan cheese and lab grown fake vegan ‘meat.’

Booker bragged about all of the delicious vegan restaurants popping up everywhere. “I’ve seen incredible vegan cheese shops popping up across the country, and my friends who are lovers of cheese just can’t tell the difference. You have pizza: I was at the New Jersey VegFest, and Screamer’s Pizza is just phenomenal. My non-vegan friends love it,” he said.

The Democrats aren’t even hiding their war on meat eaters.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s radical Green New Deal also took aim at cows — the Democrats would love to have a meatless society where people consume lab grown, processed garbage all in the name of ‘saving the planet.’

Veganism is the latest Marxist, new age rubbish the Democrats and Hollywood elites are pushing onto Americans.

The Resurgent

Published  2 months ago

The Democrats may be denying that Green New Deal white paper’s lamentations about cow farts, but Cory Booker (D-NJ) is being very, very open about embracing one of its key points.

The pope wants to use the power of government to coerce farmers into abandoning animal populations in favor of vegetarian farming. Booker is doubling down on that.

Booker told the vegan magazine VegNews earlier this month that he became vegan after coming to the realization that eating eggs “didn’t align with my spirit.”

While claiming he does not want to lecture Americans on their diets, Booker says Americans need to be nudged into fake cheese because the planet cannot sustain the “environmental impact” of the food industry.

“You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet,” Booker said. “We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry.”

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact,” he said. “It’s just not possible.”

Booker went on to complain about the “devastating impact” of climate changing emissions produced by animals. According to the VegNews report

The number-one reason for rainforest destruction now is animal grazing land. We see greenhouse producing gases produced; the devastating impact is just not practical. The numbers just don’t add up.

Booker, of course, talks out of both sides of his mouth on this. He also says, “This doesn’t mean, in any way, getting rid of animal farming,” but then says we need to get rid of animal farming unless run by small and midsized farmers, which would dramatically raise the cost of meat, pricing the poor into unhealthier choices. Because, let’s be honest, people aren’t going to embrace veganism. They’re going to embrace worse dietary options.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker is not only a potential 2020 presidential candidate; he’s a vegan who says the world “can’t sustain” people eating meat.

Booker told the February issue of VegNews that he became a vegetarian in 1992 when, after a few days of trying the new lifestyle, he said, “Oh my gosh, I will never go back to eating meat.” He made the decision to go vegan in 2014.

“I remember my last non-vegan meal was Election Day, November 2014,” Booker told the vegan news source. (RELATED: Meat Disappears From Trudeau Government’s Vegan Like Food Guide)

If Booker manages to win the Democratic Party presidential nomination and then the general election, he’d be the first vegan to do so.

The potential candidate is also a fan of New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, which would like to eliminate “farting cows” from the American landscape. He compared the widely lampooned and sweeping environmental plan to winning WWII.

In their response to the the Green New Deal, the Food & Environment Reporting Network favorably mentioned the document’s commitment to ”investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health” and “building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food.”

The progressive senator doesn’t think veganism is just appropriate for his private life; he’d like everyone to embrace the diet because he believes the world can’t keep providing enough beef and pork to satisfy meat cravings.

“You see the planet earth moving towards what is the Standard American Diet,” he told VegNews. “We’ve seen this massive increase in consumption of meat produced by the industrial animal agriculture industry.” (RELATED: Vegans Scream For Animal Liberation At Toronto Restaurant)

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don’t have enough land.”

In addition to convincing the masses to give up meat, Booker has other legislative goals that would interfere with America’s eating habits.

“Legislatively, I want to continue to be a part of a movement of folk who are fighting against corporate interests that are undermining the public good and the public welfare,” he said.

Booker went on to explain that he aims “to continue supporting bills that are about public health, whether it is pumping in all these antibiotics into animals that are literally threatening the safety of Americans.”

He also believes cramming too many pigs into barns “is harmful and violates our collective values as a country.”

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton unloaded on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal and said the media were “complicit” in burying the most radical parts of the deal.

Cotton, a staunch Republican, appeared on The Hugh Hewitt Show on Tuesday and discussed the widely ridiculed Green New Deal that aims to implement sweeping changes across the nation.

UNION LEADERS WARN GREEN NEW DEAL MAY LEAD TO POVERTY: 'MEMBERS ARE WORRIED ABOUT PUTTING FOOD ON THE TABLE'

But what particularly caught Cotton’s eye was how the media became complicit in hiding the now-infamous FAQ document circulated by the Ocasio-Cortez office, which included lines such as promising a job to “all people of the United States” – including those “unwilling to work” – and making air travel industry obsolete.

“I understand the Democrats that proposed this immediately tried to retract that white paper that went along with their resolution,” Cotton added. “And too many people in the media have been complicit in the Stalin-like or 1984 technique of disappearing it, sending it down the memory hole.”

“And too many people in the media have been complicit in the Stalin-like or 1984 technique of disappearing it, sending it down the memory hole.”

— Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton

Hewitt asked whether the Democrats who immediately jumped to endorse the radical package have actually read what’s inside it.

“Sure. I mean, Hugh, it’s pretty remarkable that when these Democrats put out the Green New Deal last week that you had many Democrats running for president leap onto a proposal that was going to confiscate every privately owned vehicle in America within a decade and ban air travel so we could all drive or ride around on high-speed light rail, supposedly powered by unicorn tears, yes,” Cotton said.

KLOBUCHAR DOWNPLAYS GREEN NEW DEAL AS 'ASPIRATIONAL,' ADDRESSES BINDER-TOSSING REPORT

Multiple Democratic 2020 candidates such as Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and Kirsten Gillibrand have endorsed the deal.

Cotton finished the interview the segment saying the Green New Deal, in essence, is what Democrats believe in and want for the U.S.

“But this is where their heart lies,” he said. “They believe that Americans driving around in trucks on farms, or commuting from the suburbs where they can have a decent home into the city to work are a fundamental threat to the world, and they have to have the power and the control of those Americans’ lives to implement their radical vision for humanity.”

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

The Democrat Party is now defined my Ilhan Omar, Ralph Northam, Rashida Tlaib, Joy Reid, Dianne Feinstein and Louis Farrakhan.

chicagotribune.com

Published  2 months ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted that freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar apologize for tweets saying that members of Congress are being paid to support Israel.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

It's been a wild week. If you thought it the Left couldn't get any crazier after Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for an end to cows, airplanes and gas cars, you were wrong. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J.,

Frontpage Mag

Published  2 months ago

In addition to supporting such economy-wrecking Democrat-Socialist ideas as "Medicare for all” and the “Green New Deal,” Senator Cory Booker has come up with one of his own proposals to distinguish his run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. It’s called the "baby bonds" program, under which all children born in the United States – presumably including anchor babies – would be given a $1000 initial “bond” at birth to be deposited in a trust account. Each year thereafter, so long as the income of the child’s parents remains below 500% of the federal poverty guidelines, the child would receive additional government payments of as much as $2000 into the account until the child reaches the age of 18.

According to the 2019 poverty guidelines, 500% of the poverty guideline for a family of 4 would be $128,750. Senator Booker estimated that his proposed baby bonds program could cost as much as sixty billion dollars a year, according to an article appearing in the New Yorker last December. He would pay for his give-away proposal by, unsurprisingly, imposing more taxes on upper income taxpayers.

Although the program would be structured as racially neutral, the New Yorker article reported that “Booker’s staff has calculated that the average white child would accrue about fifteen thousand dollars through the program, and the average black child would gain twenty-nine thousand dollars.”

Jordan Weissmann, Slate’s senior business and economics correspondent, wrote that while Senator Booker has not expressly called for reparations to fix the disparity of wealth between white and black Americans, his baby bonds proposal “might be the closest thing that we can expect to see from a serious presidential contender going into 2020.” Darrick Hamilton, a professor of economics and urban policy at the New School who worked with Senator Booker on the proposal, is quoted by Mr. Weissmann as telling him, “The most parsimonious way to address racial wealth inequality is a system of reparations. But if we’re not at the political moment for reparations, then baby bonds are a very good mechanism.” In short, Senator Booker’s baby bonds proposal is his weapon of choice with which to engage in a form of combined race-based and economic class warfare.

The baby bonds proposal is not as new a Democrat idea as it may seem. Hillary Clinton was pushing the idea back in 2007. However, in addition to its significant cost, baby bonds would not help families with children struggling to make ends meet while they are raising their children. Instead, it would redistribute wealth to trust accounts for children of parents with incomes of as much as six figures. These accounts would not be available for productive use for 18 years from the child’s birth. On the other hand, child tax credits are already available, which provide money to families while they most need it. A new refundable credit, up to $1,400 if the child tax credit would bring one’s tax liability below zero, was established under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed into law by President Trump on December 22, 2017. Yet today’s far left Democrat party bizarrely dismissed this law, including its real life benefit to help people of need through the expanded tax credit.

Senator Kamala Harris, who is also running for her party’s presidential nomination, wants to turn the tax credit idea into a vast wealth redistribution program, paid for by imposing more taxes on corporations and on taxpayers in the higher income brackets who already pay a disproportionately high amount of the nation’s income taxes. Her proposal would provide up to $6,000 a year per family, in the form of a refundable tax credit, for households earning under $100,000 annually. This government subsidy would be in addition to the public benefits that some people already receive. The subsidy would also be extended to people higher up the economic ladder than is the case today. The cost could amount to as much as $200 billion a year. In short, Senator Harris’s proposal would transform the original intended purpose of the earned income tax credit to incentivize work as well as offset federal payroll and income taxes into a socialist style wealth redistribution scheme. She uses class warfare rhetoric to justify what she would plan to do if given the chance. Senator Harris, like Senator Booker, also backs “Medicare for all” and the “Green New Deal.”

Indeed, Democrats such as Senators Booker and Harris are running to the far left, pushed by the progressive base of the party to mainstream the radical class warfare ideas of Democrat-Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Democrat-Socialist Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The official Green New Deal Resolution, introduced by Representative Ocasio- Cortez, is a manifesto against what it calls “systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices.” Ranging far beyond its pie-in-the-sky proposals to create a fossil fuel free economy within 10 years, the resolution demands that the federal government “promote justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of indigenous communities, communities of color, migrant communities” and of other so-called “frontline and vulnerable communities.” It would provide all people of the United States with “economic security.” As a top adviser to Representative Ocasio-Cortez has now admitted, a "Green New Deal" document posted by her office contained a guarantee of economic security even for those "unwilling to work."

History is littered with failed socialist policies to guarantee everyone “economic security,” which end up sapping the incentives to work and create wealth. The Booker baby bonds proposal and Harris wealth distribution tax credit plan would operate along the same lines. As Margaret Thatcher is quoted as saying, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money.”

Sean Hannity

Published  2 months ago

Liberal superstar Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “retracted erroneous information” surrounding her Green New Deal this week; with key staffers saying “mistakes happen” after posting an “unfinished fact sheet” regarding the proposal.

“An early draft of a FAQ that was clearly unfinished and that doesn’t represent the GND resolution got published to the website by mistake,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff.

“Mistakes happen when doing time launches like this coordinating multiple groups and collaborators,” added the key staffer.

Mistakes happen when doing time launches like this coordinating multiple groups and collaborators. It's hard to have both a transparent and open process with many stakeholders while keeping all info locked down. But what’s in the resolution is the GND.

— Saikat Chakrabarti (@saikatc) February 9, 2019

Despite the “mistake,” the Green New Deal has already been endorsed by key Democrats and liberal lawmakers; including Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Bernie Sanders, and others.

Read the full report at the Washington Post.

The Black Sphere

Published  2 months ago

DC is subtle at times. But the subtlety of Pelosi in cleaning up her latest mess has all the subtlety of speaking through a bullhorn at a cocktail party.

Frontpage Mag

Published  2 months ago

This is important.

It's far more important than the question of whether Governor Northam wore blackface 34 years ago, but it's also going to be ignored. Actual hard core racism of the black nationalist variety gets a pass. Rep. Keith Ellison started his political career in the Nation of Islam. Multiple members of the Congressional Black Caucus have met with Farrakhan and pressed his flesh and praised him.

There's been no House condemnation of them. Nor will there ever be.

Barack Obama even posed with Farrakhan. He has never been asked about it to his face by the same media outlets running the "Trump is a racist" loop 24/7.

So this just makes Rep. Tlaib one of the gang. It shows that she paid her dues in Dem politics.

Rashida Tlaib was elected to Congress in 2018 and has quickly become a lightning rod for her criticism of Israel and her associations with Palestinian activists, at least one of whom has compared Zionism to Naziism. Tlaib recently told the New York Times regarding her support for such Palestinians, "respect for free speech does not equate to anti-Semitism."

When Tlaib worked for the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services in Detroit in 2006, she wrote an article for Louis Farrakhan's publication The Final Call:

The article is unremarkable. The publication is.

If a Republican House member had been caught writing an article for a white supremacist publication, there would be hell to pay. (Assuming it was politically useful for hell to pay. Ron Paul got a pass for that sort of thing because he was politically useful during the Iraq War.) But this is just what the new Dem reality is. Farrakhan had posed with a two term president. He's on good terms with a nice chunk of the CBC. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Cory Booker or Kamala Harris meet up with him at some point. If they haven't already.

Anti-Semitism and racism are the new Dem normal.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday he’ll soon bring up Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal” resolution, a move designed to put Democrats on the spot on the controversial measure.

“I’ve noted with great interest the Green New Deal and we are going to be voting on that in the Senate,” the Kentucky Republican said Tuesday after meeting privately with senators. “We’ll give everyone an opportunity to go on record and see how they feel about the Green New Deal.”

Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., along with Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., introduced the resolution last week, and it currently has 67 co-sponsors, all Democrats, in the House.

There are no immediate plans to bring it up for a House vote. Instead, Democrats are waiting to see how many people sign on as co-sponsors, said House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

The measure has attracted considerable criticism from Republicans. It calls for a 10-year plan to drastically cut carbon emissions and to replace fossil fuel with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar in the coming decades. The resolution was accompanied by a fact sheet produced by Ocasio-Cortez’s staff and posted on her congressional website that called for eliminating the need for air travel, retrofitting every house and building to green energy standards, and reforming the nation’s agricultural practices to eliminate cows.

Ocasio-Cortez has since scrubbed the fact sheet from her website and said it was mistakenly posted there.

Senate Republicans said holding a vote on the resolution in the Senate would force lawmakers to go on record as to whether they back the plan. Leaders did not say when the vote will be scheduled.

“It's an opportunity for members on both sides to weigh in on that,” Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said. “Most of us in our conference believe a lot of the ideas contained in the 'Green New Deal' are going to be disastrous for our economy and for the American people.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Republicans should consider their own version of the deal.

"The first question Republicans should answer is what is their answer on climate change, what are they going to put forward," he told reporters Tuesday.

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., didn't elaborate on how much support there was for the resolution within his caucus.

"I haven't heard any discussion about it," he said. "I'm just reading it for the first time. It's pretty long."

Several 2020 presidential contenders from the Senate, however, have voiced their support for the framework, including Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Kamala Harris of California, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

Naomi Lim contributed to this report.

Washington Free Beacon

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.) said the planet "can't sustain" people eating meat, as the 2020 hopeful aims to become the first vegan president.

The Federalist

Published  2 months ago

The new wave of freshman Democrats is beginning to criticize our nation’s historically strong ties with Israel. The party might soon be split.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

A top adviser to New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has admitted that an official "Green New Deal" document posted by Ocasio-Cortez's office contained a guarantee of economic security even for those "unwilling to work" -- but not before he went viral in progressive circles for claiming the exact opposite, repeatedly, in an interview with Fox News' "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) is facing scrutiny over her treatment of congressional staff and her workplace demeanor, just days ahead of her decision about whether she will run for president in 2020.

A number of former staffers who worked for Klobuchar spoke anonymously to BuzzFeed News, accusing the senator of often berating staff over small mistakes and creating a hostile work environment.

BuzzFeed interviewed eight former aides and reviewed dozens of emails.

A spokesperson for Klobuchar did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill.

BuzzFeed reported that Klobuchar often yelled, threw papers and flung objects and aides were regularly left in tears, citing four former staffers.

One staffer was hit with a binder, though Klobuchar did not mean to hit the person, somebody who saw the incident told the publication.

“I cried. I cried, like, all the time,” one former staffer told BuzzFeed.

Klobuchar will announce her decision about whether she will run for the Democratic presidential nomination on Sunday in Minneapolis.

She’s been considering a presidential run for months, but has signaled a likely bid amid news that she’ll be headlining a local Democratic banquet in Iowa on Feb. 21.

In emails reviewed by BuzzFeed, Klobuchar told staff their work was “the worst in ... years,” and “the worst in my life.”

In several emails, she reportedly criticized staffers, writing in all capital letters, after they made what they believed to be small mistakes or misunderstood her.

However, BuzzFeed also quoted staff who defended her.

Some previous aides spoke to BuzzFeed on the record to defend and praise Klobuchar as a boss.

Kali Cruz, who worked in Klobuchar’s office during her first Senate term, said that the Minnesota Democrat “cared deeply for me as her staffer,” adding that Klobuchar threw a baby shower for Cruz when she was pregnant.

A campaign spokesperson also defended Klobuchar.

"Senator Klobuchar loves her staff — they are the reason she has gotten to where she is today,” the campaign spokesperson for Klobuchar told BuzzFeed.

“She has many staff who have been with her for years — including her Chief of Staff and her State Director, who have worked for her for 5 and 7 years respectively, as well as her political advisor Justin Buoen, who has worked for her for 14 years — and many who have gone on to do amazing things, from working in the Obama Administration (over 20 of them) to running for office to even serving as the Agriculture Commissioner for Minnesota.”

The BuzzFeed story comes on the heels of a report from The Huffington Post that three potential candidates to lead her nascent presidential campaign declined the job, citing the mistreatment of staff.

If Klobuchar jumps into the race, she will be the fifth U.S. senator to run for president, joining Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.).

She’d be the second presidential candidate to hail from the Midwest, though Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) is still considering a bid and currently touring early primary states.

The Federalist

Published  2 months ago

Of course Democrats don’t want to vote on Green New Deal.  They prefer to incrementally, and deceitfully, pass it.

NewsBusters

Published  2 months ago

Megyn Kelly, she famously late of NBC, was fired not long ago from her NBC morning show. The New York Post’s “Page Six” headlined the Kelly story this way: “Megyn Kelly out at NBC After Defending

Daily Wire

Published  2 months ago

On Thursday, Hill-HarrisX released a survey about health care. The survey, which was conducted between February 1-2, presented five statements regarding potential changes to the health care system in the United States, and asked respondents to indicate which statement they aligned with most.

15% of respondents agreed that "the government should remove itself from paying for all health care."

14% said "the current health care system should be kept as is."

26% said "any citizen should be able to sign up for Medicare/Medicaid regardless of age or income while those with private plans could keep their existing insurance."

32% said "Medicare/Medicaid should be expanded to cover all citizens regardless of age or income but people should be able to purchase private supplemental plans."

13% said "Medicare/Medicaid should be expanded to cover all citizens regardless of age or income and private health plans should be abolished."

Despite only 13% of respondents indicating they wanted to eliminate private insurance in favor of a government-run health care system, support for such a plan has become standard among declared 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

During a CNN town hall on January 28, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA), who declared her intention to run for president a week earlier, suggested eliminating private health insurance.

After an audience member asked the senator about health care, Harris replied in part:

I believe the solution — and I actually feel very strongly about this — is that we need to have Medicare for all. That's just the bottom line.

And I'll say this. And this is, I think, why you're also asking this question. What we know is that, to live in a civil society, to be true to the ideals and the spirit of who we say we are as a country, we have to appreciate and understand that access to health care is a— should not be thought of as a privilege. It should be understood to be a right.

... It is inhumane to make people go through a system where they cannot literally receive the benefit of what medical science can offer because some insurance company has decided it doesn't meet their bottom line in terms of their profit motivation. That is inhumane.

Jake Tapper then asked Harris: "So, just to follow up on that, and correct me if I'm wrong, to reiterate, you support the Medicare for all bill ... initially co-sponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders. You're also a co-sponsor onto it. I believe it will totally eliminate private insurance. So for people out there who like their insurance, they don't get to keep it?

Harries replied:

Well, listen, the idea is that everyone gets access to medical care, and you don't have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork, all of the delay that may require. Who of us has not had that situation, where you've got to wait for approval, and the doctor says, well, I don't know if your insurance company is going to cover this? Let's eliminate all of that. Let's move on.

This position isn’t just held by a single presidential candidate. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), all of whom have announced their respective presidential candidacies, are co-sponsors of Senator Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) "Medicare for All" bill.

Obama-era Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Julian Castro, who officially announced his presidential plans on January 12, also supports a "Medicare for All" style system.

Sanders’ bill would eliminate, or at the very least severely restrict, private health insurance providers by enacting a single-payer government health care system. The text of the bill can be read in its entirety here.

Additionally, there are rumblings that Sanders himself is planning a presidential run.

This would mean that at least six Democratic candidates jousting to unseat President Trump in 2020 would be on record supporting a universal, government-run health care system, which only 13% of Americans seem to want, according to the Hill-HarrisX survey.

NBC4 Washington

Published  2 months ago

Coast Guard Lieutenant Accused of Threats Detained

A Coast Guard lieutenant accused of being a white supremacist who stockpiled guns and compiled a target list of prominent Democrats will remain detained in federal custody after his arrest.

Federal Magistrate Judge Charles Day ordered 49-year-old Christopher Paul Hasson held Thursday but said he might be willing to reconsider later if the government hasn't charged him with more serious crimes in the next two weeks.

The U.S Attorney for Maryland, Robert Hur, told reporters outside the courthouse Thursday that the sheer number and force of the weapons recovered from Hasson's residence, coupled with the disturbing nature of his writings, "appear to reflect a very significant threat to the safety of our community," particularly given the position of trust that Hasson held with the U.S. government.

Hasson's defense attorney said the government made a histrionic characterization by filing inflammatory document to attract media attention and pressure the court to assure detention. His lawyer said Hasson is not a danger to the community, has no criminal record, has served the military for 28 years and is a good husband and father who should be with his family pending trial.

(Published Wednesday, Feb. 20, 2019)

Hasson was arrested Friday on gun and drug charges, but prosecutors say those offenses are the "proverbial tip of the iceberg."

In a court filing, prosecutors say Hasson has espoused extremist views for years and drafted an email in which he said he was "dreaming of a way to kill almost every last person on the earth."

In a draft of a letter apparently intended for a known white supremacist leader, Hasson identified himself as a white nationalist for more than 30 years who advocated “focused violence” to create a “white homeland,” according to charging documents.

Prosecutors say federal agents found 15 firearms and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition inside Hasson's Silver Spring, Maryland, apartment.

Prosecutors wrote Hasson is a domestic terrorist who “intends to murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country” and must be detained.

They say internet searches show he was targeting top Democrats and created an Excel spreadsheet list of names, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Sens. Tim Kaine, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Richard Blumenthal, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke. The list also included top names in media, like MSNBC’s Chris Hayes and Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Don Lemon.

(Published 4 hours ago)

"I feel very, very confident that our law enforcement at the federal and local levels is on top of these things and making sure all of us whose names were on the list are safe,” Schumer said.

Law enforcement sources told NBC News the feds caught on to Hasson because of searches made on his computer at Coast Guard headquarters in Washington, D.C.

He is accused of searching the following phrases on Google the morning of Jan. 17: “what if trump illegally impeached,” “best place in dc to see congress people,” “where in dc to congress people live,” “civil war if trump impeached” and “social democrats usa.”

His search history also included searches for pro-Russian and neo-fascist literature.

Hasson routinely read portions of a manifesto written by Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik that prosecutors said instructs would-be assailants to collect firearms, food, disguises and survival tools, court papers said. Breivik, a right-wing extremist, is serving a 21-year sentence for killing 77 people in a 2011 bomb-and-shooting rampage.

Copyright Associated Press / NBC4 Washington

Business Insider

Published  2 months ago

Warren's comments Saturday echo her December announcement she was launching an exploratory committee, which said her run was dedicated to defending the middle class.

Daily Intelligencer

Published  2 months ago

Photo: Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Unless they are really obscure, virtually all the 2020 Democratic presidential wannabes have baggage they’d like to jettison, from Joe Biden’s crime-bill sponsorship to Elizabeth Warren’s Native American association to the various things Bernie Sanders said and did in many decades of being a proud socialist. In national terms, New Jersey senator Cory Booker is still a fresh face with an unclear identity. But for progressives and labor activists with long memories, he’s got some issues, too.

He might be able to explain away his reputation for being a reliable friend of Wall Street as a matter of virtual constituent services given the financial industry’s importance to New Jersey and to the city of Newark where he served as mayor for seven years. But a more concrete problem involves his long history of support for any and every kind of school choice, including not just the charter public schools the Clinton and Obama administrations supported, but the private-school vouchers that most Democrats stridently oppose. What makes this history a fresh concern is the fact that Booker was once a close ally of the DeVos family, the Michigan gazillionaires and education privatization champions who gave the world Donald Trump’s secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos. Kara Voght has the story:

In 1999, when he was still a city councilman, Booker worked with a conservative financier and a New Jersey Republican mayor to co-found Excellent Education for Everyone, a group dedicated to establishing a school voucher program in the Garden State. The following year, Dick DeVos—the Republican megadonor, school choice evangelist, and husband to the nation’s 11th education secretary—invited the 31-year-old Newark councilman up to his home base of Grand Rapids, Michigan, to speak in defense of a ballot measure that would lift the state’s ban on school voucher programs …

Booker’s association with the DeVos couple continued as he progressed from City Council to Newark’s mayoral seat in 2006 to the US Senate in 2013. In the mid-2000s, Booker and DeVos served together on the board of directors of Alliance for School Choice (AFC), the precursor to the American Federation for Children, which DeVos eventually chaired. Booker twice spoke at the AFC’s annual School Choice Policy Summit: once in 2012 as a mayor and again in 2016 as a senator.

Booker did begin to talk a lot less about vouchers and more about charter schools as mayor and as senator, and ultimately voted against DeVos’s confirmation as Education Secretary. But he has never entirely turned the page on this issue. And as Voght reports, he’s still defending his charter-centric educational policies in Newark:

Though he’s been relatively quiet on the subject of school choice as of late, he’s been pushing back against the characterization of his school choice project as a failure. As he’s prepared for a 2020 run, Booker has twice sat down with education website The 74 to defend his work in Newark, citing new researchthat attributes the educational gains of the city’s students to the closing of low-performing schools and the introduction of charters.

The teachers unions that managed in 2016 to push Hillary Clinton into a far less supportive posture on charter schools than her husband had embraced are watching Booker and the rest of the 2020 field carefully, as Brookings Institution education wonk Paul Valant observes:

“I think most of these candidates want to be understood and identified as progressive, and to do that right now is not to actively support charter schools,” Valant says.

Will Booker be among them?

“Maybe Sen. Booker will, maybe he won’t,” [American Federation of Teachers president] Weingarten explains. “He’ll have to answer a lot of questions.”

The growing militancy of teachers unions and their tendency to make uncontrolled growth of charter schools a primary issue means Booker won’t be able to dodge or finesse the issue much longer. And the way the wind is blowing in Democratic circles was amply illustrated by a recent column from former Chicago mayor — and former Clinton and Obama staffer — Rahm Emanuel, who regretted his long battles with teachers over his advocacy of “education reform,” which often came across as simply union-bashing.

Booker could choose to flatly repudiate his past positions on education policy and take this issue largely off the table for the 2020 primaries. Or he could, as other Democrats have long done, draw a bright line between private-school vouchers and public charter schools, and reject unaccountable charters that exist to make profits. He could even double down on his heresies as a token of independence from Democratic interest groups. But at some point soon he’ll have to make up his mind.

Leave a Comment

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

We are reaching a turning point that will forever determine our future -- how we live our lives and how our children will live theirs. The gap between the ever-widening left and right has never been wider, and yet amazingly it continues to widen. 

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

New Jersey Democrat and 2020 presidential candidate Cory Booker just made the most hilarious comment about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal and two of the most unlikely comparisons.

Booker was talking to a small crowd in Mason City, Iowa, and stated that efforts to pull through with the Green New Deal were similar to fighting murderous genocidal Nazis and astronauts breaking scientific barriers traveling to the moon.

VOTE NOW: Should Nancy Pelosi Be Removed From Office?

If this was any glimpse into Booker’s future run for president, then it certainly came off as a huge laughable presentation showing us everything we need to know about his future failed campaign.

Besides the fact that the Green New Deal doesn’t sound like much of a deal at all considering everything it wants to get rid of for every day Americans, comparing it to something like defeating Nazis who murdered 17 million people or our beloved astronauts who risked everything to make one of the most epic space flights in world history is just hilarious.

Is this Cory Booker acting like a future presidential candidate or practicing his stand-up comedy act?

Either way, it appears he will surely fail as this is one act we can’t laugh with, but instead – laugh at.

Holy cow this guy is nuts!

Booker said, as quoted by Real Clear Politics:

“There are a lot of people out there pushing back against the Green New Deal, saying it is impractical, it is too expensive, it is all of this.

If we used to govern our dreams that way, we would have never gone to the Moon. God, that’s impractical. That ball in the sky? That’s impractical.”

He later added, “When the planet has been in peril in the past, who came forward to save Earth from the scourge of Nazism and totalitarian regimes? We came forward! Who came forward to save the planet, or continents, from financial ruin?”

The Green New Deal may eventually include eliminating cow farts.

That’s how we know they’re serious.

[RELATED: Trump Names Former Fox News Reporter To Key Post, And Dems Are FURIOUS]

[RELATED: The Price Tag For Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Green New Deal’ Will BLOW YOUR MIND]

NBC News

Published  2 months ago

Virginia Democrats called on Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax to resign on Saturday after a second woman accused the political rising star of sexual assault, a revelation that came after the party's other two top Democrats admitted to wearing blackface in their youth.

On Saturday night, Fairfax released a statement saying the past week had been "devastating" for not only his family but for the state of Virginia. He reiterated that his past encounters with accusers Meredith Watson and Vanessa Tyson were consensual.

"The one thing I want to make abundantly clear is that in both situations I knew at the time, and I know today, that the interactions were consensual," Fairfax said.

Fairfax claimed he spoke with both women after the time the alleged the assaults occurred and said neither indicated that his interactions had "caused her any discomfort." He called on the FBI and other "appropriate and impartial investigatory authorities," to look into the allegations.

"I am asking that no one rush to judgment and I am asking for there to be space in this moment for due process," Fairfax said.

But amid his calls that "no one rush to judgement," the state party said on Saturday that Fairfax should step down.

The state chairwoman, Susan Swecker, said that the allegations of sexual assault needed be taken seriously. Because of the accusers' credibility, Swecker said Fairfax could "no longer fulfill the duties and responsibilities of his post."

"While the Lieutenant Governor deserves due process in this matter, it is in the best interest of the Commonwealth that he goes through this process as a private citizen," she said in a statement. "The Lieutenant Governor no longer has our confidence or support. He must resign."

The Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association on Saturday replaced Fairfax as chairman of the organization.

Once considered to have a bright future in the Democratic Party, Fairfax stands accused of sexual assault by two women. He has denied both allegations.

Watson said in a statement from her lawyer Friday that the lieutenant governor raped her while they were both students at Duke University in 2000. The lawyer, Nancy Erika Smith, described the attack as "premeditated and aggressive."

"Ms. Watson shared her account of the rape with friends in a series of emails and Facebook messages that are now in our possession," Smith said in the statement. "Additionally, we have statements from former classmates corroborating that Ms. Watson immediately told friends that Mr. Fairfax had raped her."

He called the accusation "demonstrably false" and called for an investigation.

"I will clear my good name and I have nothing to hide," the lieutenant governor said. "I have passed two full, field background checks by the FBI and run for office in two highly contested elections with nothing like this being raised before. It is obvious that a vicious and coordinated smear campaign is being orchestrated against me. I will not resign.”

Fairfax also denied an accusation made by Tyson, a college professor, that he forced her to perform oral sex while they were both at the Democratic National Convention in Boston in 2004.

Whatever his decision — stay or resign — Fairfax has lost the support of party leaders from the state, as well as many 2020 Democratic presidential contenders.

The list includes former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California and Kristen Gillibrand of New York.

"Lieutenant Governor Fairfax should resign. The allegations against him detail atrocious crimes, and he can no longer effectively serve the Commonwealth," said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va. "We cannot ever ignore or tolerate sexual assault."

Conservative Review

Published  2 months ago

This is going mainstream in the Democratic Party.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Top Democrats running for president in 2020 have jumped on and endorsed Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s radical Green New Deal that aims, among other measures, eliminate air travel.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal” resolution calls on the federal government to provide economic security for those “unwilling to work.”

A “Green New Deal” FAQ page posted on Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional website says a “Green New Deal” Would guarantee “[e]conomic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work.” In other words, people who may not want to work.

However, Ocasio-Cortez’s staff seemed to have taken the FAQ off their website as of Thursday afternoon.

The same line is on the FAQ Ocasio-Cortez’s staff gave to NPR along with the actual text of the resolution. The “Green New Deal” resolution’s actual text simply calls for “economic security for all people of the United States.”

The legislative test puts “economic security” on a list of things the government should provide, including “high-quality health care,” “affordable, safe, and adequate housing” and “access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature.”

Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her “Green New Deal” resolution Thursday alongside Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, who introduced a companion bill in the Senate. Markey’s bill is co-sponsored by 2020 presidential contenders, including Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California.

I’m proud to co-sponsor @AOC and @EdMarkey‘s Green New Deal. We must aggressively tackle climate change which poses an existential threat to our nation.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) February 7, 2019

Ocasio-Cortez said the House version had more than 60 co-sponsors, including Democratic Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. The bill is unlikely to pass the House and has zero chance of passing the Senate.

House Democratic leadership hasn’t lined up behind the “Green New Deal.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed the resolution as a “suggestion” that would only be an option her party considered.

“It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive,” Pelosi told Politico Wednesday. “The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”

“No, I think it is a green dream,” Ocasio-Cortez responded at an event Thursday to promote her resolution. “I think that all great American programs, everything from the Great Society to the New Deal. Started with a vision for our future, and I don’t consider that to be a dismissive term. I think it’s a great term.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Six of the seven Democratic Party presidential candidates in the U.S. Senate voted against a pro-Israel bill this week that would make it easier for states to oppose the “boycott, divestment, sanctions” (BDS) movement.

Some critics have called BDS not only anti-Israel, but antisemitic, because it targets only Israel and not the Palestinians, and because it singles out Israel while ignoring human rights abuses committed by its neighbors.

As Ron Kampeas of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency noted (via the Jerusalem Post):

The Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act (S.1), which the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said “contains critical pro-Israel provisions,” passed 77-23, earning yeas from every Republican but one, Rand Paul of Kentucky. It codifies $38 billion in defense assistance to Israel and provides legal cover to states that target the boycott Israel movement.

However, Democrats were split on the bill. Initially, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) even blocked the bill from coming to a vote, blaming the government shutdown at the time.

Democrats were almost evenly split on the final vote. As Kampeas notes, Sen. Amy Klobucher (D-MN), who is expected to announce her candidacy for president this weekend, was the only contender to vote for the bill.

The others — Kamala Harris (D-CA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) — all voted against the bill. Most cited free speech concerns — though anti-BDS laws have been found not to violate free speech laws. Last month, for example, a federal judge in Arkansas upheld that state’s anti-BDS law, which prevents the state from doing business with companies that boycott Israel. Even left-wing California, Harris’s home state, has an anti-BDS law in force.

A likelier reason for their “no” vote has to do with the increasing importance of anti-Israel political forces in the Democratic Party coalition.

Last month, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) appointed the avowedly anti-Israel Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, despite concern over her radical views and past antisemitic rhetoric.

Booker, once a favorite of Jewish donors in the Democratic Party, has effectively switched sides on the issue after supporting President Barack Obama’s ill-fated Iran nuclear deal in 2015.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Conservative News Today

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Kamala Harris joined nearly every other candidate for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential nomination in endorsing the progressive disaster known as the “Green New Deal.” The California Democrat co-sponsored the bill introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Thursday and was almost instantly mocked for it. I’m proud to co-sponsor @AOC and @EdMarkey‘s Green New Deal. We must […]

The Federalist

Published  2 months ago

The Green New Deal is likely the most unserious plan that has ever been presented by any elected official to the American people.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Virginia Delegate Patrick Hope (D) warned Friday evening that he will introduce articles of impeachment against Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax (D) unless he resigns by Monday as a second allegation of sexual assault surfaced.

“On Monday, I will be introducing articles of impeachment for Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax if he has not resigned before then.,” Hope said in a statement shared to social media.

A second woman, Meredith Watson, has come forward to accuse Fairfax of sexual assault, alleging in a statement Friday that the attack took place when she and Fairfax were Duke University classmates in 2000. The allegation comes after California college professor Dr. Vanessa Tyson accused Fairfax on Wednesday of forcing her to perform oral sex on him in 2004 during the Democrat National Convention.

Contenders for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination have begun to issue calls for the lieutenant governor of Virginia to resign. Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) were first among the expanding field to call for Fairfax’s resignation. Booker posted on Twitter that “the multiple detailed allegations against the Lt. Gov. of Virginia are deeply troubling” and called on Fairfax to leave office.

Gillibrand called details of the second woman’s claims “sickening and horrendous” and also called on Fairfax to step down, continuing:

This new allegation from Meredith Watson that Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax raped her, corroborated by at least two named individuals in interviews and emails, is sickening and horrendous. I believe Meredith Watson and Dr. Tyson, and it was extremely brave for them to come forward. Mr. Fairfax should resign and no longer serve the Commonwealth of Virginia

Former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) also called on Fairfax to step aside, urging for the embattled Virginia Democrat to do so right away.

Fairfax has vehemently denied the allegations and has called for an investigation into the claims. “The allegations against Justin Fairfax are serious and credible,” said McAuliffe. “It is clear to me that he can no longer effectively serve the people of Virginia as Lieutenant Governor. I call for his immediate resignation.”

The new accusation further clouds the fate of Virginia’s government. Fairfax would take over if Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) were to resign over the racist photo that appeared on his medical school yearbook page. Northam told his top staff Friday that he would not resign. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring (D), who is second in line of succession, admitted to putting on blackface in college.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Daily Beast

Published  2 months ago

Meredith Watson claims Fairfax raped her in 2000, when they were both students at Duke University. Earlier this week, Vanessa Tyson publicly accused Fairfax of sexual assault.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Friday at a campaign event in Mason City, IA, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) compared Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey’s (D-MA) so-called Green New Deal to fighting Nazis.

Booker said, “We have to deal with this. Our planet is in peril, and we need to be bold. It’s one of the reasons I signed on to the resolution. I co-sponsored the resolution for the Green New Deal. There’s a lot of people blowing back on the Green New Deal. They’re going, ‘Oh, it’s impractical, oh it’s too expensive, oh it’s all of this.’ If we used to govern our dreams that way, we would have never gone to the moon.”

He added, “We need to be bold again in America. We need to have dreams that other people say are impossible. We need to push the bounds of human potential. Because that is our history. When the planet has been in peril in the past, who came forward to save the earth from the scourge of Nazi and totalitarian regimes? We came forward. Who came forward to save the planet or continents from financial ruin? We came forward with the Marshall Plan.”

Sean Hannity

Published  2 months ago

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive lawmakers left Americans scratching their heads Thursday; unveiling their Green New Deal proposal that seeks to end air travel and support those “unwilling to work.”

“Along the way, her office says the plan would aim to make air travel obsolete, upgrade or replace every building in America to ensure energy efficiency and give economic security even to those ‘unwilling’ to work,” writes Fox News.

Excited to join @AOC & @SenMarkey on a historic #GreenNewDeal resolution to address the peril of climate change and worsening inequality. Our history is a testimony to the achievement of what some think is impossible — we must take bold action now.

— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) February 7, 2019

I’m proud to co-sponsor @AOC and @EdMarkey's Green New Deal. We must aggressively tackle climate change which poses an existential threat to our nation.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) February 7, 2019

“Today is the day that we truly embark on a comprehensive agenda of economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America,” said Cortez. “That’s what this agenda is all about.”

Read the full story at Fox News.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

The radical Democrat-Socialist plan will destroy the country in months… if not days.  The plan ends air travel with ocean bridges, ends traditional forms of energy and will kill millions, ends nuclear energy, mandates all new jobs must be unionized and gives free money for not working Why do Democrats hate this country so much? […]

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her "Green New Deal" today, which promises heavy financial burden on the American people. She proposes eliminating air travel altogether, among numerous other bogus objectives. Get Your "Build The Wall"

Mail Online

Published  2 months ago

University of North Carolina Chapel Hill said they 'wholly condemn' the 'abhorrent' photos published 40 years ago in the 1979 yearbook. Governor Roy Cooper featured on another page.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responded to criticism from a top columnist on Tuesday that she had a "rare bad night" during President Trump's State of the Union speech.

Peggy Noonan, the Wall Street Journal columnist, tweeted that the 29-year-old Democrat looked "sullen, teenaged and at a loss" during a night where the freshman rep kept mostly silent and refused to applaud president Trump's remarks as he touted his administration's low unemployment numbers and efforts to cure AIDS and stop sex traffickers.

Ocasio-Cortez - a frequent critic of Trump - took to Twitter to defend herself.

"Why should I be “spirited and warm” for this embarrassment of a #SOTU? Tonight was an unsettling night for our country. The president failed to offer any plan, any vision at all, for our future. We’re flying without a pilot. And I‘m not here to comfort anyone about that fact," she wrote.

Ocasio-Cortez did clap when Trump recognized the number of women in Congress.

Trump's appeal for unity is unlikely to win over many of his Democratic critics in Congress. Before Trump even delivered his speech, California Sen. Kamala Harris, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, said, "We will hear insincere appeals to unity."

Also in the audience were several other Democrats running to challenge Trump in 2020, including Cory Booker of New Jersey, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

Noonan tweeted, "This has been a deeply adept speech in terms of policy. He cut to the muscle on legal and illegal immigration, on abortion and infanticide, on foreign wars. His vow on socialism will be remembered. Great heroes in the balcony, a real American panoply."

Middle East Eye

Published  2 months ago

Senate passes Middle East bill that includes provision against Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who announced a sweeping "Green New Deal" on Thursday that promises to render air travel obsolete, get rid of flatulent cows and ensure economic security for everyone in less than a decade, seemingly contradicted herself in a span of twelve hours on the nature of the government's role in the massive undertaking.

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

Senate Democrats introduced legislation on Monday to prevent President Trump from using military and disaster relief funds to construct the U.S.-Mexico border wall should he declare a national emergency.

The legislation would prevent Trump from using funding from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers civil works funds and military construction funding "for the construction of barriers, land acquisition, or any other associated activities on the southern border without specific statutory authorization from Congress" if he declared a national emergency.

Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said that while an emergency declaration to construct the U.S.-Mexico border wall would be challenged in court "Congress should not wait for the courts to act."

"We must stand up and assert our role as a co-equal branch of government, and we must prevent the president from going around Congress to raid critical funds … for a politically-motivated, unjustified national emergency declaration that isn’t based in reality," he said.

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) added that the bill would "prevent funds designated for critical military construction and disaster response" from being used to build the wall in the event Trump declares a national emergency.

Democrats estimate that approximately $35 billion from the fiscal year 2018 funding cycle is "subject to raiding"—being repurposed for constructing the border wall—including money for disaster relief and military construction projects.

More than a dozen Democrats, including Udall and Heinrich, introduced the Restrictions Against Illegitimate Declarations for Emergency Re-appropriations, or RAIDER, Act. Among the bill's supporters are Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who are both running for the party's 2020 nomination.

Trump has kept the option of declaring a national emergency to construct the wall on the table despite pushback from Congress.

He hinted last week that he could tip his hand during Tuesday night's State of the Union address about his plans, telling reporters to "listen closely."

“I think there’s a good chance we’ll have to do that,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday.

If Trump declared a national emergency, Congress could try to pass a resolution of disapproval to block the action. Lawmakers in both parties have also predicted a lengthy court battle that would almost immediately delay action on the border wall.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

Another instance has surfaced where Sen. Elizabeth Warren identified herself as Native American, this time when registering for the State Bar of Texas.

On the 1986 registration card, obtained by the Washington Post, the Democrat from Massachusetts identified her race as “American Indian.”

Warren, who is in the running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has faced criticism, especially from President Trump, for her claims to Native American heritage decades ago when applying for law school professorships.

Trump has called Warren “Pocahontas” and said that he would donate $1 million to a charity of her choosing if she took a DNA test and proved that she is Native American.

Warren has maintained her claims to aboriginal blood, and publicized a DNA test that revealed she is as little as 1/1024th American Indian, which is less than the average European American.

Last week, Warren issued a private apology to the Cherokee Nation for making the test results public, the first time on record that she apologized for the ordeal. The specifics of the apology were not made public.

“I can’t go back,” Warren told the Post. “But I am sorry for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”

In the 2020 race, Warren will need to appeal to minority, nonwhite voters to be successful.

The Democratic field is expected to be crowded, and more than a half dozen have already entered a bid and launched their campaigns, including fellow Sens. Kamala Harris, Calif., Kirsten Gillibrand, N.Y., and Cory Booker, N.J.

The Rush Limbaugh Show

Published  2 months ago

RUSH: I know it may not look like that to you because you might think the Democrat Party's winning and dominating things.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

The left needs to learn how to lose an election without undermining the entire democratic process. Stacey Abrams provides an unfortunate case in point.

When asked whether or not the Georgia governor’s race was stolen, the Democratic candidate conceded to CNN’s Jake Tapper that her opponent, former Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, won — but not that he won fairly. She wouldn't even say he was a "legitimate" governor.

"I will never deny the legal premature that says he is in this position, and I pray for his success. But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and disenfranchisement of thousands of voters? I will not say that," Abrams said, all but calling Republicans a bunch of cheats.

She was even less gracious in her begrudging concession-nonconcession speech:

"This is not a speech of concession, because concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true, or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede that. But my assessment is the law currently allows no further viable remedy. Now, I can certainly bring a new case to keep this one contest alive, but I don’t want to hold public office if I need to scheme my way into the post. Because the title of governor isn’t nearly as important as our shared title — voters. And that is why we fight on."

Not long ago, the Left argued, and argued with good reason, that refusing to accept the results of an election was a threat to democracy. But now “fighting on” and casting doubt on the reliability of the ballot box is all the rage among progressive political stars. Look at the potential 2020 field:

Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio claimed that if Abrams didn’t win the election, then Republicans “stole it.”

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton complained that “if [Abrams] had a fair election, she already would have won.”

While ballots were still being counted, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., claimed the “election is being stolen from her, using what I think are insidious measures to disenfranchise certain groups of people.”

So what are these insidious measures? And what is the evidence that Kemp stole the election? Mostly wild allegations pushed by Democrats and lapped up by the national media, casting doubt on an election that didn’t go their way.

Because Kemp was Georgia's secretary of state, each of the arguments go in one form of the other, Kemp is guilty of everything that went wrong leading up to and on election day.

Voter rolls were purged, they argue, in order to disenfranchise minority voters.

Kemp did in fact do the purging in question. American Public Media reported that nearly 600,000 Georgians were removed from the rolls in 2017 by the secretary of state’s office. But this isn’t a conspiracy. This was the result of a “use it or lose it” bill signed by a Democratic governor, Zell Miller, and passed by a Democratic legislature in 1997.

The 600,000 removed from the rolls were removed because they hadn’t voted in the last three elections. Voters don’t get tossed without warning, though, as Michael Warren of The Weekly Standard reported earlier in October. If they haven't moved out of state, then they are notified. Each voter is given a menu of options to reactivate his registration, and up to four years to complete this process.

Granted, 600,000 is a high number to purge. Again, Warren reported, the increase resulted from a failed lawsuit over alleged racial bias by the group Common Cause and the NAACP. Georgia won the case at the Supreme Court, allowing the dead, the convicted, and former residents who had moved away to be removed from the rolls. Suppression? Hardly.

What about the polling places that were closed? Surely it was a sinister effort by Kemp to lengthen lines and keep people from voting.

Well, no. There were delays, yes. There have been 214 precincts closed since 2012, according to an analysis by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. But Kemp had absolutely nothing to do with closing a single polling place. Those offices were shuttered by county election officials, not the secretary of state.

Finally, and laughably, there were delays caused by voting machines without power cords. As of this writing, there is no sign that Kemp or any of his allies snuck into polling stations and stole extension cords. If there was any evidence of this, the Republican should not be governor. Not just because this would be illegal, but because only an idiot would try to steal an election by stealing a charge cord.

In the end, cords were found and voting commenced.

None of this is overly complicated. It just takes time to explain. This is why the Left won’t learn to lose an election gracefully. It was beyond the pale to question the sanctity of the ballot box two years ago. Now it is standard operating procedure because cries of fraud make for easy excuses, norms and institutions be damned.

thenewamerican

Published  2 months ago

A homosexual has accused Democratic Senator Cory Booker of a bathroom sex assault in 2014. by R. Cort Kirkwood

USA TODAY

Published  2 months ago

"Empire" star Jussie Smollett was hospitalized after a possible homophobic and "racially-charged assault and battery," Chief Anthony Guglielmi of the Chicago Police Department said in a statement Tuesday. The attack is being investigated as a hate crime, according to a press release sent to USA TODAY. "Detectives are currently working to gather video, identify potential witnesses and establish an investigative timeline," the press release stated. "The victim is fully cooperating with investigators and

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Kamala Harris and her fellow Democrats may think “Medicare-for-all” is their ticket to the White House. But voters are not interested in their plan to eliminate private health insurance.

Big League Politics

Published  2 months ago

National Democrats are calling for Virginia governor Ralph Northam to resign after Big League Politics’ publication of a medical school yearbook photo showing Northam and a friend in blackface and a Ku Klux Klan robe, respectively.

But Virginia senators Tim Kaine and Mark Warner — while expressing concern about the situation — have not yet asked Northam to resign.

The Virginia Legislative Black Caucus convened an emergency late-night meeting. Governor Northam could not do anything to convince them that he should remain in office.

Former governor Terry McAuliffe stated, “This has been a heartbreaking day. Ralph Northam is my friend and he served well as my Lt. Governor and as Governor. His actions on display in this photo were racist, unacceptable and inexcusable at any age and any time.”

“The situation that he has put himself and the Commonwealth of Virginia in is untenable. It’s time for Ralph to step down, and for the Commonwealth to move forward,” stated former governor McAuliffe.

“These images arouse centuries of anger, anguish, and racist violence and they’ve eroded all confidence in Gov. Northam’s ability to lead. We should expect more from our elected officials. He should resign,” said New Jersey senator Cory Booker.

Democratic senator Kamala Harris of California called for Northam to resign.

“Leaders are called to a higher standard, and the stain of racism should have no place in the halls of government. The Governor of Virginia should step aside so the public can heal and move forward together,” Senator Harris stated.

Leaders are called to a higher standard, and the stain of racism should have no place in the halls of government. The Governor of Virginia should step aside so the public can heal and move forward together.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) February 2, 2019

Harris joins the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in calling for Northam to resign.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Former Vice President Joe Biden, a possible 2020 presidential contender, joined a bipartisan chorus of calls for embattled Gov. Ralph Northam (D-VA) to resign after a photo emerged Friday of him and another man wearing blackface and Ku Klux Klan attire.

“There is no place for racism in America. Governor Northam has lost all moral authority and should resign immediately, Justin Fairfax is the leader Virginia needs now,” Biden said in a statement shared to Twitter Saturday:

In a photo first reported by Big League Politics and later obtained by the Virginian-Pilot, Northam’s 1984 yearbook features Northam and another man in blackface, a bowtie, plaid pants and KKK attire. According to a Virginia Democrat in contact with Northam, the embattled governor now believes he does not appear in the photo — a shocking reversal — after admitting in his Friday evening apology that he was, indeed, in the photo. He would not reveal which attire he wore.

In his first apology, Northam acknowledged the clothing he had on was “clearly racist and offensive” and said in his follow-up apology that he was “deeply sorry” yet fully committed to staying on as the state’s chief executive.

“I accept responsibility for my past actions and I am ready to do the hard work of regaining your trust,” said Northam.

Biden joins Democrat presidential candidates, including Sens. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), in demanding Northam resign. “Leaders are called to a higher standard, and the stain of racism should have no place in the halls of government. The Governor of Virginia should step aside so the public can heal and move forward together,” said Harris.

Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner (D-VA) issued their own statements on the matter, condemning Northam for appearing in the “racist” and “deeply offensive” photo. The top Virginia lawmakers did ask for Northam to step down. “The racist photo of Governor Northam’s 1984 yearbook is horrible. This causes pain in a state and a country where centuries of racism have already left an open wound,” Kaine said. “I hope the Governor–whose career as an Army officer, pediatrician and public official has always manifested a commitment to justice and equality for all–now takes the time to listen to those he has hurt and reflect on how to move forward.”

Warner, calling the unearthed photo “shocking and deeply offensive,” said it reopened wounds from Virginia’s “long and painful history of racism and violence toward African-Americans.”

“The Governor must now listen to the people and communities he has hurt, and carefully consider what comes next,” his statement concluded.

Northam is expected to address the matter in a press conference scheduled for Saturday at 2:30 p.m. local time.

NBC4 Washington

Published  2 months ago

Northam initially planned to resign after apologizing for appearing in the photo and speaking with the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, but later had a change of heart, the Virginia Democrat told News4 and Tom Sherwood. He now insists neither figure wearing a racist costume was him. He plans to make an official statement at 2:30 p.m. Saturday amid immense pressure to step down. On Friday, Northam apologized for appearing in the photo, which was printed in a medical school yearbook on a page titled with

Conservative News Today

Published  2 months ago

Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to President Donald Trump, says if Democrat Senator Cory Booker were a Republican, he’d be viciously attacked as a “sexist” for choosing to run for president instead of supporting one of his female colleagues.

Obviously, Booker is running because he thinks he’s a better candidate than all the women from his party who are running.

Why Won’t Cory Booker Support His Female Peers?

“Welcome [to the race],” Conway told Fox & Friends. “He’s welcome to dive in ― along with 10, 15, 30 other Democratic candidates.”

When asked her reaction to Booker’s candidacy, Conway replied:

“I would ask him a couple questions today as he runs from my native New Jersey. One is: What’s wrong with the candidates that are already in there?

What is your objection to Kamala Harris running, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, these others who have already announced, Tulsi Gabbard, maybe?

If he were a Republican running against them, they would immediately call him a sexist for running against these women in the Democratic field.”

Conway: What Has Booker Accomplished?

Aside from his sexism, Kellyanne Conway says Cory Booker is not qualified to run for president.

Before becoming a US senator, Booker was the mayor of Newark, New Jersey from 2006 to 2013. During that time, crime in Newark soared and poverty remained a major problem in the embattled city.

“I would also ask him what exactly have you accomplished that qualifies you to be commander-in-chief and president of the United States?” Conway said.

Kellyanne also noted that Booker’s side gig as a “motivational speaker” is a disaster. She said even Democrat David Axelrod ― the former chief strategist for Barack Obama ― dissed Booker’s underwhelming “motivational-speaking” skills.

“I think people should go and look at his record in Newark, New Jersey.

Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, about 8 or 9 years ago, gave $200 million in matching funds to Newark for its school system and a whole bunch of that ― millions and millions of dollars ― went to politically-connected consulting firms.

I first came upon Cory Booker many years ago when he was a pro-school choice advocate. But the modern Democrat party…has moved so far to the left that he can’t even bring himself to continue to help these schoolchildren.”

Trump: ‘Spartacus’ Ran Newark Into the Ground

Meanwhile, check out President Trump’s brutal takedown of Booker after he tried to hijack the Senate Judiciary hearings in September 2018 by comically declaring “I Am Spartacus!”

“How about Cory Booker? Did you watch the performance?” Trump asked. “He ran Newark, New Jersey, into the ground and now he wants to be president? What was the moment he said he had? [‘Spartacus!’] I don’t think so. We’ll take Kirk Douglas at his prime. Booker ran Newark into the ground.”

While Booker condemned Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh over uncorroborated, decades-old groping allegations, he admitted that he groped a girl’s breast in high school without her consent.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

In a stunning reversal, Gov. Ralph Northam (D-VA) now says he does not believe he appears in a photo which shows two individuals in blackface and KKK uniform and has no immediate plans to resign, according to a Virginia Democrat who spoke to the embattled lawmaker, the Associated Press reports. On Friday evening, Northam acknowledged he was in the photo, yet declined to reveal which attire he wore.

The Democrat, who said they were “not authorized” to speak publically on the matter, told the news outlet that Northam is phoning state lawmakers Saturday in an attempt to shore up support that has all but evaporated the prior evening.

Northam has faced a torrent of criticism and calls for his resignation after a photo surfaced from decades ago that showed two people in racist costumes: One person is dressed in blackface, and another is wearing a full Ku Klux Klan uniform. The photo appeared in Northam’s 1984 medical school yearbook.

However, former political allies say Northam appears to have almost no choice but to resign after losing support from virtually the entire state Democratic party and other key allies, who late Friday urged the governor to leave office because of the racist photo.

The Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, the state House Democratic Caucus, and the state Senate Democratic Caucus all called on Northam to resign, along with several key progressive groups that have been some of the governor’s closest political allies.

Their calls for Northam to step down came in a wave late Friday after the Democrat had apologized for appearing in a photo in which one person is dressed in blackface and another is wearing a full Ku Klux Klan uniform. The photo appeared in his 1984 medical school yearbook.

The yearbook images were first published Friday afternoon by the conservative news outlet Big League Politics. The Virginian-Pilot later obtained a copy from Eastern Virginia Medical School, which Northam attended. The photo shows two people looking at the camera — one in blackface wearing a hat, bow tie and plaid pants; the other in a full Ku Klux Klan robe.

In his first apology, issued in a written statement, Northam called the costume he wore “clearly racist and offensive,” but he didn’t say which one he had worn.

He later issued a video statement saying he was “deeply sorry” but still committed to serving the “remainder of my term.”

“I accept responsibility for my past actions and I am ready to do the hard work of regaining your trust,” Northam said.

But Northam appears to have virtually no path forward to remain in office without any institutional support. His departure would mean current Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax, a Democrat who is only the second African American to win statewide office in Virginia, would be the next governor. Northam’s term was set to end in 2022.

Black lawmakers said they met with Northam Friday evening and said in a statement they appreciate his service.

“But given what was revealed today, it is clear that he can no longer effectively serve as governor,” the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus said, “It is time for him to resign, so that Virginia can begin the process of healing.”

Several Democrat presidential hopefuls, including Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), have called on Northam to jettison his post. “Leaders are called to a higher standard, and the stain of racism should have no place in the halls of government. The Governor of Virginia should step aside so the public can heal and move forward together,” Harris said in a statement.

Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner (D-VA) condemned Northam, calling the photo “racist” and “deeply offensive,” — however — the pair stopped short of calling on him to resign. The racist photo of Governor Northam’s 1984 yearbook is horrible. This causes pain in a state and a country where centuries of racism have already left an open wound,” said Kaine. “I hope the Governor–whose career as an Army officer, pediatrician and public official has always manifested a commitment to justice and equality for all–now takes the time to listen to those he has hurt and reflect on how to move forward.”

In a separate statement, Warner described the photo as “shocking and deeply offensive,” citing Virginia’s “long and painful history of racism and violence toward African-Americans.”

“The Governor must now listen to the people and communities he has hurt, and carefully consider what comes next,” he concluded.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

SFChronicle.com

Published  2 months ago

Sen. Kamala Harris’ Rolls-Royce rollout of her presidential run quickly shot her to the front of the Democratic pack, and with it all the troubles that come with being seen as a front-runner. The first misstep came during her televised town meeting in Iowa. She was terrific for the first three-quarters of the show, connecting with the audience both in the hall and those of us at home. In the final quarter, however, her focus seemed to fade — and that’s when she stepped in it, flippantly dismissing the concerns of people who like their private health insurance and aren’t enthusiastic about replacing it with government-run Medicare for All. Her “let’s move on” line sounded a lot like, “Get over it.

The Daily Beast

Published  2 months ago

Corruption scandals. Skyrocketing crime. Abandoned allies. There are reasons why New Jersey is lukewarm about its own Sen. Cory Booker—even while the rest of the country swoons.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee condemned the Senate Judiciary Democrats on Thursday for questioning judicial nominees’ religious beliefs before the committee.

Democratic Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono denied ever instituting a religious test and scolded Lee for what she believed was censuring her.

“You can’t openly, publicly question a nominee about that nominee’s religious beliefs, about what he or she believes to be sinful conduct without subjecting that nominee to ridicule and simultaneously demeaning some of the fundamental tenants of our constitutional republic,” Lee said.”You can’t ask a nominee questions like those to which Neomi Rao was subjected just the other day and those that I’ve seen asked of some of our other nominees and then later ask the question ‘how did we get here?'”

Lee’s condemnation came two days after Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey questioned Rao on her view of homosexuality and LGBTQ Americans during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to vet her for a seat on the D.C. Circuit Court. Booker asked Rao if she considers gay relationships to be “immoral.”

“I can’t fathom a circumstance in which it’s ever appropriate for us to ask a nominee about his or her religious beliefs about whether x, y or z is a sin,” Lee continued. (RELATED: Ted Cruz Blasts Senate Dems For Holding A ‘Theological Court Of Inquisition’ Over Trump Nominees)

Referring to the line of questioning as “wildly inappropriate,” the Utah senator put forth a specific circumstance where one’s religion would come in conflict with their ability to faithfully execute their duties. However, it would require a narrow, specific type of question.

“I urge you to consider the fact that we should never expose someone to shame, ridicule or scorn on the basis of their religious beliefs and I ask that we refrain from doing so in this committee,” Lee said. “We should never again ask someone what they regard as a sin or other particulars of their religious beliefs. It’s nobody’s darn business. It’s certainly not the business of this committee.”

“We are not in the business of censuring each other’s questions to nominees or falsely assigning motives that don’t exist,” Hirono responded. “There is no religious test for nominees on this committee and to suggest otherwise is, to quote my friend from Utah, ‘wildly inappropriate.'”

“The problem with asking a nominee about the particulars of his or her religious beliefs is that those questions inevitably expose those beliefs as somehow a qualifier or a disqualifier for public office,” Lee said. “That is flatly inconsistent with [the United States Constitution].”

The Hawaii senator further defended probing nominees on their religious beliefs in order to determine if it will “not enable them to be objective,” and called it a “legitimate area of inquiry.” (RELATED: Mike Lee Blocked EEOC Nominee Who Believes Sexual Liberty Trumps The First Amendment)

“It is not that we all ask ‘do you think such and such is a sin, etc., etc.,'” Hirono continued before Lee confronted her with Booker’s question to Rao.

“I don’t think we’re here to censure,” Hirono responded.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

CNN -- the network that promotes the hashtag #FactsFirst -- mislabeled embattled Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam as a Republican on Friday during a segment about the Democrat's apology for his racist 1984 medical school yearbook photo.

The photo showed two men holding beers -- one dressed in black