PODCAST: Packing The Court

/in , , , , /by

During the 2020 campaign, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden proposed developing a bipartisan dialog regarding the number of justices to sit on the Supreme Court. This occurred following the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett as Associate Justice, thereby putting conservatives firmly in control of the Court. Biden’s proposal was all part of his “unity” themed campaign he promised to America which, of course, was a bald faced lie. Instead of such a dialog, the Democrat controlled Congress has jumped the gun and is now proposing four more seats being added to the court which would enable the Democrats to take political control of the Court.

This legislation is being introduced by Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-NY10), Mondaire Jones (D-NY17), and Hank Johnson (D-GA4), all Democrats. Republicans, of course, were never consulted. So much for “unity.” If enacted, this would allow the court to grow from nine seats to thirteen. In reality, this is a thinly veiled attempt to politicize the supreme court in favor of leftist doctrine and a genuine threat to our Republic.

This is certainly not the first time politicians have tried to change the makeup of the Supreme Court. Let’s begin with this fact; the Court’s size had been set at nine since the passage of the Judiciary Act of 1869, over 150 years ago.

As a point of history, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D) also tried to change the makeup of the court during his administration. Prior to this, his government work programs during the Great Depression were regularly rejected by the Court, thereby infuriating the President. To overcome this problem, FDR introduced the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. This would have allowed him to appoint a justice for every current justice over the age of 70 which, at the time, was six, thereby expanding the court to fifteen and presumably giving the president the votes needed to pass his legislation.

Fortunately, the Bill was defeated as it was considered by Congress as nothing more than an attempt by FDR to pack the court. Both Republicans and Democrats voted against it, including FDR’s Vice President at the time, John Nance Garner.

Just as in 1937, the 2021 Bill is based on political bias and is rightfully considered a court packing scheme by the Democrats. It will be interesting to see how Democrats vote on this legislation this go around. I suspect they will vote along party lines.

My question is simple; if the Democrats insist on doing this, why stop at a thirteen seat Court? Why not 99? Suppose the legislation is passed and thirteen becomes the magic number. What would the Democrats do if the Court is taken over by conservative justices? Increase the number of seats again? Frankly, any number other than nine would be considered a farce.

In other words, let’s uphold the Judiciary Act of 1869 and Keep It Simple Stupid.

Keep theFaith!

P.S. – For a listing of my books, click HERE.

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

Interior Enforcement And The Border Crisis

/in , , , , , , /by

The one issue intentionally ignored by our corrupt political elites.

There is no shortage of news coverage about the immigration crisis on the U.S.-Mexican border, with much of the coverage focusing on the horrific conditions in which unaccompanied minors are being kept.

What is almost never discussed, however, is how the lack of interior enforcement of our immigration laws within the United States fails to deter and actually serves to encourage massive levels of illegal immigration. What is also ignored is how this lack of interior enforcement undermines national security, public safety, public health, and the jobs and wages of Americans.

Consider that if you ask most folks how many “border states” the U.S. has, you are likely to be told that there are four: California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.

In reality the United States has 50 border states. Any state that lies along the northern and the southern border or along America’s 95,000 miles of coastline is also a border state, as are those states that have international airports. As I have written about before, the breakdown of the Southwest border is only the tip of the iceberg.

Meanwhile, radical Democrats are now calling for the dismantling of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Biden administration has taken the unprecedented measure of issuing an executive order prohibiting ICE agents from making warrantless arrests of illegal aliens. Given this and the Biden administration opposing other such security measures, it can truly be said that “Biden Cripples Immigration Law Enforcement” because his executive orders handcuff agents and set law violators free.

On February 18, 2021 the Washington Post reported that a “Biden memo for ICE officers points to fewer deportations and strict oversight.” According to the Post, ICE agents “will need preapproval from a senior manager before trying to deport anyone who is not a recent border crosser, a national security threat or a criminal offender with an aggravated-felony conviction.” The Biden administration expects this policy “to result in a steep drop in immigration arrests and deportations.”

In other words, with a mere stroke of his pen, Biden has virtually eliminated the statutory authority that ICE agents have to make warrantless arrests of suspected illegal aliens. This sends a clear message to the agents, that anything they do can (and likely will) be used against them.

Furthermore so-called “sanctuary” policies implemented by numerous mayors and even some governors further undermine any remaining vestiges of interior enforcement and hence undermine national security and public safety. Sanctuary states now provide driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. New York state even went so far as to block ICE and Border Patrol access to its DMV database, Cuomo’s gift to ISIS, the drug cartels, and human traffickers.

Under Biden’s policies, the Border Patrol is once again engaged in the “Catch and Release” of aliens they arrest. Upon release, these aliens head to towns and cities across the United States. Some have been told to appear for hearings years from now and some have not even been given court dates. Aliens who fail to appear for immigration hearings will have nothing to fear from immigration authorities because of the Biden executive orders and policies.

For decades the interior enforcement mission of immigration law enforcement under both Democrat and Republican administrations has been all but ignored. This has, in my judgement, been the biggest failure of the immigration system and is really a failure by design. It has suffered from an abject lack of resources that has done untold damage and, in my judgement and even in the judgement of the 9/11 Commission, contributed to the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, and other terror attacks mounted in the United States by international terrorists.

This lack of interior enforcement also hobbles efforts to combat human trafficking, transnational gangs, and drug trafficking organizations. ICE agents are supposed to investigate and penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. ICE agents are assigned to various multi-agency task forces such as the Joint Terrorism Task Force and the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, where I was assigned for the final ten years of my career with the former United States Immigration and Naturalization Service.

In November 2001, just weeks after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, I testified before the House Immigration Reform Caucus, then chaired by Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado. On December 10, 2001, he entered my prepared testimony for that hearing into the Congressional Record. The focus of that hearing, and consequently my testimony, was to explore the failures of the immigration system that contributed to the ability of the terrorists to enter the United States, embed themselves in our country, and prepare to carry out the most horrific terror attack in our nation’s history.

Among the issues that I raised was my concept of the “Immigration Enforcement Tripod.”  Under this concept, the Border Patrol enforces our immigration laws between ports of entry, interdicting illegal immigration and the smuggling of contraband into the United States; the Immigration inspectors (now known as Customs and Border Protection inspectors) enforce our immigration laws at ports of entry by applying the immigration laws during the inspections process; and, finally, comprising the third leg of the enforcement tripod are the Immigration special agents (Now Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents) who enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States, backing up both the Border Patrol and the CBP Inspectors by arresting aliens who evade the Border Patrol and the inspections process conducted at ports of entry by entering the United States without inspection. ICE agents are also supposed to arrest aliens who violate their terms of lawful admission into the United States.

ICE agents also conduct investigations into immigration fraud where aliens may enter into fraud marriages with U.S. citizens or lawful immigrant aliens in order to acquire lawful immigrant status or seek visas by concealing or altering material facts in their applications. The 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, identified immigration fraud and visa fraud as the key methods of entry and embedding employed by not only the 9/11 hijacker terrorists, but other terrorists as well.

Immigration fraud enables aliens to circumvent measures that are designed to combat illegal immigration. The border wall that has received so much attention can be easily defeated by an item that you can place in their jacket pocket or hold in your hand: a green card.

Similarly, while so many have, over the years, asked me if mandatory E-Verify would end illegal immigration once and for all by forcing employers to stop hiring illegal aliens, the answer is that through immigration fraud, an alien who acquires a green card or other appropriate visa can legally work in the United States, enabling them to fly through the E-Verify program.

The only way to combat immigration fraud is to have an adequate number of ICE agents who have the resources they need to do their jobs effectively. Today ICE has only about 6,000 agents for the entire country and most of them are engaged in non-immigration related investigations.

The official commission report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel,” included several observations that are important to consider. Page 61 warned that “human smugglers have facilitated the travel of terrorists associated with more than a dozen extremist groups.” Page 98 observes that immigration fraud is a primary method for terrorists to remain in the U.S. after securing entry. For example, “Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Moreover, the report warns, simple immigration benefit fraud can and has been used by terrorists to prolong their residency in the U.S. “In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated.”

Consider how so many of our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and expectations of privacy have been sliced away in the name of “national security” in the post-9/11 world while a succession of administrations have ignored the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Harry Truman understood accountability when he placed that placard on the desk in the Oval Office that read, “The Buck Stops Here!” Today it would appear that the Biden administration is obstructing the enforcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act undermining national security, public safety, public health, and in direct opposition to those critical findings and recommendations of the commission that was convened to protect us from future terrorist attacks. It needs to be held accountable.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Why America’s Founders Didn’t Want a Democracy

/in , , , , /by

In his book “Liberty in Peril,” Randall Holcombe challenges the presumption that liberty and democracy are complementary.

When I took history and government in school, many critical issues were misrepresented, given short shrift, or even ignored entirely. And those lacunae undermined my ability to adequately understand many things. Randall Holcombe’s new book, Liberty in Peril: Democracy and Power in American History, fills in some very substantial gaps, particularly with regard to American constitutionalism and how it has morphed from protecting liberty to advancing democracy at the expense of liberty. It does so with a host of novel and important insights rather than the disinterest generated by the books I suffered through in school.

The Role of Government

Holcombe gets right to the main point:

The role of government as [America’s founders] saw it, was to protect the rights of individuals, and the biggest threat to individual liberty was the government itself. So they designed a government with constitutionally limited powers, constrained to carry out only those activities specifically allowed by the Constitution. This book describes how the fundamental principle underlying American government has been transformed from protecting individual liberty to carrying out the will of the people, as revealed by a democratic decision-making process. (p. xxii)

Holcombe begins by laying out the case that “the Founders had no intention of creating a democracy, in the sense of a government that would be guided by popular opinion,” (p. 5) in sharp contrast to current “understanding.” And what makes the transformation from a central focus on liberty to a central focus on democracy that routinely invades liberty particularly significant is that

the powers embodied in America’s twenty-first-century democratic government are those that eighteenth-century Americans revolted against to escape. (p. 7)

Since I do not have the space to dissect all of the issues in Liberty in Peril, I would like to highlight a few particularly noteworthy things.

Holcombe starts with John Locke, which is a common place to start for those interested in advancing liberty. But he also calls attention to Cato’s Letters, which was one of the most influential—but now almost completely ignored—influences leading to the birth of the American Revolution. I have long been struck by how many of the insights our founders are credited with that actually trace back there (see the first major chapter of my book Lines of Liberty), and I echo Holcombe’s invitation for more people to discover it.

Liberty in Peril challenges the typical current presumption that liberty and democracy are complementary.

The principle of liberty suggests that first and foremost, the government’s role is to protect the rights of individuals. The principle of democracy suggests that collective decisions are made according to the will of the majority…The greater the allowable scope of democracy in government, the greater the threat to liberty…In particular, the ascendency of the concept of democracy threatens the survival of the free market economy, which is an extension of the Founders’ views on liberty. (pp. 14-15)

This is reflected in the changing nature of elections.

At one time, elections might have been viewed as a method of selecting competent people to undertake a job with constitutionally-specified limits. With the extension of democracy, elections became referendums on public policy. (p. 20)

The book also challenges commonly held presumptions that our Founders wanted democracy. But while “the Founders wanted those in charge of government’s operations to be selected by a democratic process,” they “also wanted to insulate those who ran the government from direct influence by its citizens” because “[b]y insulating political decision-makers from directs accountability to citizens, the government would be in a better position to adhere to its constitutionally-mandated limits.” (p. 15)

“Thus, the Constitution created a limited government designed to protect liberty, not to foster democracy.” (p. 16) But the United States “consistently has moved toward more democracy, and the unintended side effect has been a reduction in liberty.” (p. 25)

Holcombe lays out issues of consensus versus democracy, with consensus illustrated by market systems in which all those whose property rights are involved agree to transactions, (p. 29) but in government, “a group is able to undertake more extensive collective action if it requires less consensus to act.” (p. 30) And the slippery slope is that

[t]he more citizens want to further national goals through government action, the less consensus they will demand in the collective decision-making process. (p. 33)

Another notable aspect of Liberty in Peril is how far beyond the typical discussion of constitutional issues it goes, substantially expanding readers’ understanding in intriguing ways. For instance, how many Americans know of the Iroquois Constitution, which focused on unanimity? How many are aware of the Albany Plan of Union, drawn up in 1754, or how it was influenced by the Iroquois Constitution? How many know that a “clear chain of constitutional evolution proceeds from the Albany Plan of Union to the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution of the United States”? (p. 43)

How many have noticed that “when compared with the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution clearly less constraining than the document it supplanted…the Constitution did not limit the powers of government; it expanded them”? (p. 48) Yet,

[w]hile the authors of the Constitution did deliberately expand the powers of the federal government, they just as deliberately tried to prevent the creation of a democratic government. (p. 52)

How many are aware of what the Confederate Constitution tells us about the US Constitution and the drift from its principles since its adoption, especially because “the problems that the authors of the Confederate Constitution actually did address were overwhelmingly associated with the use of legislative powers to impose costs on the general public to provide benefits to narrow constituencies”? (p. 107)

The Constitution often is portrayed as a document that limits the power of the federal government and guarantees the liberty of its citizens…When compared to the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution places less constraint on the federal government and allows those who run the government more discretion and autonomy and less accountability. The adoption of the Constitution enhanced the powers of government and laid the foundation for two centuries of government growth. (pp. 66-67)

Holcombe’s section on “The Elitist Constitution” is fascinating. It lays out the case for why “[t]he Constitution devised democratic processes for collective decision-making, but the Founders had no intention of designing a government that would respond to the will of the majority,” (p. 70) as illustrated by the fact that citizens “had almost no direct input into the federal government as the Constitution was originally written and ratified.” (p. 70)

The section on the Electoral College is even more striking, as it stands in sharp variance from the presumptions behind almost the entire current debate over the National Popular Vote compact:

[A]t the time the Constitution was written the Founders anticipated that in most cases no candidate would receive votes from a majority of the electors. The Founders reasoned that most electors would vote for one candidate from their own states…and it would be unlikely that voting along state lines would produce any candidate with a majority of the votes. (p. 75)

Consequently,

The Founders envisioned that in most cases the president would end up being chosen by the House of Representatives from the list of the top-five electoral vote recipients…Furthermore, there was no indication that the number of electoral votes received should carry any weight besides creating a list of the top five candidates…The process was not intended to be democratic. (p. 76)

I found the issues discussed above to be of particular interest. But there is far more in the book to learn from, and often be surprised by, in comparison to what history courses usually teach.

Such issues include the evolution of parties, the influence of Andrew Jackson, who “fought for democracy, but, ironically, the result of making the nation’s government more democratic has been to expand the scope and power of government in response to popular demands for govern programs,” (p. 91) which “the Founders foresaw and tried to guard against by limiting the role of democracy in their new government,” (p. 91), the War Between the States (“the single most important event in the transformation of American government,” (p. 93) including the elimination of state succession as a real possibility, the Reconstruction Era amendments, the origins of interest group politics, the evolution of federal regulatory power, the evolution of the incentives of civil servants, the Sixteenth Amendment (income tax) as “a response to the demand for a larger federal government,” (p. 149) a different take on the 1920s, in which “[f]ar from representing a retreat from progressivism, the 1920s extended the now-established orthodoxy, (p. 154) added insight into the New Deal and the courts, Social Security as the “one New Deal program for the responsibility for fundamentally transforming the historical, constitutional role of the federal government,” (p. 175) how “The Great Society represents the ultimate triumph of democracy, because for the first time a major expansion in the scope of government was based on the demands of the electorate, with no extenuation circumstances” (p. 205), and far more.

In sum, there are very many good reasons to recommend Liberty in Peril. In it, Randall Holcombe provides not just a powerful and insightful look into crucial aspects of America’s evolution away from the principles of the revolution that created it but also an important warning:

Unfortunately, many Americans do not appear to fully understand these dangers as they continue to push the foundations of their government away from liberty and toward democracy. (p. 225)

COLUMN BY

Gary M. Galles

Gary M. Galles is a Professor of Economics at Pepperdine University and a member of the Foundation for Economic Education faculty network. In addition to his new book, Pathways to Policy Failures (2020), his books include Lines of Liberty (2016), Faulty Premises, Faulty Policies (2014), and Apostle of Peace (2013).

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

PODCAST: Dem’s HR-1 and The Jim Crow Shtick

/in , , , , , /by

When it comes to voting reform, Democrats gleefully point at their pending H.R.1 “For the People” Act which they claim will make voting accessible to more people, most of whom are illegal aliens. When the Republicans push for voter reform, such as what was recently implemented in Georgia, the Democrats accuse them of implementing racially designed “Jim Crow” laws. Even President Biden called the Georgia law, “Jim Crow in the 21st Century,” as well as many other Democrats and left-leaning media personnel.

Some of us are old enough to remember Jim Crow laws, but most of the voters today haven’t a clue regarding its background and it’s applicability today. Let’s try to clear this up.

Following the American Civil War, the country entered a period of “Reconstruction” of the South. This consisted of laws devised by northern Republicans to get the South back on its feet economically while securing the civil rights of the former slaves. Over time, federal troops withdrew from the South and Democrats took control of the State Assemblies and governor mansions. To combat Republican policies, these “Dixiecrats” implemented sweeping rules and regulations depriving blacks of their civil rights, particularly in the areas of segregation, land ownership and voting, thereby catering to white control. In effect, they were able to turn the clock backwards to before the Civil War without having to enslave anyone.

Over time, “Dixiecrats” power grew in parallel with the rise of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). In particular, both groups grew to prominence during the Wilson administration and beyond. It finally ended in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act under President Lyndon Johnson.

The rules devised by the southern Democrats came to be referred to as “Jim Crow,” which was named after a theater character stereotyping blacks from the early part of the 19th century. Such laws defined where a black could go to school, where to eat and drink, shop, reside, ride a bus, vote, and many other oppressive stipulations.

Interestingly, now the Republicans are being accused of enacting similar laws. It is rather ironic the party of Lincoln, who fought for the freedom of slaves, is being falsely accused of such nonsense. Let us not forget, not one Republican president owned a slave. The Democrats cannot claim otherwise.

Today’s Republicans are simply angling to stop illegal voting, such as fraudulent and duplicate voting. This is why they are in favor of such things as Voter Identification, verifying signatures, review of voter rolls, etc., none of which is in the Democrats’ H.R.1 Bill. In fact, H.R.1 would simplify voter cheating if enacted. Instead, Democrats claim Republican voter initiatives would prohibit people from voting, hence they claim it is “Racist” and akin to “Jim Crow.” Of course, this is an old tactic used by the radical left to try and bully people and has nothing to do with reality. It is a familiar shtick to falsely cast dispersions on others while they, themselves, are the true culprits trying to undermine the system for political gain.

What we have to realize is those who falsely claim others are racists, are truly the racists themselves. You can call the Republicans whatever you want, but you cannot distort the truth, especially when it comes to “Jim Crow.” Frankly, this tactic has been used so many times, I doubt if it is effective any longer. However, as long as the populace remains ignorant of our history, such as who the true designers of “Jim Crow” laws were, we will continue to produce a sucker every minute. Then again, some people like to be deceived.

For more info, see; “Voter Fraud is Dirty Business” – July 09, 2020

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – For a listing of my books, click HERE.

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

PODCAST: Actually, Everything the DEMOCRATS do is Racist!

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

RACHEL ALEXANDER

Rachel Alexander is a political columnist and the founder and editor of Intellectual Conservative. She is a regular contributor to Townhall, the Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research and The Christian Post . She frequently appears on TV and news radio as a conservative commentator, and also hosted a radio show in Phoenix. She previously served as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Arizona, corporate attorney for Go Daddy Software. Rachel was ranked by Right Wing News as one of the 50 Best Conservative Columnists and is a recipient of Americans for Prosperity’s RightOnline Activist of the Year award.

TOPIC: Actually, Everything the DEMOCRATS do is Racist!

CATHERINE MORTENSEN

Catherine Mortensen is the Vice President of Communications at Americans for Limited Government. She can be reached at cmortensen@getliberty.org. Mortensen is a former TV news anchor in New Mexico, elected official in Southern Colorado, and Capitol Hill communications director for Congressman Doug Lamborn. She also served as a spokesperson at the National Rifle Association. She has bachelor’s degrees in journalism and political science from Boston University and a master’s degree in public administration from Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

TOPIC: Fight to protect judicial independence ought to be bipartisan, where are the Democrats?

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

Utah Governor Defends Racism As Long As It’s Against White Kids

/in , , , , , , , /by

If America has a ‘race problem’, this is it.

Utah Governor Defends Racism As Long As It’s Against White Kids

By Jordan Davidson, The Federalist, April 16, 2021

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox defended racism against white kids during a question and answer session with constituents on Thursday.

During the session, live-tweeted by the governor’s official Twitter account, one Utah citizen asked “if it’s racist that the Utah Jazz excludes white children from the team’s scholarship program.”

The program created by the NBA team allots a scholarship to a new “underrepresented student of color enrolling as a freshman for the 2021-22 school year” for every team win during the 2020-21 season basketball season. To qualify for the funds, students must have graduated from high school and be a “person of color.” Since the program’s start, the team has handed out nearly 50 full-ride scholarships to black and minority students only.

Despite the team’s deliberate exclusion of white students from the program, Cox said the scholarship requirements are not racist.

“It’s not racist. Ryan Smith and the Jazz can do what they want with their funds. All kids should have equal opportunities, and we’re proud of the Jazz,” he replied.

When asked if Cox believes that excluding white people from amenities, finances, and programs is racist, the governor’s office reiterated his former claim but said it did not apply to government scholarships.

“Gov. Cox believes the Utah Jazz has every right to act according to their own corporate values and issue scholarships to whomever they choose. Government scholarships, on the other hand, are not based on race,” a spokesperson from the governor’s office told The Federalist.

The Utah Jazz also did not respond to The Federalist’s request for comment.

In addition to his comments about racism during the question and answer session, Cox claimed, without evidence, that masks are still required in Utah schools because education facilities “had high transmission rates early in the pandemic.” Cox also told a citizen concerned about the governor’s amassed power during the pandemic that he doesn’t support “reining in executive powers — especially on health and safety issues.”

https://twitter.com/GovCox/status/1382762842965766145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1382762842965766145%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthefederalist.com%2F2021%2F04%2F16%2Futah-governor-defends-racism-as-long-as-its-against-white-kids%2F

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Get the f*** out!’: Black protesters in Brooklyn Center eviscerate white protester, tell him ‘you’re white, you already don’t belong!’NEWS

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

Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

CNN’s Chris Cuomo Says There Won’t be police Reform Until ‘White people’s kids start getting killed’

/in , , , , , /by

More reprehensible anti-police propaganda from CNN. This is why attacks on police officers is skyrocketing. This is why police officers are retiring en masse. CNN is a disgrace. Americans need to stop watching this disgusting and dangerous network.

Chris Cuomo says there won’t be police reform until ‘White people’s kids start getting killed’

‘What’s going on with these police? Maybe we shouldn’t even have police’ Cuomo said, pretending to be a White parent

By Fox News, April 17, 2021

CNN’s Chris Cuomo Friday during “Cuomo Primetime” said that police and gun reform won’t happen until  “White people’s kids start getting killed.”

“Shootings, gun laws, access to weapons. Oh, I know when they’ll change,” said the anchor. “[When] your kids start getting killed. White people’s kids start getting killed.”

Cuomo put on a hypothetical accent and pretended to be a White parent. “What’s going on with these police? Maybe we shouldn’t even have police,” he said.

“That kind of madness. That kind of mania. That will be you. That will be the majority. Because it’s your people,” Cuomo said, apparently directed at the White members of his audience.

“How many more?” Cuomo asked. “Die of the pandemic, dying from police shootings. George Floyd, Daunte Wright. I wonder if you’ll remember their names six months from now because they’ll be replaced by so many others.”

Cuomo pointed out that some focus on the past of the victims in police shootings.

“Why do that? Because you wanna make the problem them,” he said. “Takes the onus off the idea that you’re wrong about policing needing to change.”

“Forget that police are trained to deal with non-compliance with force that is not lethal. Hey, comply or die,” Cuomo said.

The U.S. has faced multiple major shootings over the past month, most recently in Indianapolis where a gunman opened fire at a FedEx facility, killing eight.

At the same time, tensions have reached new heights in some areas of the country where protesters and rioters are on edge as they await the verdict of the Derek Chauvin trial and demand justice in the police-involved killing of Daunte Wright in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota and 13-year-old Adam Toledo in Chicago, among others.

RELATED ARTICLE: LEFTWING RIOTS: Portland IN FLAMES overnight as ANTIFA sets Apple store, other buildings on fire

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Gunmen Open Fire on National Guard Troops in Minneapolis After Democrat Maxine Waters Incites BLM Rioters To Violence: “Get More Confrontational.”

/in , , , , , , , /by

Murderess. Arrest Waters and charge her with attempted murder. Prosecute these bloody Democrat seditionists.

BREAKING: Gunmen Open Fire on National Guard Troops in Minneapolis, Two Injured

By Todd Starnes, Apr 18, 2021

Gunmen opened fire on National Guard troops in Minneapolis injuring at least two soldiers.

The Minnesota National Guard said the shooting happened in the early morning hours when security teams were providing neighborhood security.
The attack happened just hours after Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) told an angry crowd in nearby Brooklyn Center to “get more confrontational.”

“We’ve got to get more confrontational,” Waters told the crowd. “We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”

“We’ve got to stay in the streets, and we’ve got to demand justice,” she declared.

Two members of the National Guard sustained minor injuries from shattered glass.

“I am relieved to know none of our Guardsmen were seriously injured,” said Maj. Gen. Shawn Manke, the Adjutant General of the Minnesota National Guard. “This event highlights the volatility and tension in our communities right now. I ask for peace as we work through this difficult time.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) blamed the attack on Waters.

“BLM terrorists took her orders and took action,” she wrote on Twitter. “She should be expelled from Congress.”

Republicans were right to be stunned and alarmed at Waters’ unhinged comments.

“The Radical Left don’t care if your towns are burning, if there’s violence in your streets, or if the police are too defunded to defend their communities. As long as the Left appeases their anti-America base, their job is done,” Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., wrote on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/AlphaNewsMN/status/1383557652047826950?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1383557652047826950%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.toddstarnes.com%2Fcrime%2Fbreaking-gunmen-open-fire-on-national-guard-troops-in-minneapolis-two-injured%2F

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Fredo’ Cuomo Says There Won’t be police Reform Until ‘White people’s kids start getting killed’

Democrat NYC Mayoral Antisemite Candidate Labels Jewish State ‘Apartheid State’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

2020 Election Post-Mortem

/in , , , , , /by

Part 1: High Crimes and Misdemeanors

Now that the putative Biden-Harris administration is going full tilt, as we catch our breath and reflect on what has transpired in our country, we would do well to consider the wider implications of the theft of this election. So let’s return to the scene of the crime—actually, to the scenes of the multiple crimes inflicted on our nation.

Election Theft Crime #1

By now we know about the Dems’ rampant and shameless vote fraud, and the gigantic CCP cyber attack on our election through Dominion and other voting machines. We have hard evidence of foreign interference in our election in the 270 pages of evidence compiled by attorney Sidney Powell, as well as a treasure trove of incriminating evidence recently made public by Mike Lindell in his documentary “Absolute Proof!” In that documentary, we actually got to see the forensic data, including computer time stamps, and all manner of specificity: from computer X to computer Y in this or that location, etc. The data entries are all unique, but they coincidentally all show the exact same vote shift: from President Trump to Beijing Biden. And we have paper evidence as well. You may recall that back in early January, Patrick Byrne—former CEO of Overstock who joined Sidney Powell and others to aid Trump in attempting to prove his election win—wrote about a shredding company given 3,000 pounds of ballots from Georgia to dispose of, pieces of which remained and were subsequently analyzed. In their midst, authorities discovered a shipping receipt…wait for it…from China! Of course, the ballots themselves were not legitimate—they were phony Chinese knock-offs, all marked for…guess who? Let’s call that Crime #1.

Election Theft Crime #2

Crime #2 is the false flag event before, during and after the peaceful Trump rally in D.C. on January 6th. You better believe the radical Left, aka Democrats, had war-gamed January 6th down to the last detail. In fact, there’s a video by brilliant young journalist Millie Weaver, that, in my opinion, puts the Watergate journalists Woodward and Bernstein to shame. In that video, we hear the Leftists planning and plotting their on-the-ground destructive strategies through conversations Millie’s undercover reporter recorded in real-time, à la Project Veritas. It is an eye-opener for sure.

Here are the names of some of the Marxist/revolutionary organizations infesting our nation and busily planning its demise: The Sunrise Movement, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Momentum, Extinction Rebellion, Shutdown DC, and United for Peace and Justice, which is a coalition of over 1,000 Leftist groups. And as everyone witnessed on live TV, they were all on fire to wreak havoc on January 6th! In the undercover video, they are planning for every contingency, including a Trump win. That possibility, in their minds, called for the literal takeover of D.C., like Seattle’s CHAZ on steroids.

And in case you think these Leftists/Marxists are just fringy aging hippies and clueless young radicals operating in a fantasy world of their own, here’s some more bad news for you: these radical organizations boast many government officials among their ranks! That’s right: people who for all we know are nameless, faceless bureaucrats conducting the nation’s business for their fat paychecks and handsome retirement benefits, are colluding with the Soros-funded minions hell-bent on overturning the freest and most prosperous nation in human history. One such woman worked at DHS Headquarters. Another still works in National Security. Go figure!

They war-gamed for every possible outcome—if only Conservatives did that! If Trump were to win they’d use Plan A. If Biden won but Trump wouldn’t concede, Plan B. If the results were unclear, Plan C, etc. And they took strategy lessons from a real pro: Lisa Fithian, of the National Steering Committee of United for Peace and Justice, an organization which, in true Orwellian fashion, seeks war rather than peace, and the destruction of the rule of law under our Constitution, rather than justice.

Originally, these folks planned to actually physically seize the White House and take over major cities all over the country on election night. I suppose as the Big Steal proceeded apace, they were told they could wait it out. Then came their new plan, “On the 5th we’re going to shut down the White House.” They managed to procure a military-style “target map” that is far more detailed than Google Earth maps, to use for spotting the police stations, key government buildings, bridges, places to blockade and disrupt transportation, etc. Spooky. Creepy. Malevolent.

Watching Communists at work is not for the faint-hearted.

Election Theft Crime #3

Crime #3 took place in the Capitol Building in the aftermath of the false flag “insurrection” in which Antifa thugs masquerading as Trump supporters broke some windows and instigated chaos. By the way, it now seems that the only deaths during the “storming of the Capitol”—which was more like a spontaneous sightseeing tour for folks who got waved in by the Capitol police—were from medical emergencies, not violence, with the exception of the death of Ashli Babbitt, who was purportedly shot and killed by a Capitol policeman. Funny thing about that point-blank shooting death, though. Some have pointed out that there was hardly any blood although Babbitt was shot at close range in the neck, which would normally have resulted in copious bleeding and splatter. Just sayin’.

Let’s now examine what transpired as our heroic Congressional Representatives finally emerged from their safe-space bunker. And notice how the Deep State performs many of its most egregious acts of destruction under cover of darkness, in the middle of the night. That’s what they did with their fraudulent vote-counting, and that’s what they did vis-à-vis the Joint Session of Congress. Some of the Congressional members may not have known the “insurrection” was basically Leftist preplanned theater, and so really felt threatened and frightened. Of course they’d be quick to believe the MSM narrative, which was also propounded by their colluding colleagues.

But ask yourself this: Why didn’t VP Pence send everyone home and announce a plan to reconvene on Friday, or maybe Monday, to conduct this all-important business for the nation? Would any of us have been in a proper state of mind to intelligently and dispassionately decide the fate of our Republic under those chaotic circumstances? They’d had a shock, and were likely tired and hungry and wanting to go home, have dinner and a stiff drink, and go to bed. Perhaps that’s why they stopped the proceedings after hearing from only two of the four states whose legislatures had submitted requests for time to conduct forensic audits. In any case, once again, at 3:40am, after we’d all gone to sleep—the same way they’d counted up the fake votes in the wee small hours of the morning—they sold out America by certifying the results of the Color Revolution against our nation. We must never forget this final travesty was performed by American citizens on American soil—predominantly by those we trusted and employed as our elected representatives.

Part 2: The Biblical Resonance

What makes the stolen 2020 election Biblical is not only that it may well spell the end of the American experiment in liberty, but that the fate of the entire world seems to hang upon it. For while members of the unholy alliance among the Chinese Communists, the Deep State, the Republicans in Name Only (RINOs), the Democrats, the radical Left (but I repeat myself)—may have sought to take down America for their own reasons, the ultimate goal of the Davos Cabal is nothing short of enslaving all the people of the world under their planned and tyrannical One World Government. The good news is that millions of people worldwide have awakened to this danger—another reason the cabal is moving at lightning speed, and taking so many big risks in the process. This battle is spiritual as well as physical, moral as well as political—a battle ultimately for our bodies, minds, and very souls.

The Power of MAGA

And as some of us see fit to describe Pence as Judas, or perhaps Pontius Pilate, this simultaneously implies the analogy of Trump as Savior. Of course we’re well acquainted with Trump’s shortcomings and foibles, and understand that as human  beings, we’re all imperfect, so I’m certainly not comparing Trump to Jesus in any literal sense. Nevertheless, President Trump, as he himself has stated, stood between us and our enemies, and many have looked to him as our champion and protector. For those who haven’t read my article “Trump is My President!”, here’s a small sample of the national and international reverence for this man:

“I’m from Malaysia, and Trump is my President!”
“I’m from Japan, and Trump is my President!”
“I’m from Canada, and Trump is my President!”
“I’m from Wisconsin and Trump is my President!”
“I’m from Singapore, and Trump is my President!”
“I’m from Ireland, and Trump is my President!”

“BAHAMAS HERE— GO TRUMP!”

So much love and appreciation for this man worldwide!

The massive following for Trump, the enthusiasm, loyalty and especially the renewed passion for freedom he inspired, is what the globalists/elites/liberals/Leftists/Progressives want desperately to snuff out. Trump awoke the Sleeping Giant: America’s patriots. He brought love of country and pride in the USA back to us. And he brought God back into the conversation, doubtless much to the consternation of Leftists who thought they’d successfully excised Him permanently from public discourse.

And as the Romans and Sanhedrin viewed Jesus as a danger to the status quo, so too does our ruling class view Trump as a danger to their plan for a New World Order. That’s why, on the night of January 6th, sometime after midnight, they chose to crucify our Republic along with our President, since Trump had become not just the leader of our nation and our Commander-in-Chief, but also the symbol of our liberty under God. That they followed this evil deed with another sham impeachment is tantamount to placing the crown of thorns on Trump’s head and mocking him after the fact.

The godless Left vs. the Christian right

What we’ve witnessed playing out is to some extent a battle between the godless Left and the Christian/Conservative Right. Consider Founding Father John Adams’ words: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” And for a more modern day example, how about Solzhenitsyn’s famous quote that summarizes what he learned after the terrible ordeal of his imprisonment under Soviet Communism: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” The Democrats’ hatred of President Trump is a reflection not only of their hatred of America, but also of God Himself.

It is no accident that Trump was so popular with Conservatives, or that Evangelical Christians voted for him in great numbers. How many times did President Trump invoke the name of God? And when he ended a speech with “God bless you, and God bless America!” people knew he meant what he said. You could see it in his actions, and hear it in his voice.

President Trump may have referred to God in his speeches nearly as often as Obama referred to himself when speechifying during his destructive eight years in office. As history demonstrates, if you take God out of the equation, morality often vanishes as well. Man then becomes his own god, and as such, there’s no stopping him should he seek absolute power. This paves the way for the State to become all-powerful, and the eradication of people’s liberty soon follows. Perhaps that’s why Karl Marx said, “The goal of the Communists is to enter into men’s minds and cast God down from his throne.” Then the Politburo can place itself on that throne, and woe to the newly dispossessed serfs thereafter.

An alternative Biblical analogy for President Trump’s role may be that of the restrainer who keeps the burgeoning evil at bay. Trump certainly did that by standing up to Communist China, Iran, North Korea, the G20 Davos elites, and the deeply corrupt United Nations, while taking America out of pro-globalist trade deals, the disastrous Iran deal, and the ruinous Paris Climate Accord, among others. President Trump stood between us and those who wish us harm, and we owe him immense gratitude for all he accomplished and all he endured on our behalf. Now it is up to us to wrest our Republic out of the hands of the treasonous conspirators who snatched it from our grasp.

© 2021 Cherie Zaslawsky – All Rights Reserved.

E-Mail Cherie Zaslawsky: cherzz@sbcglobal.net

Arizona community college must pay $155,000 to professor it forced to apologize for criticizing Islam

/in , , , , /by

A slight pause on American academia’s out-of-control-freight-train rush to submit to Sharia. But the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is still flogging this case in court, hoping to use it to destroy the freedom of speech and criminalize criticism of Islam.

Arizona community college to pay $155K settlement for directing professor to apologize for Islamic terrorism quiz question

by Katlyn Patton, FIRE, April 13, 2021:

Maricopa County Community College District will pay professor Nicholas Damask $155,000 in exchange for his agreement not to sue district personnel, who last year violated his expressive rights in an attempt to quell criticism of his quiz questions on social media. The district also pledged to strengthen its commitment to academic freedom.

Damask, who teaches political science at Scottsdale Community College, came under fire on social media last May after a student complained that quiz questions in Damask’s world politics course were offensive to the student’s religious beliefs. Damask said the college suggested it would require him to meet with an Islamic religious leader to review the content of his course because a student complained that three of Damask’s quiz questions about Islamic terrorism were “in distaste of Islam.”

In response, the college directed Damask to issue an apology — pre-written for him by a communications staff member — and implied that he would be investigated. The college ultimately backed down after an urgent letter from FIRE.

Now, the district is finally paying for SCC’s unconstitutional knee-jerk reaction to online criticism….

A lawsuit brought by the Council on American-Islamic Relations remains pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. (A district court judge dismissed the lawsuit in August for failure to state a claim, and CAIR appealed.)…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Quotes ‘Holy Qur’an’ in Ramadan Greeting, says ‘Muslim Americans Have Enriched Our Country Since Our Founding’

UK: Muslim migrant rape gang members who were ordered deported six years ago launch another appeal to stay

Sweden: Almost 700,000 migrants are receiving state benefits

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

Democrat Mayor Who Called for ‘Defunding the Police’ Arrested for ELEVEN Child Sex Crimes

/in , , , , /by

Well, we know why this Democrat pedophile wants to destroy the police — the man wants to be free to diddle the kiddies.

Former Sebastopol mayor Robert Jacob now faces 11 felony charges of child sexual assault, up from five since city police arrested him Saturday morning, April 10, according to Sonoma County Superior Court records.

Sonoma West Times: Jacob is also the co-founder of Sebastopol’s first cannabis dispensary, Peace in Medicine.

The court records for Robert Emmanuel Jacob list one count for sexual penetration with a child under 16 years-old, five counts of lewd acts with a child age 14 or 15 being 10 or more years older than the minor and two counts of coming into the possession of a child younger than 16 for lewd or lascivious acts.

Further, the records show one count for communication with a minor to commit an offense, one count for arranging to meet a child for lewd acts and one count for distribution of child pornography.

Sebastopol police officers reached Jacob at around 7 a.m. Saturday, April 10 in the 7400 block of Woodland Avenue and arrested him on suspicion of five felony and one misdemeanor sexual assault crimes against a minor, per the April 10 SPD statement said.

According to the press release, the police came into information on March 30 about sexual assaults that may have happened in Sebastopol from December 2019 to March 2021 and the investigation led to Jacob. Police Chief Kevin Kilgore said six officers responded, along with a lieutenant and himself, to serve the arrest and search warrant in an April 14 interview.

Mayor Who Called for “Defunding the Police” Arrested for Child Sex Crimes

By The Election, April 16, 2021:

Robert Jacob, seen here in this photo uploaded to Facebook on March 27, 2019.

The former mayor of Sebastopol, Cal., a progressive Democrat who voiced support for Black Lives Matter rioters and defunding police, was arrested Saturday morning over multiple felony child sex crimes.

Sebastopol Police booked 44-year-old Robert Emmanuel Jacob on 11 felony counts related to sex crimes against minors.

The court records for Robert Emmanuel Jacob list one count for sexual penetration with a child under 16 years-old, five counts of lewd acts with a child age 14 or 15 being 10 or more years older than the minor and two counts of coming into the possession of a child younger than 16 for lewd or lascivious acts.

The charges against Jacob, who is openly gay and married as of 2019, include transportation of a child for lewd and lascivious acts, arranging a meeting for sexual purposes with a person believed to be underage, sexual penetration of a child under 16-years-old and harmful material sent with the intent to seduce a minor.

Jacob, who describes himself as a “community advocate” and “inspirational leader” in his LinkedIn profile, made headlines when he became mayor in 2013 because he owned two licensed cannabis dispensaries at the time.

Jacob was a vocal supporter of Black Lives Matter. In June of 2020, Jacob praised the violence created by BLM in a Facebook post. He wrote, “Again, thank you BLM, the rioters, and protesters. Your direct actions are creating change.” In another post, he referred to the rioters as “warriors ” and said BLM was engaged in a “Civil rights war.” Jacob called on his followers to support the “troops” in their riot.

The radical liberal mayor also openly called for defunding the police. He wrote on Facebook: “Defunding is about re-funding,” he wrote on Facebook. “Defund the police to re-fund the resources we’ve been slashing for generations.” He also praised Minneapolis’ city council for promising to dismantle its police department.

In another post the same month, Jacob advocated for defunding police. “Defunding is about re-funding,” he wrote on Facebook. “Defund the police to re-fund the resources we’ve been slashing for generations.” He also praised Minneapolis’ city council for promising to dismantle its police department.

Jacob is being held at the Sonoma County Main Adult Detention Facility with a bail of $620,000. His next court date has not yet been scheduled.

Police say the investigation remains on-going. Officials are asking for the public’s help. Anyone with information regarding the case is asked to contact the Sebastopol Police Department at 707-829-4400 and refer to report #21-0220.

RELATED ARTICLE: Tracking all of Joe Biden’s false or misleading claims – updated on April 16

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

NPR: Hamas-linked CAIR covered up Florida chapter top dog Hassan Shibly’s serial abuse of women

/in , , , , , , /by

When even NPR notices what is going on at Hamas-linked CAIR, you know it must be very bad. Of course, NPR’s Leila Fadel portrays this sinister organization has pure as the driven snow and fighting valiantly for civil rights against racist, redneck “Islamophobes”; there’s just this little problem of multiple claims of sexual harassment by its former Florida chapter director, Hassan Shibly. Fadel doesn’t bother to inform her hapless readers that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department. CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.) CAIR chapters frequently distribute pamphlets telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented and has been declared a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates. CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. CAIR’s national outreach manager is an open supporter of Hamas.

Nor does Fadel even come close to touching upon what may have led Shibly to behave this way:

The Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34

Muhammad’s child bride, Aisha, says in a hadith that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?’” — Sahih Muslim 2127

The Qur’an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: “Your women are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth as you will” — Qur’an 2:223

It declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man: “Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as you choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her” — Qur’an 2:282

It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, then only one, or one that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice” — Qur’an 4:3

It rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: “Allah directs you as regards your children’s inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” — Qur’an 4:11

It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” — Qur’an 65:4

Islamic law stipulates that a man’s prayer is annulled if a dog or a woman passes in front of him as he is praying. “Narrated ‘Aisha: The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).” I said, ‘You have made us (i.e. women) dogs.’ I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him.” — Sahih Bukhari 1.9.490

Another hadith depicts Muhammad saying that the majority of the inhabitants of hell are women:

“I looked into Paradise and I saw that the majority of its people were the poor. And I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its people are women.” — Sahih Bukhari 3241; Sahih Muslim 2737

When asked about this, he explained:

“I was shown Hell and I have never seen anything more terrifying than it. And I saw that the majority of its people are women.” They said, “Why, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “Because of their ingratitude (kufr).” It was said, “Are they ungrateful to Allah?” He said, “They are ungrateful to their companions (husbands) and ungrateful for good treatment. If you are kind to one of them for a lifetime then she sees one (undesirable) thing in you, she will say, ‘I have never had anything good from you.’” — Sahih Bukhari 1052

And in another hadith:

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) went out to the musalla (prayer place) on the day of Eid al-Adha or Eid al-Fitr. He passed by the women and said, ‘O women! Give charity, for I have seen that you form the majority of the people of Hell.’ They asked, ‘Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religious commitment than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.’ The women asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is deficient in our intelligence and religious commitment?’ He said, ‘Is not the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Is it not true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is the deficiency in her religious commitment.’” — Sahih Bukhari 304

Another statement attributed to Muhammad: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning.” — Sahih Bukhari 4.54.460

“Muslim Civil Rights Leader Accused Of Harassment, Misconduct,”

by Leila Fadel, NPR, April 15, 2021:

Hassan Shibly, once the prominent head of the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Florida chapter, resigned after allegations of domestic abuse were made against him. Since then, other women have come forward with accusations of their own. Shibly has denied the allegations.

For months, stories swirled around a prominent Muslim civil rights leader, alleging secret marriages, bullying, sexual harassment.

Then, late last year, some of the allegations against 34-year-old Hassan Shibly burst into public view. In a video posted on GoFundMe, Shibly’s estranged wife, mother of their three children, looked directly into the camera and begged for help. She said her abusive husband had cut her off financially.

“For years, I’ve been in an abusive relationship, and the situation at home has become unbearable,” Imane Sadrati said. “I finally decided to build the courage to start over for my children and I.”

The accusations were shocking not only in their content but in the public airing of a nationally recognized Muslim leader’s personal drama. For a decade, Shibly led the prominent Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR. It’s a nonprofit rights watchdog known for defending Muslim civil liberties in the post-Sept. 11 era.

Within 15 days of his estranged wife’s video going live, Shibly resigned from his high-profile job at CAIR’s Florida chapter. In an interview with NPR, Shibly denied abuse allegations, including that he twisted Sadrati’s arm, slapped her and shoved her against a wall during one incident last summer that Sadrati detailed in court documents. Shibly also denied all other allegations of misconduct.

His resignation, though, didn’t put the matter to rest. Shibly’s departure emboldened a slew of women to come forward with their own accusations of emotional abuse and sexual misconduct by him and of workplace discrimination at CAIR’s national office and several prominent chapters.

NPR interviewed a half-dozen Shibly accusers and reviewed internal CAIR documents, social media posts and email exchanges. Together, the accounts portray Shibly as a man who used his position to seduce women and bully critics with impunity.

Shibly’s critics say his alleged actions were shrouded by a culture of silence, rooted partly in Muslim taboos about discussing personal scandals and partly out of fear that the fallout would fuel vicious anti-Muslim hostility.

When concerned parties brought allegations to senior CAIR officials in Washington, D.C., and Florida, former employees said, there was little, if any, follow-up action. They said leaders were aware of some of the allegations as early as 2016.

Laila Abdelaziz, who worked under Shibly at the CAIR Florida chapter, said she resigned in 2016 in part because Shibly sexually harassed her. She said she believes CAIR leaders have failed to adequately address the situation,partly because Muslim communities already face such a barrage of discriminatory and sometimes violent anti-Muslim hate.

“When your community is being attacked and diminished and demeaned every single day,” Abdelaziz said, “it’s difficult to invite even more of that.”

“Muslims do turn to them in crisis”

In 1994, a handful of young Muslim activists in Washington, D.C., decided to push back against what they saw as the growing demonization of Islam in politics and pop culture.

The result of their organizing was CAIR.

Nearly 30 years later, CAIR has grown into the largest and most recognized Muslim civil rights group in the U.S., with some 33 independently operated chapters nationwide. CAIR leaders show up on TV to defend Muslim civil liberties, and they speak out against anti-Muslim hate and authorities targeting Muslim communities.

“There is a certain brand recognizability,” said Zareena Grewal, a historical anthropologist at Yale University who has written extensively on U.S. Muslim communities. She said many CAIR chapters do excellent grassroots work that’s seen as vital. “Muslims do turn to them in crisis.”

Still, Grewal said, there have been growing pains and an apparent lack of accountability. Externally, CAIR has had to fend off vicious and unfair Islamophobic political attacks. Internally, it has faced turmoil too, including thwarting employees’ efforts to unionize in the national office in 2016.

“They’ve been very resistant to growing and letting a new generation of leaders come in who may have a much deeper commitment to things like reckoning with sexual harassment or gender bias, corruption and things like unions,” Grewal said.

Parvez Ahmed, a former chairman of the CAIR national board, left over a decade ago and has since been critical of CAIR leadership over issues like inclusion and gender equity. He said the Shibly case offers CAIR an opportunity to show the people it serves that “they are doing everything within their power to take these allegations seriously.”

“The leadership of CAIR owes the community an explanation as to who knew what and when and how those complaints were handled,” Ahmed said.

Shibly agreed to a more than two-hour interview with NPR on the condition that it not be recorded. He denied that he ever hurt his wife, Sadrati, or cut her off financially.

He provided a photo of himself with a black eye, saying he was injured by Sadrati during a fight. (The incident was not reported to police, and NPR has no way to independently verify it.) Sadrati denies it.

“Her accusations are absolutely and blatantly false,” he said. “She’s using my position and the legal system to gain advantage in our ongoing legal divorce process.”

He noted that the temporary restraining order Sadrati requested was not granted and instead a hearing was set. According to court documents, Sadrati has since withdrawn the request for a restraining order on the condition that a no-contact order be included in their divorce proceedings. Shibly also shared a letter from the Florida Department of Children and Families. It said the agency found no indication of “intimate partner violence” that threatens the children.

Shibly said the couple separated more than two years ago. He said they divorced in Islamic tradition about eight months ago. They filed for legal divorce after Sadrati’s public allegation of domestic abuse.

As for the other allegations of misconduct against him — including workplace sexual harassment and bullying — Shibly said they are part of a campaign to “humiliate me and hurt me” and to smear CAIR and his work with the organization.

“I’m speechless,” Shibly said. He contends that many of the allegations “are verifiably false,” adding he has “faith that the way I was misrepresented online doesn’t reflect who I am.”

Shibly said that he did enter into religious marriage contracts with women outside his legal marriage when he and his wife were separated and prior to that — with her permission and when he felt their marriage was essentially over. He denies that any of the relationships were secret or abusive and described them as courtships.

Most religious scholars do not see a conventional Islamic marriage as legitimate unless it is publicly declared, and having more than one wife is generally frowned upon in jurisdictions where that’s not allowed under local law.

Sadrati declined to be interviewed by NPR beyond denying Shibly’s counteraccusations. She said her desperate online plea for help speaks for itself.

“The GoFundMe is there for a reason, an honest reason,” she said. “I’m standing by my statement.”

In response to NPR queries about the claims involving Shibly and others, CAIR’s national office sent a written statement saying that leaders “take any allegations of misconduct against our staff or volunteers seriously.” It also noted that chapters operate independently….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago Man Who Trained at Gym to ‘Cut the Neck’ of Non-Muslims Tells Judge He’s ‘Just a Big Teddy Bear’

Germany’s foreign ministry top dog: Sabotage of Iranian nuclear facility ‘not a positive contribution’

France: Court upholds decision not to try Muslim who killed Jewish woman, since he was high on marijuana

Norway pleads with Muslim migrants to stop going home for vacations because of Covid spread

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

It Takes a Village

/in , , , /by

Maybe you own a few firearms or maybe you’re content with one, but no matter how good you are with that red dot sight on your 5.56 rifle you’re only human. There’s a reason Wyatt Earp wasn’t alone at the OK Corral, so why not consider arming your neighbors?

The Best Defense…

If you’ve seen the news in the last decade, you’re aware that crime rates and neighborhood violence have escalated. The more tensions rise, the more irrational people become and you’ll want someone to have your back when it hits the fan. Rather than sit around and wait to be victimized, though, why not create an environment that will deter criminals? It’s not hard to purchase a few cheap firearms to put in the hands of trusted neighbors, whether you’re in a bad situation or want to live in a safer area. The reason to buy some “throw-away” guns is because, no matter how much you like your neighbor, you wouldn’t want to give away a firearm you’ve trained with. Having a few extra weapons to arm your neighbors with will increase your numbers and give a better chance of survival.

Early Warning System

The saying “It takes a village” doesn’t just apply to raising children, but protecting them. If your home gets broken into or comes under attack, you’ll want to know your neighbors will show up to help. People rely on police for protection but their job is to catch the criminal, not prevent the crime. That means it’s up to neighbors and friends to watch out for each other. By having several armed adults, you can know if something bad is coming your way. If the first home on your block is attacked, a gunshot from your neighbor will alert everyone and provide an early warning system that could save lives and prevent something terrible. Of course, it pays to be able to trust your neighbors’ abilities.

Quality Over Quantity

Would you rather have 10 guns with no skill or 5 guns in the hands of experienced shooters? If you have no other option, arming your neighbors in a time of crisis is important but it doesn’t mean you have to wait until then to build skill and familiarity. Taking your neighbors to the range or putting some time into teaching them on gun safety and basic shooting can mean the difference between help and friendly fire. Inexperienced hands can be just as dangerous when trying to protect you. A lot of crimes take place because criminals see a weak element among the flock of society, but safety is in numbers. Surrounding yourself with a few experienced neighbors that you trust behind you will prevent a lot of the potential crime that would come to your neighborhood.

It’s Your Right

The last reason to purchase additional firearms and arm your neighbors is patriotism. Not because having a gun is a nationalistic requirement, but because of the intent by a group of men in 1776. The revolution that was fought for your rights put the 2nd amendment there so that we could protect each other in the face of adversity and crime. While we do have first-responders to keep law and order, their numbers are limited and they can’t be everywhere. Arming your neighbors and yourself, even with something as simple as a revolver, can make for a safer environment. With widespread riots and crimes taking place, from kidnappings to assaults, it’s good to have the peace of mind that comes with a secure village.

This article by Richard Douglas originally appeared here.

©Richard Douglas. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Harmeet Dhillon and James O’Keefe discuss Project Veritas’ Twitter Lawsuit on Hannity

/in , , , , /by

I announced today that I will be suing Twitter for defamation after they banned me for “operating fake accounts.”

Esteemed lawyer Harmeet Dhillon and I joined Sean Hannity on Fox News tonight to discuss just how we will do it:

All Americans who are defamed every day, their lives destroyed because they do not have the means to fight back – not on our watch.

This team is fighting for them and the principles that define us.

The tyranny of Twitter who lied with malice about me and admitted misinformation from CNN after we exposed CNN’s political agenda and the propaganda they push instead of reporting the news.

Twitter can try to erase us but they cannot change what our journalist captured – watch the CNN recordings and make up your own mind.

They have betrayed every American and every journalist trying to do their best as we are robbed of a free press so vital to our republic.

No matter how powerful, no matter what they do or say, we know nothing can change the fundamentals.

There is only one truth, and millions on all sides see this for what it is – tyranny backed by extraordinary wealth and power.

We will prevail because good is stronger than evil and worth fighting for always.

Indeed, we cannot lose.

Thank you, Twitter, for giving us this opportunity for discovery into your operations, and to inspire hundreds, thousands, millions to follow….

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas column and video are republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

COMMUNIST COUP: House Democrats Introduce Resolution to ABOLISH ELECTORAL COLLEGE

/in , , , , , , /by

The Democrats are destroying the country at breakneck speed. They staged a coup and the clock is ticking …..‘Unlimited majority rule is an instance of the principle of tyranny.’

‘Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority.’ (Rand)

The Democrats insist there was no issue with the 2020 election, so why do they suddenly want to radically change election methods?

The Electoral College was designed specifically to prevent the tyranny of big states over small states, as was the U.S. Senate, which affords all states, large and small, equal representation.

“If we did away with the Electoral College in favor of the national popular vote, the election would still be decided in a handful of states — populous states such as California and New York. Even though both of those states are deep blue, the GOP candidate would still fish in their waters, because swinging 1 or 2 percent into the red column would be worth more than swinging 1 to 2 percent in a smaller state. Voters in small states, such as Connecticut, would be permanently and completely disenfranchised.

Moreover, candidates would campaign in big media markets (which, of course, are in big states) in order to reach as many potential voters as efficiently as possible. This would favor media personalities and celluloid campaigns. Candidates would never have to meet voters one-on-one, as they do currently in small swing states.” (The Hill)

There are also motions afoot to make D.C. and Puerto Rico states – in order to tip the scales in favor of the Democrat-Nazi party: Washington Post reporting, ‘Democratic control of Senate put D.C. statehood front and center.’

More…..

Democrats are ramming through:

  • Ban the Electoral College
  • Give illegal aliens a path to citizenship
  • Provide slavery reparations
  • Take federal control of U.S. elections
  • Pack the SCOTUS with 4 new justices

RELATED ARTICLES:

BLOWING UP SCOTUS: Democrat Top Dogs Introduce Bill To Dismantle The Supreme Court And Install Packed Kangaroo Court

Democrat Jihad-Rep Rashida Tlaib Calls for ‘NO MORE POLICING, INCARCERATION’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.