The Tradwife movement reminds us of the virtue of service in marriage

/in , , , /by

In a culture that has championed feminism, the Women’s March, #MeToo, and national campaigns to close the gender pay gap, life as a full-time homemaker seems anything but progressive. And yet, the growing #TradWife social media movement celebrates the classic domestic female as its role model.

The movement, often illustrated with 1950s posters of apple-cheeked housewives brandishing vacuums or serving their husbands dinner, consists of a growing multitude of women who proclaim their choice to be “traditional” wives by staying at home and fulfilling household duties rather than pursuing a career outside the home.

Not surprisingly, the trend has met fierce backlash. Critics have called it backwards, dangerous, and even racist. The reactions generally claim either that misogynistic males are hypnotizing their wives into submission, or that women who somehow prefer domestic life are spreading an insidious message that hinders the female crusade for equality.

The critiques raise plenty of questions about gender roles and feminism, but they also prove that our culture has largely abandoned an important reality: that while a happy marriage has nothing to do with servitude, it has everything to do with service.

Alena Pettitt, one of the most prominent public faces of the Tradwife movement, makes this abundantly clear. In a BBC interview with Victoria Derbyshire last month, the British marketing-manager-turned-housewife explained why she embraced the Tradwife life: “My talents lie in domesticity and cooking, and I love it,” she said. Soon after, she added, “It’s also an act of service for my husband, and it’s a way I demonstrate and show love.”

Derbyshire’s immediate follow-up: “Is it servitude?”

Even though Pettitt continued to speak about her free decision to work in the home, the question had already proven that Derbyshire, along with most modern feminists, missed the point.

By and large, full-time female homemaking is interpreted as servitude, even when it is freely chosen. In part, that is because it is associated with a time in which women were restricted legally, professionally, financially, and socially. While many of those restrictions have been lifted, the interpretation remains. Why? One big factor is that our culture’s emphasis on individual career success, particularly for women, has fuelled and intensified it.

Within a worldview that urges women to be just as successful (if not more so) than men, domestic life is an entirely backwards choice, because 1) it limits a woman’s chances to achieve that success, and 2) it hands over the glorious career path to the man in the house, thereby placing her below him.

While there is certainly a place for voicing women’s needs when they are overlooked and fighting for their rights when they are violated, hyper-individualism and careerism do neither. They overshadow the reality that any kind of work is more fulfilling when it is done not for me but for you. And not you in a collective, abstract sense of community, but you as a real person within a relationship. In marriage, that means that whatever work is being done (inside or outside the home) has meaning when it is placed at the service of one’s spouse and the family that grows from that bond.

My husband, for instance, has always referred to his work not as “my career” but as “our career.” To him, the sole purpose of his profession is to give me and our children a happy life, and he works hard to excel at his job for that purpose.

The same logic of loving service applies to the work of the home. All of us have experienced its impact: When we walk into a dining room with the table set, napkins folded, and delicious food beautifully presented, we can’t help but feel loved. Someone not only took the time to prepare that meal but also invested effort to do it well, with attention to detail. Like any profession, doing something with precision and finesse leaves an impression. And when it is done for someone, it becomes more than an accomplishment. It becomes a gift.

This is what makes Pettitt and so many women (myself included) find deep fulfilment in homemaking. Some of us may have a better knack for housework than others, but for all of us, our work in the home is essentially about creating a bright and cheerful space for our families.

That total, loving dedication is not oppressing but empowering. It brings joy. It spreads love. That’s how humans are wired: when we give of ourselves in a full-hearted effort of love, we receive love abundantly in return. In Pettitt’s interview, one comment from a viewer captured this virtuous cycle of giving: “The more my wife puts me first, the more I put her first.”

With that outlook, life is no longer about “your career” versus “my career,” or about housework placed at the service of one spouse’s career advancement. Instead, it’s about “our home,” with each spouse’s work devoted to making that home flourish.

Such an outlook need not be confined to the #TradWife setup. A thriving marriage and family is possible whether or not both spouses work full time, and whether or not spouses share the work of the home. But regardless, the dedication to each other and the primacy of the family must remain constant.

Alena Pettitt’s approach has simply shone new light on the beauty of service within marriage, and for that, it is anything but a regression. It is a breath of fresh air in our individualistic culture, one that could rescue the happiness in homes of all shapes and sizes.

COLUMN BY

Sophia Martinson

Sophia Martinson is a writer with a primary focus on cultural and family topics. She lives with her husband in New York City.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Paganism in 21st-century Europe – what’s the attraction?

/in , , , , , /by

Some Europeans have turned to ancient pagan religion to fill the spiritual vacuum created by today’s materialistic world – with a bit of tweaking here and there.

Our ancestors worshipped an array of nature spirits and deities before the advent of Christianity. The shaman (to use a generic term) was the intermediary between spirit beings and people. Fictitious beings such as fairies, pixies and elves were also part of this picture. The more advanced ancient civilizations developed complex belief systems involving pantheons and priesthoods. It all falls under the broad heading of ‘religion’ – pagan religion. (A good background source is Ken Dowden’s ‘European Paganism: The Realities of Cult from Antiquity to the Middle Ages’, 2000.)

Pagan beliefs have not completely vanished from Western culture. The Easter bunny, the mistletoe as a harbinger of future romantic love, and aspects of the Arthurian legends (the sword in the stone and the druids, for instance) have withstood the ravages of time to become part of our cultural heritage.

Most of us do not consciously think of these as relics of European paganism. But some people in our midst take all this quaint stuff deadly seriously to the point of professing belief in the chimeras our distant past throws up. They even call themselves ‘pagans’ despite the pejorative connotations of the term in common usage – paganism has long had bad press, including films such as the 1973 box-office success ‘The Wicker Man’ (a play on the word ‘wicca’) with sterling performances by Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee but apparently intent on portraying pagan religion as an orgy of barbarity and licentiousness.

Some commentators have applied the label ‘neo-pagan’ to the modern phenomenon. However, many self-professing pagans object to this term because of its alleged association with Nazism, particularly within the SS – Heinrich Himmler harboured eccentric views harking back to Germany’s pre-Christian past which he supposedly infused into SS ideology. What I will do in this article is use ‘Pagan’ (capital ‘P’) when referring to organised modern paganism.

Paganism is well established in a number of European countries including Sweden, the Netherlands and Britain, where the Home Office recognized it as a bona fide religion in 1971; one of the practical implications of that official recognition is that prisoners can ask to be visited by Pagan chaplains. As well as having a website, the British Pagan Federation produces the quarterly ‘Pagan Dawn’ – one edition for each season beginning with spring, identified using ancient Celtic names. I subscribed to this journal for several years and took part in some of the lively discussion that arose in the ‘Letters’ section.

My personal association with European paganism actually arises from my first name, which is of ancient Caucasian origin and is an allusion to the bear as a totem animal – given my generous BMI and the beard, that seems rather appropriate!

At a more intellectual level, what I am interested in is what makes the 21st century Western Pagan tick. There appears to be a dearth of scholarly interest in the matter, although the past decades have seen a lot of attention being paid to the ‘New Age’ phenomenon which overlaps with Paganism but should not be confused with it.

Some social scientists seem to be taking note – see, for instance, Irving Hexham’s ‘Contemporary Paganism: Listening People, Speaking Earth’ in the Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 36 No. 3 1999. I have formed my own impressions from Pagan source materials and come up with the following themes:

A romanticized view of our pre-Christian past.

There are shades of Garden of Eden mythology in Pagan writings when alluding to our distant past. Everything was honky-dory in those halcyon days of yore when paganism ruled the roost until outsiders came and screwed it all up. Perhaps Goscinny and Uderzo, the creators of the ‘Asterix and Obelix’ comic books, have something to answer for in this regard – look at all those happy, healthy, well-nourished folk in the idyllic Gaul village that those awful Romans are trying to subdue. (Not a hope while the Druid can still brew his magic potion, of course… remember, the one Obelix fell into as a baby?)

First it was the Romans bringing dreaded modernity; then later it was Christians who really put the boot in (as they see it). Hankering for a return to a mythical ‘perfect day’ past appears to be something many Pagans share with at least some Christians!

Hostility towards Christianity.

To claim that Pagans are contemptuous of Christianity is an understatement. They rightly point to the persecution of pagans by Christendom throughout the Middle Ages and well into the 17th century. To the Christian establishment, paganism was a tool of Satan. The widely recognised elk’s head with horns as a symbol of Satanism actually arose from an ancient European fertility ritual involving a guy prancing around in that head attire.

The hysteria surrounding the witch-hunts was largely attributable to the belief that witches – in practice, usually local ‘wise women’ who practised ‘the craft’ inherited from traditional paganism – were the Devil’s fifth columnists. The early Protestants were of much the same view and dealt with the perceived threat in much the same barbaric manner.

The most appalling atrocities were committed against innocent people because of the association the Christian authorities made between paganism and Satanism. Today’s Pagans have neither forgiven nor forgotten the main perpetrators (as they see it) responsible for that dark period in European history.

The ‘spiritual dimension’ that Paganism provides.

Pagans on the whole display a cynical attitude towards the modern materialistic lifestyle. They seek a spiritual dimension to existence but unequivocally reject the one that Christianity offers. For them, Paganism fills the vacuum. It moreover does so by returning them to their ethnocultural roots, giving them a sense of belonging that the ostensibly universal belief systems, particularly Christianity, do not.

The ‘roots movement’ aspect of Paganism is a sensitive one. I recall a vibrant discussion in the pages of ‘Pagan Dawn’ about 20 years ago concerning the ethnic aspect of pagan beliefs. Some commentators were aghast at the suggestion that there is any ‘racial’ aspect to Paganism, but I interpreted this as a kneejerk reaction to the prospect of being called ‘racist’, which is what one has to anticipate these days when to self-identify as a member of a European ethnic group is likely to be wilfully misinterpreted.

However, it is impossible to remove ethnicity from the pagan equation. Only Greek Pagans worship Zeus, and only Irish Pagans acknowledge the existence of leprechauns. Having said that, classical pagan beliefs are mostly local or regional rather than national. A Cornwallian Pagan and a Highlands Scottish Pagan share few pagan traditions or beliefs.

The special status of women in paganism.

This aspect of paganism past and present would merit several doctoral theses in its own right. The somewhat idealised Pagan reconstruction of pre-history presents an ‘equal but different’ gender scenario in which women formed a religious society that ran parallel to men’s, with its own hierarchy and rituals. Women in Paganism are considered to be endowed with extraordinary spiritual powers which are manifested through certain aspects of wicca (‘the craft’).

A lot of women who belong to the Pagan movement call themselves ‘white witches’ or just plain ‘witch’ – a term of respect in Pagan society. Many female Pagans worship goddesses – some reverentially speak of ‘The Goddess’. There’s plenty of room in Paganism for feminism, albeit with its own distinctive spin.

Paganism as environmentalism.

Paganism is replete with nature spirits that animate the natural world. The notion of sacredness is extended to living entities such as trees and geological features such as mountains. Harmony with Nature is a recurring theme in Pagan literature. Many Pagans are passionate about the natural environment, particularly those parts of it that remain relatively unspoiled. Pagans stand shoulder to shoulder with environmental activists in protecting such sites from exploitation.

Despite some of the trimmings that make Paganism appear more of a lark than a serious spiritual movement, it deserves to be taken seriously. Akin to many adherents of mainstream religion, bona fide Pagans are profoundly concerned about the direction our societies have taken – and have come up with countermeasures drawn from their own European religious past.

COLUMN BY

Barend Vlaardingerbroek

Barend Vlaardingerbroek BA BSc BEdSt PGDipLaws MAppSc PhD is at the American University of Beirut. Feedback welcome at bv00@aub.edu.lb. I would be particularly interested in hearing from anyone who shares my academic interest in current-day European Paganism.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Time to End the Tyranny of District Court Judges’ Nationwide Injunctions

/in , , , , , , /by

Question: What is the difference between God and a federal judge?

Answer: God knows that He isn’t a federal judge.

On Feb. 6, U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs of North Carolina issued an injunction barring the Trump administration from implementing a new policy that changes how the government calculates the duration of an illegal immigrant’s unlawful presence in the country.

Although an injunction is the correct legal tool to stop someone from doing something, Biggs had a choice in how broad that injunction should be.

In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>

She could use an injunction that prevented the government from using the new calculation on the plaintiffs who sued, or she could use a so-called nationwide injunction that barred the government from using the new calculation against anyone, anywhere.

Biggs chose to issue a nationwide injunction. Actually, that’s a misnomer. These are better called “universal” or even “absent-party” injunctions, because they aren’t limited either by their geographic scope or the parties they cover.

Instead, they stop the government from enforcing a law or policy against anyone, anywhere.

These universal injunctions are controversial. U.S. Attorney General William Barr denounced them in a speech last May. Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen did so in a speech on Feb. 12, and Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have criticized them as well.

So, what exactly are these strange things, and are they legal?

As always, it’s wise to start our analysis with the Constitution. The Constitution defines the judicial branch’s role in our system of government. Judges don’t pass laws or set broad policies, because that’s the job of the other branches.

Instead, according to Article III, judges decide “Cases” and “Controversies,” which are actual legal disputes between specific parties. Whether civil suits between private parties or criminal cases involving the government, these disputes are brought by the parties, and judges settle them for the parties.

It makes sense, therefore, that when a judge issues an injunction in the process of deciding a particular case, that injunction will not cover more than is necessary.

Historically, when a plaintiff successfully challenged a law as unconstitutional, for example, the judge would most often block the government from enforcing the law against the plaintiff, rather than completely wipe that law from the books.

But the judiciary has grown more powerful than America’s Founders intended and, since the 1960s, this has included issuing universal injunctions.

This type of injunction has become increasingly common over the past few decades as political activists try to enlist judges to make the kind of widespread policy changes that the legislative or executive branches are designed to handle.

Like a gavel thrown into a well-oiled machine, these universal injunctions cause a host of problems for our constitutional government—and for the judiciary itself.

First, they empower judges to exercise power over the entire government, rather than just the parties who brought a case before them.

Second, universal injunctions give individual district judges far more power than they ought to have. Even if 1,000 judges have upheld a law, or limited their injunctions only to the parties in specific cases, one granting a universal injunction means that the law cannot be enforced anywhere.

Third, they undermine public confidence in the judiciary by giving activists judges near limitless power to undo the laws and policies of the democratically accountable branches of government.

One infamous activist judge, the now-deceased Stephen Reinhardt, once joked of his lawless decisions that “they [the Supreme Court] can’t catch them all.”

Finally, universal injunctions lead to what Gorsuch calls “rushed, high-stakes, low-information decisions.” Oftentimes, judges issue universal injunctions at the beginning of a case, even before resolving legal and factual issues.

When that happens, the Justice Department often appeals on an emergency basis. That’s not good, because it doesn’t give the higher courts, including the Supreme Court, the time they need to make sure they get the answer right.

The Supreme Court, in particular, prefers to weigh in on a legal issue only after many lower courts, lawyers, and legal scholars have had time to discuss it. That debate sharpens the arguments and refines the issues. Emergency appeals, however, eliminate that.

The criticism of universal injunctions has reached a boiling point, and now it’s likely that the Supreme Court will step in. On Jan. 17, the Supreme Court accepted the case of Trump v. Pennsylvania.

One of the questions presented there is whether the court of appeals erred when it affirmed a universal injunction striking down regulations that would have allowed employers with sincere religious or moral objections to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage in employers’ insurance plans.

The high court should take this opportunity to end the practice of issuing universal injunctions. It should remind the lower courts that their power is limited to resolving cases and controversies, and that they are not gods sitting in judgment over the rest of the government.

COMMENTARY BY

GianCarlo Canaparo

GianCarlo Canaparo is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET ACCESS NOW! >>

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: Deny sex is binary, embrace conversion therapy and then theirs Pete Buttigieg

/in , , , , , /by

EDITORS NOTE: This is the eleventh in a series titled Decadent Democrats. You may read the previous installments here:

DECADENT DEMOCRATS — From Pedophilia to Sex with Animals

DECADENT DEMOCRATS — From Electing a Dream ‘Queer Latina’ Candidate to No Incarceration For Drug Use of Any Kind

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: The Enemies of America are Our Best Friends Forever

DECADENT DEMOCRATS — From Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globe Diatribe to Abortion to Climate Change [+Videos]

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: From Creating Weak Men and Disorderly Women to Making Sex a Biological Reality Illegal

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: From the Party of Abortion and Allah Akbar to the 2020 Right to Life March and death of terrorist Soleimani

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: The Party of Marx, Mao and Mohammed

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: Their calls for violence created ANTIFA

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: Biden, Warren and Sanders reject President Trump’s Middle East peace plan

DECADENT DEMOCRATS: Liberals pay $2,500 to be told they’re racists, kiss the boots of blacks [Video]

The Democratic Party is all in when it comes to homosexuals. The party of Catholic President John F. Kennedy can’t help itself. Democrats even have, for the first time in history, Pete Buttigieg, a homosexual, running for president in their primary.

This is a turn around in policy and politics. We must remember what President Barack Obama, Oct. 27, 2010, in in an interview with liberal bloggers discussed his views on gay marriage:

“I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage. But I also think you’re right that attitudes evolve, including mine.”

Then in May, 2012 Politico reported that President Obama evolved in his opinion of same-sex marriage stating:

“I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

Rhuaridh Marr in a July 27, 2016 article The Democratic Party Platform is the most pro-LGBT in history reported:

This week, in Philadelphia, Democrats approved the most pro-LGBT party platform in their history. Almost half a century in the making, it represents a culmination of the struggle of LGBT activists to be recognized at the highest levels of politics. If 2012 was a watershed moment, when marriage equality was enshrined in that year’s party platform, 2016’s platform is an affirmation, a celebration of the rights of every LGBT American. The sheer breadth of the platform stands in contrast to the hate and opposition of its Republican counterpart.

Why do Democrats fully embrace the LGBTQ agenda?

The LGBTQ agenda includes:

  • Conversion therapy.
  • Teaching children about homosexuality in elementary schools.
  • Supporting male transgenders into women and girl sports.
  • Call anyone who disagrees with the LGBTQ agenda homophobic.
  • Embracing pedophiles such as Jeffery Epstein.
  • Passing policy The Equality Act on on May 17, 2019. The Equality Act is a bill passed by the United States House of Representatives that would amend the Civil Rights Act to “prohibit discrimination on the basis of the sex, sexual orientation, gender identity.”

ANSWER: Because the Democratic Party loves what they consider homosexuals to be consummate victims.

For Democrats homosexuals are victims, just as are blacks, Muslims, illegal aliens, pedophiles, transsexuals, Hispanics, etc. Victimhood is a prerequisite to becoming a member of the Democrat Party.

What is most interesting is that Democrats embrace a lifestyle that is both harmful and hurts individuals according to recent studies.

Democrats ignore science, genetics, DNA and multiple scientific studies that show homosexuality is neither natural nor normal. In fact science tells us that homosexuality is harmful and hurtful.

But this doesn’t matter because its all about getting votes.

Sex is Binary

In a February 14, 2020 Breitbart article titled No Sex ‘Spectrum’ Beyond Male and Female Thomas D. Williams, PH. D wrote:

The Wall Street Journal has issued a throwdown to the gender lobby, insisting in an op-ed Thursday that sex is binary and there is no “spectrum.”

“In humans, reproductive anatomy is unambiguously male or female at birth more than 99.98% of the time,” note biologists Colin M. Wright and Emma N. Hilton. “The evolutionary function of these two anatomies is to aid in reproduction via the fusion of sperm and ova.”

“No third type of sex cell exists in humans, and therefore there is no sex ‘spectrum’ or additional sexes beyond male and female. Sex is binary,” they assert.

In a February 16, 2020 article in the journal Public Discourse titled Transition as Treatment: The Best Studies Show the Worst Outcomes notes:

A pattern begins to emerge as we survey some of the best and longest outcome studies on gender transition: the longer the studies and the better the methods, the more negative the results.

The [conversion therapy]treatment for this particular disorder is severe: lifelong experimental medicalization, sterilization, and complete removal of healthy body parts—a treatment Dr. Ray Blanchard, one of the world’s foremost sexologists, calls “palliative.” In spite of its severity, however, medical gender transition is no longer a rarity. It is the recommended treatment for gender dysphoria, a diagnosable disorder of incongruence between one’s felt “gender” and one’s natal sex, the prevalence of which is increasing tremendously throughout the world. More and more children and adolescents are being diagnosed with gender dysphoria, and are undergoing medical treatment prior even to completing puberty.

For those who express caution or concern there is a familiar retort: “Trust the experts.” If you don’t, “you’re a bigot.”

This argument, however, makes a mockery of the fact that three of the most influential sex researchers of the last couple decades—Ray Blanchard, Michael Bailey, and the recently vindicated Ken Zucker—all have problems with the affirmation-only transition narrative that is currently being promoted. You could add to this list names like James Cantor, Eric Vilain, Stephen Levine, Debra Soh, and Lisa Littman.

In the February 13, 2020 article Science, Sex, and Suicide   asks, “Why would Scientific American urge a ban on therapies that may free some from an identity associated with greater depression and suicide, and yet never question “treatments” for gender dysphoria that lead to increased confusion, depression, and suicidal tendencies?

Otto explains:

Scientific American started off the new year—the publication’s 175th—with an editorial that unintentionally demonstrates the reality that science is not simply the dispassionate determination of the laws of nature. A great deal more than genetics and biology seems to be involved when the subject is LGBTQ-related, particularly when it concerns young people who are questioning their sexual identity.

The editorial, “Time’s Up for ‘Anti-Gay Therapy,’” calls for a federal resolution banning “conversion therapy.” The editors begin by referring to the story of a man named McKrae Game, a former champion of conversion therapy who recently left his wife and his ministry, “Hope for Wholeness.” Game has now come out as gay, pleading forgiveness for the harm he did by promoting what his organization called “freedom from homosexuality through Jesus Christ.” Game joins a growing number of former leaders of so-called “anti-gay therapy” who have recently disavowed the practice.

Conclusion

Democrats are hell bent on pushing the LGBTQ agenda on all Americans. Saying that sex is binary, believing that marriage is between one man and one woman are considered “hate speech” by Democrats.

Pointing out  that conversion therapy is harmful is deemed non-scientific, when the science is clear. The entire concepts of boy and girl, man and woman, husband and wife are now foreign to the Democratic Party.

Same-sex marriage may be legal but it is not common. What is common is that since the legalization of same-sex marriage the Democrats in concert with LGBTQ activists have made it their mission to fundamentally transform the ideal that sex is binary.

© All rights reserved.

For more articles on the LGBTQ Agenda click here.

Forthcoming Book lists Trump as one of the Greatest Presidents, Twitter Leftists’ heads explode

/in , , , , /by

This morning I wrote an article for PJ Media that makes a point that I elaborate in my forthcoming book, Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster. Then over on Twitter I noticed that “#PresidentObama” was trending for Presidents Day, as a huge crowd of Twitter Leftists hailed the socialist internationalist Obama as if he had actually been a good President.

Well, I admit I couldn’t resist, and tweeted this:

Head over to Twitter and look at the comments on that tweet: watch the fun as the Twitter Leftists howl at the prospect of someone daring to question one of their most sacred dogmas. The truth really does hurt some people, badly, like a physical pain.

And preorder the book here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Elizabeth Warren Channels Molly Bloom: Yeah! I Said Yeah! I Mean Yeah! (Part 1)

Senators ask how al-Qaeda leader was admitted as a “refugee” and became a US citizen

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Court victory for UK ‘transphobia’ delinquent

/in , , , , , , /by

Tweeting rhymes against transgenderism is allowed in a non-Orwellian state, says a judge.

Former British police officer Harry Miller has successfully challenged the use of Hate Crime Operational guidelines, issued by the College of Policing in 2014 and followed by police forces nationally.

A Judge found that they had been unlawfully used to interfere with Mr Miller’s freedom of speech when he was visited by a policeman to question him over a “transphobic limerick” he shared on Twitter.

The guidelines deal with actions “perceived to be motivated by hostility towards religion, race or transgender identity,” which must be recorded “irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element.”

Although the police accepted that “such incidents are not crimes, they are still logged on a system and can show up during a criminal records check” when an individual applies for a job.

In a landmark ruling at the High Court, Mr Justice Julian Knowles ruled the tweets were lawful, and that there was not “the slightest risk” that Mr Miller “would commit a criminal offence by continuing to tweet.” The judge added that the UK has never been an “Orwellian society,” nor had it experienced “a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi.” (“Judge rules in favour of free speech in ‘transphobic’ limerick case,” Telegraph, February 15, 2020).

But precisely because we have never lived in a police state – rather, having been used to a political system in which open debate brings about changes in the law and in society by democratic means – we have been slow to recognise the threat of fundamental changes introduced by stealth, incrementally and promoting apparently benign measures.

Coming from different angles, in fact it was a pincer movement conducted by social campaigners on one side and legal activists on the other, in whose grip the majority are suddenly finding themselves trapped.

After his self-funded challenge, Mr Miller celebrated his victory outside court, hailing the outcome as a “watershed moment for liberty” and vowing to continue tweeting. However, Mr Justice Knowles rejected his wider challenge to the lawfulness of the College of Policing’s guidance, ruling that it “serves legitimate purpose and is not disproportionate.”’

The case will now be tested at the Supreme Court after Mr Justice Knowles granted a “leapfrog certificate” to allow it to skip the Court of Appeal stage, but as the Telegraph points out, although “scathing in his judgment of Mr Miller’s treatment,” Mr Justice Knowles “defended the College of Policing’s guidelines on ‘non-crime hate incidents’,” even though they are the source of the problem.

The guidelines speak of incidents that are “perceived … to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice” and which are to be recorded “irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element.”

Moreover, although “the police say they are working hard and that they just do not have the money or time to attend every crime scene,” they are putting huge efforts into “recording non-crimes”. The Government has pledged to introduce 20,000 new police officers, but “the Home Office must make sure that they are deployed to tackle actual crime, not people’s opinions.” (Telegraph comment, “Non-crimes should not waste police time,” February 15, 2020).

Thanks to Freedom of Information requests made by the Telegraph – and cited in court by Mr Miller – it has emerged that ‘nearly 120,000 “non-crime” hate incidents were recorded by police forces between 2014 and 2019.

Mr Miller was investigated by PC Mansoor Gul, a “community cohesion officer” who said Mr Miller needed to “check his thinking” – at which point, he says, he knew the police had gone too far. He told The Telegraph the incident was indicative of the growing “political corruption” of British policing, recalling strict instructions, during his time in the force, when policing public marches “to not even step in time with the music in case it gave the impression of being political,” although now they are doing the complete opposite. “I even have one picture of a British police officer carrying a riot shield painted in the trans flag colours.” (“’Don’t tell me to check my thinking … that is not the job of the police’,” Telegraph, February 15, 2020).

PC Gul disputes Mr Miller’s claim, but in fact it is the police that need to “check their thinking” – even check whether they are still thinking. For several years now, uniformed police have marched in Gay Pride marches. Far from fostering community cohesion, they have been dragged in to become enforcers of sexual diversity, thereby setting the majority against a tiny number of troubled individuals, at the behest of their self-appointed champions.

It is said that he who pays the piper calls the tune, but although the public pays for policing they do not pay to be policed; it is the sexual diversity campaign that is calling the tune to which the police are marching in lockstep. And the Supreme Court, which will hear Mr Miller’s case and may reject it, thus entrenching intolerance in law, has shown its left-liberal bias regarding Brexit.

In 2010 the Equality Act introduced legal protections on the basis of race and disability – things that cannot be helped – but also sexual activity and identity – things that can be helped.

Recently, an employment tribunal judge ruled that the view of tax expert Maya Forstater, who expressed criticism of trans issues online, was not “a protected philosophical belief under the 2010 Equality Act,” that there was “no legal right to question whether a transgender person is a man or a woman,” and that Ms Forstater’s belief was ‘“not worthy of respect in a democratic society’.” (“Test case rules against tax expert sacked over transgender tweet,” Telegraph, December 19, 2019).

An Orwellian situation has morphed into a Kafkaesque one, where no one knows exactly what they are accused of and no one knows exactly what they are allowed to say – consequently the safest course is to say nothing on the subject. The activists who police other people’s speech are the ones who decide who is guilty and who is innocent, and they can be as offensive as they like – nobody will investigate them.

Indeed, although the police guidelines purport to protect religion, anyone quoting the Bible or citing it in defence of traditional Christian beliefs on sexuality, is in danger of being arrested or sacked.

We have gone from true tolerance – where everyone has a right to their opinion – to the self-identifying policers of public speech believing that only their opinion is the truth. Of course, though everyone has a right to their opinion, everyone’s opinion cannot be right, but it does help to be backed up by medical science. In the case of trans issues this is entirely lacking, yet we have come to a point where, in the face of biological evidence, a tiny number of individuals who believe themselves to be the opposite sex, must be believed.

Indeed, their beliefs must be affirmed and even celebrated, as clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson found in 2017 when he refused to refer to individuals in line with their chosen gender. He famously protested an Ontario Human Rights Commission ruling that “refusing to refer to a trans person by their chosen name and a personal pronoun that matches their gender identity” in a workplace or a school, would probably be considered discrimination.”

Peterson argued that his objections were on the grounds of free speech, and nothing to do with discrimination, and that at no time in British Common Law history has the legal code mandated what we must say, as opposed to what we must not say. He did add that “he would use the gender-neutral pronoun of a particular person, if they asked him.” (Mick Brown, “What’s wrong with the Petersons?” Telegraph, February 15, 2020).

In a very short time we have gone from policing speech to censoring speech to compelled speech, but even those who defend the right to free speech fall silent on the issue of banning silent prayer outside abortion clinics.

This is chiefly because the defenders of free speech are on the Left, and although on trans issues they have truth on their side, the strongest party will win if politicians continue to back the trans campaign. In this war of words, the trans fascists will succeed in silencing every mention of the issue apart from fulsome praise for all things trans.

The anti-trans campaigners reject dire warnings that criticism can be hurtful, insisting that “sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me”. In this case, however, the words of the trans activists will not only hurt the right to free speech, but kill it off entirely.

COLUMN BY

ANN FARMER

Ann Farmer lives in the UK. She is the author of By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control, and the Abortion Campaign (CUAP, 2008); The Language of Life: Christians Facing the Abortion Challenge (St Pauls, 1995), and Prophets & Priests: the Hidden Face of the Birth Control Movement (St Austin Press, 2002).

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

McCabe Got Off?! – Outer Bands of a Category Five Hurricane – Stone, Barr, Smollet and a ton more…

/in , , , , /by

McCabe got off! Comey got off! Nah, strategy. Their all going down. Timing and optics. Keep reading please.

Yes. The storm is upon us. This is a category five hurricane and we have just entered the outer bands of an intensifying category five with winds far exceeding 200 mph. There is a concentrated eye in this storm arriving at high tide with scores and scores of random erupting tornadoes. Yes, the storm us kicking up the dust and AG Barr is busy. The deep state is being exposed and they are going down. Nothing will stop this, nothing.

The stage is being set. And yes, the storm is now upon us. The outer bands of this category five hurricane, this intelligence battle to destroy or resurrect America, that category five hurricane, is kicking up a lot of dirt. Seems confusing, after all there are so many random particles just flying around and slapping us in the face and blurring our vision making it hard to see the road we are on.  Know this. The stage is being set. The hunters have become the hunted. This is the shakedown and soon to be the take down. Mark my words. The greatest military intelligence operation of our time is well underway.

We Are Winning

Lt. Col. Vindman and his brother were terminated and escorted out. Next? The four Chinese that were officially charged for the Equifax data breach hacking have been arrested. And Rudy Giuliani’s files on Biden’s, Burisma and the Ukraine will now be reviewed by AG Barry as well as Lyndsey Graham stating that at least half of all those involved in the Russian Hoax are going to prison. This is what winning looks like.

The left is now vehemently going after AG Barr. The chatter against Barr is heavy right now including sign.moveon.org which calls for signing a petition to remove Barr. Why? Because those that scream the loudest have the most to hide. The hammer of justice is about to fall as the storm is kicking up the dust. Arrest may be imminent. Let’s look at just a smattering of what this dust is currently kicking up.

The indictments are prepared, thank you, in part, to Jeff Sessions. We are now up to 192 new judges appointed in the Federal Courts. Twenty-two and counting thus far fired or redesigned from the FBI. AG Barr is in control. Durham is getting ready to deliver the goods. Rudy has been activated. Lyndsey Graham has been activated. Epstein case is on-going. Assange’s day in a US court is coming. Impeachment and scores of other coup’ d’ etat attempts have not only all utterly failed, but have back fired on the Deep State, the Democrats and the media. Roger Stone’s sentence has been reduced. I see a Trump pardon on the horizon, timing. Timing is everything. Jussie Smollett has been indicted. He will do time. This brings in Kim Fox who is next on the Smollett chopping block which leads up to the Obama’s. General Flynn, in the end, will be vindicated. This is what winning looks like.

Exposure

The stage is being set. Q (QANON), has hit front and center by being revealed at the State of the Union by two honored guests by wearing a Q lapel pin. Accident? Who are you kidding! On February 5th Donald Trump Jr. on the Tucker Carlson show, as well as Eric Trump on the Laura Ingraham show, revealed to the world their Q lapel pins.  Notice no direct questions yet from the MSM as to what is this Q on their lapel pins? Humm. The stage is being set.

So who is panicking? Jerry Nadler for one. He sent a letter to AG Barr’s office as a desperate attempt to stop Rudy’s intel from entering into the justice dept. Oops, too late and Nadler has no case. Who else is panicking? Schiff, Pelosi, Schumer, the meida, and the Deep State are panicking thus the aggressive approach to discredit and remove AG Barr, pathetic desperate criminals they are. They have been caught. This is what EXPOSURE is all about. They are cornered and again, False Flags and social media glitches and disruptions are what we can expect next.

Expect suicides, “suicided’s” and terminal illness to be a trend for some years and over time, particularly after Prosecutor Durham’s criminal investigation against the DOJ /Deep State/Dems?FBI/CIA etc. hits the news.

Yes. The storm is upon us. This is category five hurricane and we have just entered the outer bands of an intensifying cat 5 with winds far exceeding 200 mph. There is a concentrated eye in this storm arriving at high tide with scores and scores of random erupting tornadoes. Yes, the storm us kicking up the dust and AG Barr is busy. The deep state is being exposed and they are going down. Nothing will stop this, nothing.

Can you imagine what happens when the truth about Barry Sotoro BHO is uncovered? If his Presidency was in fact fraudulent in and of itself? Humm, are all the bills and EO’s he signed valid? Did you know that he too, even though no longer a sitting President can be impeached? Ponder that for a moment. Carry on fellow patriots. Remember President Trump has told us that he has caught the swamp, indeed he has! Sit back and enjoy the show.

Clarion Call

This battle will rage on for the rest of our lives. Pray for our President and his family. No Trump-no hope. What we do right here, right now is for posterity. So when your children and grandchildren ask you “What were you doing when the global governance was being thrust down the throat of America and the world, what will your answer be? Freedom, it’s up to U.S.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Derangement Syndrome Explodes with Impeachment Acquittal

The FBI’s False Prosecution and Railroading of Roger Stone

/in , , , , , /by

“The U.S. prosecution service is eating at the soul of the American republic. It is an absolute danger to everyone.” –  Conrad Black

“Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” –  Thomas Jefferson

“Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it.  For them, the ends always seem to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag.” –  Margaret Thatcher

Roger Stone is a veteran Republican Strategist, New York Times Bestselling author, pundit and longtime consultant to the Trump Organization. Mr. Stone is the grandmaster of 10 Republican Presidential campaigns including his seminal role in Donald Trump’s political emergence. This is detailed in the recent PBS Documentary series on Donald Trump as well as in the award-winning Netflix Documentary “Get Me Roger Stone.” He also served as chairman of Donald Trump’s Presidential Exploratory Committee in 2000 and 2012.

Roger and his wife of 29 years, Nydia, live in Fort Lauderdale Florida.  President Trump was an honored guest at their wedding in Washington, D.C.  The Stones have two grown children and five grandchildren.  They are parishioners at Saint Anthony’s Catholic Church in Fort Lauderdale.

An intensive two-year multi-million-dollar investigation into Stone by the Special Counsel began in 2017.  They turned up no evidence of Russian Collusion, no collaboration with Wikileaks, and no evidence that Roger Stone had advance notice of the source or content of any of the Wikileaks disclosures, including the e-mails of John Podesta before their release.  Mueller indicted Roger Stone for lying to Congress.

The Gestapo

Gestapo tactics were obvious when on Friday, January 25, 2019, twenty-nine FBI agents in bullet proof protective gear and armed with submachine guns showed up pre-dawn at Roger Stone’s home.  There were seventeen vehicles, two of which were armored, two boats behind Roger’s home and one helicopter was circling overhead.  Link

Prosecutors knew Stone was represented by counsel and had spoken with Stone’s lawyer the previous day. Yet, their claim that Stone had to be arrested in this manner because he was considered a “flight risk” was disproven hours later when the government did not oppose his release without a cash bond. Stone had neither a valid passport nor a firearm when arrested.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson prohibited Stone’s lawyers from questioning the FBI’s actions, clearly designed to portray Stone negatively in the court of public opinion prior to trial.

FBI raids are not broadcast to the media, but one of Mueller’s FBI boys saw to it that this one was widely shown. Beirut-born Assyrian-American George Piro, Special Agent in Charge Miami, most likely authorized the raid and leaked the information to CNN.  The same thing was done to Paul Manafort who is dying in prison and is culpable for wrong doings, but so are many others on the left with ties to Russia and the Ukraine, many of whom were never charged including the Podesta brothers.

This was the start of the nightmare for the Stone family, all of which was begun by the Mueller Russia investigation and none of the people charged had anything to do with Russia.

The month prior to Stone’s Gestapo style arrest, on December 3, 2018, President Trump tweeted,

“I will never testify against Trump.” This statement was recently by Roger Stone, essentially stating that he will not be forced by a rogue and out of control prosecutor to make up lies and stories about President Trump. Nice to know some people still have guts.

Vindictive Prosecution

In order to secure search warrants on all Stone properties and possessions, prosecutors told a federal judge that they had probable cause of money laundering of foreign money in campaign contributions, mail fraud, wire fraud, and various cyber-crimes including unauthorized access to a computer server. In fact, prosecutors had no such evidence other than Stone’s Twitter feed.  They found no evidence of these crimes.

Stone was ultimately charged with lying to Congress and one count of witness tampering. Stone’s contrived indictment was crafted by Mueller Deputy Andrew Weissman based on the meta-tags on the copy of the indictment blast e-mailed to the press at 7am the morning of his arrest (even though a Federal Magistrate did not unseal the indictment until 9:30am that same morning) where Weissman left his initials.

Because of the “fake news” media black-out regarding Roger Stone’s vindictive prosecution by Mueller and the DOJ, few Americans understand how and why the long-time Trump political advisor and loyalist was convicted for lying to Congress, how flimsy the case against him was, and how he was railroaded in a Soviet-style show trial in Washington, DC.  Obama appointee, Judge Amy Berman Jackson, barred every powerful line of defense and carefully stacked an anti-Trump jury comprised totally of liberal Democrats.

The Jury Foreperson was former Democratic congressional candidate Tomeka Hart.  Her anti-Trump tweets were uncovered, including a March post about the Mueller investigation, which led to the charges against Stone and the pre-dawn raid.  Judge Andrew Napolitano has publicly stated that Stone deserves a new trial.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson

Robert Mueller was allowed to “Judge Shop.” Amy Berman Jackson also presided over the case of former Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort. She had him incarcerated prior to and during his trial, even in solitary confinement for nine months, despite the fact that he hadn’t been convicted of any crime. A motion for a different Judge and a different venue by Stone’s lawyers was denied.

Special Counsel argued that Stone’s case should be before Judge Amy Berman Jackson. They claimed his case was related to the still untried case in which Mueller charged 75 Russians for the alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee.  Prosecutors asserted that Stone’s e-mail address was found by a search warrant in that case, and that this case is related to Stone’s.  Where’s the proof?

They asserted that certain “stolen documents” are a topic in both cases, and second, that warrants used in the Russian hacker case surfaced “certain evidence that is relevant” to Stone’s case. In fact, no evidence from the Russian hacking case was introduced at Stone’s trial. Nothing in Stone’s indictment alleged he had access to “stolen documents.”

Obama appointee, Judge Jackson is a liberal activist Judge who dismissed the wrongful death lawsuit in Benghazi against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and the suit by the Catholic Church challenging Obamacare’s requirement that employers provide free coverage for contraception and abortion. Jackson’s decision on the Catholic Church was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Jackson ruled for the prosecution and against Stone’s lawyers on every motion in the case save one. It was reported that the Judge would smirk and roll her eyes at the jury whenever Stone’s lawyers were speaking in court.

The Prosecutors

Overseeing Stone’s case for the Office of Special Counsel was Jeannie Rhee, who represented Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation in the e-mail case. She gave the maximum contribution to Hillary’s campaigns in 2008 and 2016 as well as Obama’s in 2008.

Aaron Zelinsky, a former Huffington Post Columnist and Assistant U.S. Attorney worked under and was recommended by Acting AG Rod Rosenstein to assist Rhee in Stone’s prosecution.

Stone’s case would ultimately be prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Kravis who worked in the White House Counsel’s office during the Obama administration as associate counsel to the President.

Adam Jed, an Obama DOJ official who successfully argued that the act of Congress outlawing gay marriage was unconstitutional rounded out Mueller’s prosecution of Stone.

The Charges

Stone was charged with Violation of the False Statement Act, which requires not only that the statement be false but also that it be material and there was an intent to deceive. The prosecution claimed that Stone lied because “the truth wouldn’t look good for Donald Trump” is ludicrous in view of that fact that candidate Trump himself spoke openly about his campaign’s interest in the Wikileaks disclosure.

  • October 10, 2016 in Wilkes-Barre, PA: “This just came out,” Trump said. “WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks.”
  • October 12, 2016 in Ocala, FL: “This WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable,” Trump said. “It tells you the inner heart, you gotta read it.”
  • October 13, 2016 in Cincinnati, OH: “It’s been amazing what’s coming out on WikiLeaks.”
  • October 31, 2016 in Warren, MI: “Another one came in today,” Trump said. “This WikiLeaks is like a treasure trove.”
  • November 4, 2016 in Wilmington, OH: “Getting off the plane, they were just announcing new WikiLeaks, and I wanted to stay there, but I didn’t want to keep you waiting,” said Trump. “Boy, I love reading those WikiLeaks.”

In fact, Trump mentioned WikiLeaks 141 times in the month before the 2016 election, according to MSNBC. So, what was Stone “hiding?” Stone, who appeared before the committee voluntarily and not under subpoena, had no motive to lie about what was a completely legal political activity. There was no testimony at trial that he told any Trump campaign official anything about Wikileaks that they could not have read on Stone’s Twitter feed! The House Intelligence Committee voted to turn over Stone’s classified testimony at Mueller’s request but did not refer Stone for prosecution. The Committee’s final report did not find that Stone had mislead the Committee.

One count that Stone engaged in “witness tampering” is also false. Stone had already divulged to the House Intelligence Committee that progressive radio host and comic impressionist Randy Credico who Stone had worked with for criminal justice sentence reform was his source regarding the significance and timing of the coming Wikileaks disclosures to the House Intelligence Committee.

Stone urged Credico to assert his fifth amendment rights not to testify before the House Intelligence Committee because Credico said he feared public exposure in the progressive community because he had “helped elect Trump.” Credico admitted that his own lawyer advised him to assert his fifth amendment rights as did numerous reporters as well as the ACLU.

Charges by prosecutors that Stone had threatened to “steal Credico’s dog” to pressure him into silence were specifically denied by Credico at trial. On January 20th, 2020 Credico wrote a letter to Judge Jackson saying that he “never felt threatened by Stone.” Nonetheless, Stone was convicted on the charge of witness tampering.

The prosecution insisted that Credico was not Stone’s source regarding the general significance and October release of the Wikileaks disclosures despite Stone’s release of a chain of e-mails which indisputably prove that he was.

Testimony

Prosecutors insisted Dr. Jerry Corsi was the source of Stone’s limited knowledge of Wikileaks plans but produced no evidence whatsoever to prove this and pointedly did not call Corsi as a witness at Stone’s trial. A text exchange between Corsi and Stone on October 3rd showed Corsi saying, “Assange has nothing and has made a fool of himself.”

Judge Jackson would not allow Steve Bannon’s sworn testimony before the House Intelligence Committee saying it was hearsay when Bannon stated that Trump’s campaign had no “access point to Wikileaks.”

Convicted felon Rick Gates testified at Stone’s trial that he overheard a cell phone conversation between Stone and Trump while in an SUV on the way to LaGuardia Airport in August 2016. Gates admitted that he could not hear the actual conversation and federal prosecutors produced no phone record or additional witness to corroborate this claim, although Gates said there were two Secret Service Agents in the SUV. Both Trump and Stone have denied this conversation ever took place. In written responses to questions from Mueller, President Trump specifically denied ever discussing the Wikileaks disclosures. Gates, who was convicted of conspiracy and lying to the FBI received a 45-day sentence in return for his testimony against Stone and federal prosecutors declined to prosecute Gates for not paying taxes on millions of dollars of income he admitted he embezzled from his partner Paul Manafort.

Guilty on All Charges

The jury found Stone guilty of all charges. While one juror, a Beto O’Rourke contributor, told the Washington Post that the jury was “diverse in age, gender, race, ethnicity, income, education and occupation, his claim is misleading to say the least. The jury included no Republicans, no military veterans, no Roman Catholics, no black men and no one with less than a college education, but did include a former Democratic candidate for Congress, two lawyers who worked in democratic administrations, three jurors with ties to the FBI, three jurors with ties to the DOJ, and two jurors with ties to the CIA, as well as an Obama appointee to the position of Communications Director of a Federal Department. It is questionable whether any Republican can get a fair trial in the District of Columbia.

The underlying premise of the federal indictment of Roger Stone contained in the first two pages of his indictment is that the Russians hacked the DNC and provided this allegedly hacked data to Wikileaks. All of the questions Stone allegedly lied about relate to this alleged action, yet Judge Amy Berman Jackson would not allow Stone’s lawyers to disprove this by calling forensic witnesses as they had for whistleblower Bill Binney of the National Security Agency. Having based their prosecution of Stone on this premise federal prosecutors insisted it was irrelevant.

Judge Jackson barred Stone’s attorneys from raising any questions regarding the misconduct of the special prosecutor, the DOJ, the FBI or members of Congress. “There will be no investigating of the investigators in my courtroom,” she said despite the appointment of Special Counsel John Durham, by AG Bill Barr to do exactly that.

Deep State

Congressman Adam Schiff admitted his coordination with the office of the Special Counsel in violation of House Rules in a letter to Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, but Judge Jackson prohibited Stone’s lawyers from pursuing this evidence of a “set-up” by Schiff.

The Washington Post reported that Mueller had an advance copy of Stone’s classified testimony (another violation of House Rules) prior to the full committee voting to release the testimony to the Special Counsel at Mueller’s request but did so with no referral for prosecution for perjury.

Schiff, Congressman Eric Swalwell and Congressman Joaquin Castro all predicted immediately after Stone’s testimony that he would be indicted for perjury, impossible for them to know without having seen the fruits of surveillance on Stone.

The Gag Order

I do not believe gag orders are constitutional.  General Flynn suffered under the same order for years. This unconstitutional order disallows public defense of charges when one is innocent until proven guilty. Yet, the prosecution is allowed to join with their Deep State mainstream media friends to destroy the innocent victims before trial.

Even after conviction, Stone is still under a gag order imposed by Judge Jackson.  While Stone has been gagged by the Judge based on the claim that his public defense of himself would “taint the jury pool” the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, The New York Times, the Daily Beast , Vox, Vice and others orchestrated an 18-month drumbeat of leaks from Mueller claiming that Stone would be prosecuted for treason and conspiracy against the United States and would prove to be the link between the Trump Campaign and Russia. None of this would prove true.

Roger’s wife, Nydia Stone has said publicly that her husband was prosecuted because he refused a deal to falsely testify against the president regarding the content of more than 25 phone calls between candidate Trump and Stone in 2016, which was proposed by prosecutors just prior to the transmittal of the Special Counsel’s Report to AG Bill Barr.

Conclusion

Roger Stone was indicted for lying to Congress despite the failure of Mueller to find any underlying crime for Stone to lie about. At trial, prosecutors provided evidence that Stone tried (unsuccessfully) to learn the content of the announced Wikileaks disclosures (which is not a crime). Mueller criminalized perfectly legal political activities in the indictment and conviction of Stone.

Stone was the last victim of Mueller’s witch hunt. He was railroaded in a vindictive, politically motivated prosecution by a biased Judge and a stacked jury. He now faces years in prison. He and his family have been bankrupted, they’ve lost their home, their savings, their insurance and Stone’s ability to make a living. Roger wife, Nydia Stone, is deaf and has no means to support herself if Roger is incarcerated for what amounts to a life sentence.

Over 150,000 Americans have now signed a petition urging President Trump to “Free Roger Stone.” President Trump has called Stone’s prosecution a hoax, he should pardon Roger Stone as an act of both mercy and justice now. At a minimum President Trump should commute Roger Stone’s sentence immediately after sentencing as prosecutors are demanding instant remand of Roger Stone into custody. Please urge the President to do so.

Obvious to many is the Deep State targeting and prosecution of those who supported Donald J. Trump for U.S. President.  The real criminals still walk free.

Stone is scheduled to be sentenced February 20th, 2020.

Part 2 shortly.

© All rights reserved.

Mr President, Don’t Go Changin’

/in , , , /by

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace implied that Trump behaved vengefully by firing LTC Vindman after his impeachment acquittal. Wallace’s guest, Republican advisor Karl Rove said Trump should be moving the country forward after his acquittal rather than passionately calling out the Democrats.

I thought, “Are you guys nuts?

Have you not been paying attention?” Deranged Democrats launched an unfair, corrupt and baseless impeachment hoax against Trump and the American people. Their hoax cruelly destroyed the lives of innocent people associated with Trump, while viciously attacking Trump’s family.

In their outrageous arrogance, Democrats actually tried to impeach Trump for simply functioning within his presidential authority and performing his duty to the American people.

Despite Trump’s acquittal, Democrats and fake news media continue filling the airwaves with their lie that Trump is guilty of crimes against America and must be removed immediately.

So Mr Rove and Mr Wallace, how does Trump play nice with a political party that wants him politically dead? Why aren’t you guys scolding Democrats and fake news media for their inability to move forward for the good of the country?

I thank God that Trump does not listen to Washington insiders and stays on offense. It is time that Trump take out the treasonous trash in his administration; people who are hellbent on stopping his America-first agenda.

Trump fired 70 Obama holdovers. Right-on bro!

Trump fired Col. Vindman. Excellent! LTC Vindman played a role in Democrats’ kangaroo court coup to remove Trump from office.

Trump tweeted video of Pelosi’s temper-tantrum at the SOTU. I am really thrilled by Trump’s video tweet because for decades Democrats have gotten away with portraying themselves as strong advocates for minorities, women, and blue collar Americans. Pelosi’s behavior at the SOTU exposed them for the mean-spirited cold-hardhearted elitists they truly are. 18 million have seen this video. Please continue sharing it.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1225553117929988097

Trump exposing Democrats’ corruption keeps Democrats and their fake news media tag-team partners off balanced. Every disgusting dirty trick in their “Takeout The Republican” playbook has failed on Trump. Their repeated failure has driven them totally insane; openly instigating violence against Trump and anyone caught wearing a MAGA cap in public.

CNN’s Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon irresponsibly justified progressives physically attacking MAGA cap wearers. https://fxn.ws/2w0RSsH

Despite Trump’s long list of inconceivable remarkable achievements for We the People, Republican advisors like Carl Rove still seek to transform Trump into an acceptable Washington DC Republican politician. Republicans behaving like wimps in Washington DC has gotten us into this mess, on the verge of losing our Founding Fathers’ divinely inspired vision for America.

I am elated that Trump stays on offense, not allowing Democrats, fake news media and deep state defenders of the status quo to dictate his behavior. Trump’s agenda is extremely simple and straight forward. If something is good for America, he does it. If it is not, he rejects or reverses it.

And yet, some who are supposedly on our side persist in scolding Trump for not behaving more presidential; too outspoken about exposing Democrats and fake news media. Because 92% of media coverage of Trump is negative (lies), if Trump does not tell the people the facts, they will not know.

God knew we needed a courageous no-holds-barred America-first bull in the White House to bring our country back from the edge of destruction.

My wife Mary’s mentor, Mary Kay Ash of Mary Kay Cosmetics said “Leadership flows from the top down.” That is so true. I call it the “Trump Effect.” More and more Americans are courageously speaking out and pushing back against all the insane anti-American and anti-Christian initiatives that Obama gave progressives a green-light to force down our throats.

Thanks to Trump’s outspokenness, more and more Americans have begun to see Democrats for the power-obsessed scoundrels they truly are. A female supermarket checkout clerk said this to me, my wife and a guy wearing a “Trump 2020” cap. “I’m not suppose to say it, but I’m with you guys.” Referring to Democrats, she added, “If we are not dependent, they can’t pull our strings.”

Everywhere I go, I see and hear from everyday Americans, black and white, who support Trump. They understand who and what we need to keep America on the road to peerless new heights of greatness.

Like that old Billy Joel song, don’t go changin’ Mr President. We love you just the way you are!

© All rights reserved.

Abortions and Perpetrated Fraud in America: My response to ‘NYC 2020 FASHION WEEK’

/in , , , , , , , /by

We have been subjected to so many lies, frauds, deceptions, and distortions for almost three years that most people are disoriented and puzzled. Who is doing that to us? You can answer the question, if you remember my definition of Stalinist Political Correctness made in 2017: “… Political correctness is a Stalinist policy, driven by a political agenda, a skillfully crafted design of a quintessential system of lies, fraud, and a long-term strategy of war against Western civilization to create a One World Socialist Government under the Kremlin’s rule.”  Stalinist Political Correctness is a mechanism of preventing the Truth from getting out, it is aimed at hiding or masking the Truth.

Several years ago, an editor of the monthly news magazine Whistleblower, David Kupelian said:

“Donald Trump is right about political correctness. It is like a disease that has infected America and is destroying it. The cure is truth, spoken boldly and courageously, but without hate. That’s what readers will find in abundance in The Thought Police,” 2016.

WOW! How right David Kupelian was several years ago. Unfortunately, America hasn’t learned to discern Stalinist Political Correctness yet and our culture has greatly suffered. Trump’s negative attitude to PC made me his supporter, because I knew PC and had written about it even before Trump’s announcement. Political Correctness is a monumental weapon to destroy successful capitalism and the political system left to us by the Founding Fathers. The Democrat Party has used PC against the American Republic and conservative Republicans for decades…

Abortions: Political Correctness and the Pro-Choice Fraud

It is painful to see how Stalinist Political Correctness continues deceiving and misleading the American public in the 21st century. Abortion is an issue that divides our country and a vivid example of the Dems’ work, armed with Stalinist PC. Their policy has a long history since the 60s. The pro-choice/pro-life framework overlooked the many hidden ways in which the law impacts women’s reproductive freedom. What the abortion debate left out was logic: Yes, logic and knowledge of Stalinist Political Correctness.

 In my articles written in 2010-2013, I gave several examples of the PC machinery that infiltrated all spheres of our society: politics, culture, art, education, and so on. Those columns have been deleted by the corrupt Obama’s FBI. Hence, I will present this example in the application of PC exercised by the Democrats again. Abortion is the real issue that divides America, especially the women of America. I had several abortions in my past life in the USSR and it is hard to describe the awful feelings I had after each experience. Besides excruciating physical pain (a surgery without anesthesia), I felt a psychological doom, a combination of grief, guilt, and a black hole in my entire existence. In America, I also found a description of women’s feelings, but it was much softer than mine.

“Many women with unplanned pregnancies believe abortion is their only option. This is what their boyfriends, family, and culture tell them. In moments of vulnerability and confusion, they end up making a choice they never wanted.” What’s a human life worth? Townhall.com Nov. 9, 2015. It is a very true description of a pregnant women’s life—confusion and vulnerability. I felt that way exactly… Don’t forget—a pregnant woman feels confusion and vulnerability in any culture and country she lives due to the pregnancy, which is changing the chemistry of her entire body and mind, regardless of her race and nationality.

 The Mechanism of Fraud Political Correctness Creates

Above mentioned Editor David Kupelian is right: The cure is truth, spoken boldly. Yes, and you are the witnesses of the system of incredible lies by the Democrats in following Stalin’s PC. Let’s go to the Truth and analyze the mechanism of Stalinist precepts: They are:

  1. Establishment of a false premise for a future theory or action.
  2. Usage of the false premise as a foundation of the theory or action.

While introducing Stalin in my books, among other epithets, I called him a charlatan of a highest class. Today, I’d like to show you the dreadful harm, which has been brought to the world by Stalinism and his PC. Please, look at the real definition of the word ‘Premise’ in the Dictionary:

LOGIC

Noun

1.

a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion.

“if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true”

Verb

1.

base an argument, theory, or undertaking on.

“the reforms were premised on our findings”

The first example I bring is a misleading meaning to the term “pro-choice,” inculcated by the intimidating power of political correctness used by the Democrats. The issue has a long history which grew as a snow ball to the gigantic cultural fraud due to PC. The premise is clear—prevention of pregnancy. Be attentive to the premise—prevention of pregnancy. The Democrats just moved the time span one bit further and the Republicans, as usual, swallowed the fraudulent hook.

The real pregnancy comes to life by the sexual act and the actual choice is a prevention of sexual act. The partners, especially a woman has a choice before a sexual act, it is action taken before the sexual act that prevents pregnancy and not actions after the fact. Using PC, the Democrats just reprogrammed the human mind, moving the time span and making the choice after the sexual act, which is a fraud. The abortion issue has become a tool for the Democrats to undermine our traditional culture, and our set of values. Just count the disproportional murder of black fetuses and fatherless black families to see the enormous cultural implications of this leftist fraud.  Unfortunately, this fraud has affected all ethnic groups in America. You see it today–eighteen percent of pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) ended in abortion in 2017.

The issue of abortion is quite complicated one. Besides politics, it is the actual application of medicine mixed with three participants or subjects: the fetus, the woman’s will and the action of a doctor directed to abort the fetus. It doesn’t matter how you see a fetus, an alive child or not—the fetus is there, an integral part of the abortion procedure itself. The scandal revealing Planned Parenthood being related to the sale of babies’ body parts just confirms my point. A woman has a choice, a free choice in America when she is facing and intending to have a sexual encounter. Yes, it is her body… She ought to decide before the sexual act—THAT is the real choice for any women…

Now, please, combine the previous topic of a fraudulent time issue and abortion, spread nationwide for four decades in America to see an extremely negative cultural implication domestically, created and supported by the Democrats. More than 58 million babies have been aborted in America since 1973, more than 17 million of those were black babies. These are the awful numbers. They testify to the dramatic changes in our culture and moral slide if not outright degradation of our value system successfully created by the Democrat’s fraud. America still has not found the solution…What a shame!

Perpetrated Fraud by Stalinist Charlatans in America

The Democrats have gone even further in foreign policy, sabotaging our national security. Let’s take as an example the nuclear deal with Iran: the false premise was established by Obama in the beginning of the discussion—nuclear deal or war. The alternative given to us by Obama was a false one and created in the best traditions of Stalinist PC against the American interests and our national security. The premise was FALSE. There were definitely several alternatives to deal with Iran. The logical one was–To double the sanctions that already existed and to punish Iran for being the biggest sponsor of global terror while proclaiming “Death to America!” The double sanctions in reality could prevent any war and thus serve our national security interests. Obama did just the opposite. You can read the details of a fraud in my book: What is Happening to America?  The Hidden Truth of Global Destruction, Xlibris, 2012

Knowledge of Russia, her Security Services, and Stalinist Charlatans in America is a must. I have warned you with this refrain for the last thirty years, because I know the importance of this topic. Today, it is not only the Stalinist PC, lies, deception, and fraud confronting our values and our exceptional political system. Today, we have three Democrat-candidates, sponsored by the Russian Security Services and competing for the U.S. Presidency—they are arrogantly talking about the shape of our democracy! Mayor Pete is not “a good alternative” to old Bernie–Pete is an ideological twin-brother of another Stalinist Charlatan–Saul Alinski. Our dysfunctional FBI have not vetted Dems’ candidates, as a result we can have the third America’s Manchurian President! It is a reality in America today… Alas, Sen. Tom Cotton is not the FBI Director…

Our corrupt-dysfunctional FBI and CIA in both Democrat and Republican administrations overslept a collapsing fraudulent Socialism in the Soviet Union and allowed an abysmal Socialist fraud to become a legitimate issue in America: America’s Socialist mafia in cahoots with Stalinist Charlatans created a Socialist movement in the heart of America’s Congress—the House of Representatives. You saw the result: how, in militant hatred to Trump’s SOTU speech, it was been ripped up—with criminal intent to confront our unique political system, left to us by our Founding Fathers. Pay attention to Bill Maher: he loves Mayor Pete and considers Bernie Sanders as an authentically one…!!??

My fellow Americans!

Enough is enough! The momentum in America’s history has come to unite in behind President Donald J Trump, defending an exceptionalism of America, and our system of government from enemies foreign and domestic. And Mighty God will help us!!!

To be continued www.simonapipko1.com and www.drrichswier.com/author/spipko/.

© All rights reserved.

The transgender suicide myth exposed: What should really terrify parents is the mutilation of their child’s healthy body.

/in , , , , , , /by

Jazz Jennings, star of the TLC reality show “I Am Jazz,” has been sharing her transition story from male to female since she was six years old. Now she is 19, bound for Harvard, and convalescing from last year’s “bottom surgery” – removal of the male bits.

The sixth season of “I Am Jazz”, which began last month, features her third operation. There has been a complication and she may have to have a fourth.

But you couldn’t say that it wasn’t a family affair. Before the surgery, her mother threw a “farewell to penis” party for her. Jazz made a short speech. “For 17 and a half years, I have lived with this body part that I have not wanted. And even though I’ve grown to love my penis for what it is, I’m happy to say goodbye. So let’s cut it off!” And then she plunged the knife into the cake.

How does Jazz feel about her medical issues? The trans-friendly New York Times interviewed her.

Finally undergoing bottom surgery has allowed me to confidently flourish in my new body and dismantle any remaining gender dysphoria. For the first time, my body fully reflected my soul — how I felt on the inside. The surgery didn’t solve all of my issues, but it did offer a sense of peace and comfort that wasn’t otherwise there.

That phrase, “For the first time, my body fully reflected my soul”, captures the rationale for transgender surgery. For males, this involves removing the penis and testicles and creating a vagina; for females, a double mastectomy and sometimes construction of a cosmetic penis.

Only a serious reason could justify this brutal mutilation of an 18-year-old’s healthy body. The ghastly and perfectly foreseeable consequences are sterility, possible surgical complications and a lifetime of medication to maintain the appearance of the chosen sex.

That reason is the risk of suicide. “Better a live daughter than a dead son,” is the attitude of parents who, like Jazz’s mother and father, have supported children who wish to transition. The Trevor Project, the world’s largest suicide prevention organization for LGBTQ youth, claims that “more than half of transgender and non-binary youth have seriously considered suicide”.

Similarly, in a New York Times op-ed earlier this month, Jack Turban, a psychiatrist specializing in transgender children at Massachusetts General Hospital, says that it is “dangerous” to forbid “gender confirmation surgery” for young people.

But what proof is there that trans kids will commit suicide? As it turns out, notwithstanding the importance of this statistic, very little.

As Turban notes in his op-ed, he is a co-author of two recent papers in medical journals which attempt to prove that transgender kids feel less suicidal if they embark on transition from one sex to another.

Neither of them is convincing.

The first was published in JAMA Psychiatry last September. It claims that there is an association between “gender identity conversion efforts” and “increased odds of lifetime suicide attempts”.

However, as other doctors pointed out, Turban’s statistics are methodologically flawed.

For one thing, they are based on a convenience sample — a group of people who are easy to contact. In this case it was 27,715 people recruited from LGBT+ organisations who responded to an on-line survey conducted in 2015 by the National Center for Transgender Equality. The authors of the survey were all trans activists and none was a scientist or a doctor.

The study in JAMA Psychiatry also failed to control for comorbid psychiatric illness — a key predictor of suicidal tendencies. Suicidal ideas could have been due to other mental health issues, like depression or autism.

Furthermore, it recruited people who identified as transgender, rather than people who suffered from gender dysphoria. As one critic pointed out, “The number of persons who at one point suffered from GD but no longer do far outnumbers those who have persistent and consistent GD and thus identify as transgender.”

Turban’s other paper has similar problems. It was published earlier this month in the leading journal Pediatrics. He told readers of the New York Times that he had found that “access to puberty blockers during adolescence is associated with lower odds of transgender young adults considering suicide”. His message was that doctors who prescribe drugs which suppress the onset of puberty are wiser than doctors who adopt a “wait and see” approach. Delay in satisfying the kids’ demands could end in suicide.

It’s a strong claim and it was greeted as a sensational result in the media. But not only was it based on weak evidence (the same survey and convenience sample he used in the previous article), the evidence undermines his claim.

Let’s take a closer look.

“Puberty blockers can literally save the lives of transgender teens, new study confirms” was the headline in Pink News, and other media were nearly as supportive.

None of the journalists appears to have read the fine print, apart from Malcolm Clark, a Twitter gadfly of trans activism and co-founder of the LGB Alliance. He zeroed in on Table 3, which compares transgenders who had puberty blockers and transgenders who never had them.

These figures are amazing.

The percentage of people who thought about suicide and actually made a plan to do it in the past 12 months is nearly the same for people who had puberty blockers (55.6%) and for those who did not (58.2%). Nearly the same! So were the blockers really helpful?

It gets worse. The percentage of people who thought about suicide, made a plan and attempted suicide were higher for those who had blockers (24.4% versus 21.5%).

And worse again. The percentage of people who attempted suicide and were hospitalized in the last 12 months was DOUBLE for those who had blockers (45.5% versus 22.8%).

How could Turban and his colleagues possibly massage their data to conclude that puberty blockers prevent suicide? By focusing on results from lifetime thoughts about suicide and suicide attempts. Those are higher for people who did not have puberty blockers. But memories of a whole lifetime are bound to be foggy; memories of the past 12 months will be sharper and more accurate.

Let’s sum up the case for the prosecution. Turban takes his data from a survey conducted on-line by trans activists who recruited respondents on LGBT websites. Dodgy.

He finds that the rate of hospitalization after a suicide attempt is twice as high amongst people who had puberty blockers. Gobsmacking.

And so … trans kids need puberty blockers to keep them from committing suicide. Illogical.

For parents, it must be terrifying when trans kids talk about suicide. But most of them eventually break through their emotional confusion and will be happy with their gender identity. In most cases, parents just need to wait out the storm.

What should really terrify them is the reality of transitioning. Like poor Jazz Jennings, their kids could end up mutilated for life – and still they might be at risk of committing suicide.

COLUMN BY

MICHAEL COOK

Michael Cook is editor of MercatorNet. Michael Cook likes bad puns, bushwalking and black coffee. He did a BA at Harvard University in the US where it was good for networking, but moved to Sydney where it wasn’t. He also did a PhD on an obscure corner of Australian literature. He has worked as a book editor and magazine editor and has published articles in magazines and newspapers in the US, the UK and Australia. Currently he is the editor of BioEdge, a newsletter about bioethics, and MercatorNet. He also writes a bioethics column for Australasian Science and contributes occasional op-ed pieces to newspapers and websites in the US, UK and Australia.

RELATED ARTICLE: Young people aspire to marriage, so let’s offer them more than a Valentine

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

We have a dossier on Rush Limbaugh

/in , , /by

For those who have discovered The People’s Cube only recently: we have been following Rush Limbaugh very closely throughout the years and have compiled an impressive Rush Dossier, detailing his many exploits.

In lieu of a formal briefing, here are some links all comrades must review and memorize for future reference. You don’t know when, you don’t know where, but you will be tested.

Rush Limbaugh Hails the People Cube’s Editorial Cartoon

The notorious author of See I Told You So described our “Founding Fathers” illustration by saying “It’s a great, great, great cartoon because this is how libs see America today.” See it here: Story #7: Great Editorial Cartoon on the Founding Fathers. He thought it was a parody!

IMPORTANT UPDATE:
We have been discovered and interviewed by Mr. Limbaugh live on his show. As a result, so many people logged in to this site that our hosting server melted into a puddle of recyclable precious metals. Click here to see how it went.

Rush Limbaugh Discovers Tomb of Rugged Individual

On the heels of James Cameron’s discovery of a tomb of Jesus came an announcement by talk radio host Rush Limbaugh that he had discovered a coffin with the remains of another historical character that progressive scientists consider a mythical creature – the Rugged Individual.

Media Matters Seeks To Silence Rush Limbaugh

The Associated Press reports this morning that Media Matters is launching a radio campaign against Rush Limbaugh, hypocritically refusing his apology and using his Sandra Fluke comments as a club to destroy his platform.

Rush Limbaugh Enemy Of The State

It’s not paranoia if they’re really after you.

I Denounce Elton John!

I find myself having to destroy my entire Elton John CD collection to raise awareness of how devastated and outraged I am that he would sing at the wedding of none other than that loudmouthed, hatemongering, wants-Obama-to-fail Rush Limbaugh!

Utter Outrage Fridays: Limbaugh Defies the Party Once Again!

 

Rush Limbaugh – the murderous capitalist enabler responsible for everything bad in the world –has single-handedly slapped Senate Majority leader Reid (Communist – Nevada) right in the face! I kid you not, Comrades! He is one upping us yet again and we cannot let him get away with this!

David Frum: Greedy Limbaugh Stole My Crown Of Evil

Hi, I’m David Frum – the rabid right-wing ultra-compassionate conservative, the uber-centrist, and the monster of moderate extremism. My unthinking fanatical followers have dubbed me el-Frumbo, a lovable little sleazeball, and Doctor Doom of Democracy.

Progressives: Rage is our Bread and Butter!

Just today the bushwah propagandist Rush Limbaugh said with regards to Sen. Schumer that he can’t understand how someone who is so successful and has always had a good, comfortable life can be so perpetually enraged at everything that happens.

Premature Eulogy for Rush Limbaugh

I stumbled upon Rush Limbaugh’s talk radio program while driving my Suburban way back in the late 1980s, when liberal politicians and the uniformly lockstep-liberal media were relentlessly trashing Ronald Reagan, calling him a bigoted cowboy war-monger…

RELATED SATIRE:

WOKEY DICK: New diversity version of literary classic

Mitt Romney cuts off his nose to spite his Republican face

Schiff: Trump to dump Alaska and become King of Florida

Schiff loses at Wheel of Fortune, can’t name whistleblower

Schiff quotes his Party Founders (Lenin & Stalin) to Senate

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire by Red Square from The Peoples Cube is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

PODCAST: The Democrats Are Running Out of Time

/in , , , /by

As of this writing, President Trump delivered his 2020 State of the Union address, was acquitted by the Senate of charges of impeachment by the House, and we are now less than nine months away from the 2020 election. Now that the President has been exonerated, and with little time left in the 116th Congress, what can we expect from the Democrats? As the smoke clears, it would be nice if both parties sat down and tended to the nation’s business. There is obviously a lot to do, such as infrastructure, lowering the price of medicine, addressing education needs, and much more. I would like to believe we could begin again and get some of these pressing issues under control, but I am not optimistic.

Thus far, the only major milestone passed by the 116th Congress is the USMCA trade deal which was initiated by the President. Other than that, we have been in gridlock as the Democrats have practiced “resistance.” The big question now is, will they continue to do so following the failed impeachment? As much as I would like to believe otherwise, I see no reason for them to change and, unfortunately, they will continue to resist this President as long as he is in office.

The fact the Democrats have been unable to dislodge this President, and watch his popularity grow in the process, fills them with rage.

There are rumblings they will continue to issue subpoenas for former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton and Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to testify before Congress. As in the first impeachment hearing, the intent is to besmirch the President’s character. Should the Congressional Democrats persist in this endeavor, they will likely be committing political suicide as the country has had enough, except for the far-left who is Hell-bent on the destruction of President Trump.

There is no better example of the Democrats’ hatred for the President than that of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA12) ripping up the President’s manuscript following his State of the Union address on February 4th. Essentially, it represented a temper tantrum. The far-left may have loved it, but the rest of the country found it rather disturbing for the Speaker to act this way. This speaks volumes of the political polarity in this country and the unwillingness to seek a way to work together. This will undoubtedly taint the reputation of the party’s leadership, not only of Speaker Pelosi, but House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD5), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA28), Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY10), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL).

Such histrionics by the Democrats leads me to only one conclusion, the Congressional Democrats will remain at war with President Trump and any other future Republican successor. This will be on the minds of voters as we go into the election. Consider this, even with an obstinate Congress, President Trump has still been able to make great progress. The voters will then begin to ask how far he can go with a cooperative Congress, and vote accordingly.

The next Congress, the 117th, will be installed on January 3, 2021. If the 116th cannot make any measurable progress in the next nine months, there will likely be some significant changes in the 117th.

At this late date though, the Democrats have no choice but to play their hand out to the bitter end and let the chips fall where they may. Only a national election with a shift in the leadership of the House will change their strategy.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also do not forget my books, “How to Run a Nonprofit” and “Tim’s Senior Moments”, both available in Printed and eBook form.

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

22-Year Old Republican Matthew Weinberg to Run for NY State Senate in District 38

/in , , , , /by

SUFFERN, N.Y., Feb. 12, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Sparked by disunity within his district, depressed property values due to some of the highest property and school taxes in the nation, and a fresh, unfettered passion for honesty and bi-partisanship, 22-year old Matthew Weinberg has announced his candidacy for New York Senate District 38 in Metro New York City today.

Running on a platform of School Choice, Tax Reform, and a vision for a state-of-the-art hospital for his district, Weinberg hopes to make life in Rockland and Westchester counties what its constituents have been dreaming for.

“Throughout my time in politics, I have seen both sides of the political spectrum. I interned for both Congresswoman Nita Lowey and the late Senator John McCain. My background working in both major political parties will enable me to bring the people in my district together once and for all, and to introduce solutions that work for everyone” said Weinberg.

A product of both the public and private school systems in Rockland County, Weinberg appreciates that each system has its strengths. “Why shouldn’t we be able to allocate our school tax dollars to the school of our choice? Freedom is what our nation was founded upon. Why shouldn’t families be able to live the lifestyle they want?”

Nevertheless, Weinberg is frustrated by “school taxes that rob people of their savings. They are simply outrageous!” Weinberg chose to run on the Republican ticket because, “under Governor Cuomo and the Democratic Party, our taxes continue to skyrocket forcing people to leave in droves. It is time for a tax plan that works for all New Yorkers.” Weinberg is pledging to bring the taxes down dramatically across the entire state of New York.

Weinberg promises to keep Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security strong while dramatically improving the quality of healthcare in his area. “I don’t have the greatest confidence in our run-down hospitals. We must build a new state-of-the-art medical facility immediately.”

Weinberg is excited about the potential for his district and wants to do all he can to make it the best place to live in New York.

Those who wish to learn more about Weinberg can visit his website at www.MatthewRWeinberg.com

The Spielbergs Donate Big Bucks to Dem Super PACs

/in , , , , /by

It isn’t only Hollywood’s messaging that is undermining America. Behind the scenes, its big money is funding anti-American organizations as well.

Filmmaker Steven Spielberg and his wife, actress Kate Capshaw, have given more than $3.5 million to Democrats since December, with some of the biggest amounts going to the organization behind the malfunctioning mobile app that crashed during last week’s Iowa caucuses, according to Breitbart News.

In recent months, the Hollywood power couple has also given money to the campaigns of California Democrat Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Ted Lieu. The pair also has donated a combined $1 million to PACRONYM, the political fundraising arm of ACRONYM, whose subsidiary Shadow, Inc. created the failed mobile app.

Spielberg also donated $500,000 to Priorities USA Action and an equivalent sum to American Bridge 21st Century, which has ties to Media Matters for America. Spielberg gave another $500,000 to the Senate Majority PAC. Capshaw made equivalent donations to the same three Democrat super PACs.

Steven Spielberg

31 Known Connections

In February 2008 Spielberg collaborated with Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen to organize an exclusive Beverly Hills fundraiser for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, an event that reportedly netted $1 million. Nevertheless, in June 2008 Spielberg officially endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton as his first choice for president, “convinced” that she was “the most qualified candidate to lead us from her first day in the White House.”

During the 2012 presidential campaign season, Spielberg advised the Obama re-election team on how to effectively use advertising messages to smear Republican challenger Mitt Romney as a heartless multi-millionaire who was indifferent to the troubles of ordinary folks. For example, commercials backed by Spielberg’s creative advice deceptively depicted Romney’s investment firm, Bain Capital, as an evil entity whose refusal to provide health insurance coverage for one particular woman had resulted in her dying from cancer.

To learn more about Spielberg, click on the profile link here.