Whitmer Kidnap Plotter Was Pardoned By Delaware Democrat Governor Last Year

MEDIA LIES: Michigan Kidnap Plotters of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer Are Anarchists who Hate Trump and Police

You reap what you sow.

Democrat chickens coming home to roost.

Buck-buck-buck.

Suspect in Whitmer kidnap plot was pardoned in Delaware last year

By Morgan Gstalter, The Hill, October 10, 2020:

Delaware Gov. John Carney (D) last year signed the pardon of one of the men accused this week of plotting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D), the Delaware News Journal first reported.

Carney in April 2019 signed off on the pardon for Barry Gordon Croft Jr., who faced a series of charges in Delaware during the mid-1990s, including possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, assault and burglary.

A spokesman for Carney said in a statement that the governor called Croft’s federal charges “disturbing” and called for everyone involved with the kidnapping plot in Michigan to be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

“This is also another warning sign about the growing threat of violence and radicalization in our politics,” Carney said.

The pardon had been recommended by the five-person Delaware Board of Pardons. The outlet noted that the details of Croft’s hearing are unclear because no minutes were recorded.

Lt. Gov. Bethany Hall-Long (D), who chairs the board, said in a statement to the News Journal that pardons are recommended to the governor based on several factors, including “the position of the Department of Justice, the nature of the incident(s), the time lapsed from the last conviction, and the impact on employment and housing.”

Mat Marshall, a spokesman for Attorney General Kathy Jennings (D), said in a statement to the outlet that her predecessor, Matt Denn, did not oppose Croft’s pardon because his criminal record was from two decades ago.

“It appeared to everyone involved that his offenses were in his past and that he had gotten himself on the right track,” Marshall said in a statement.

Nether state prosecutors nor the Board of Pardons would have endorsed Croft’s pardon had they known “what the future held.”

Read the rest

RELATED ARTICLES:

President Trump Tells Rush: ‘Iran Has Been Put On Notice’ To Not ‘F*ck Around With Us’

WATCH LIVE: BLEXIT March in Washington, DC…

Biden: No, Americans Don’t Deserve to Know If I Support Packing the Court

“We’ve Got The Emails”: Secretary of State Pompeo will release Hillary Clinton’s emails before the election

President Trump Says He Will Donate Own Blood Plasma, Is No Longer on Medication for COVID-19

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

All of Hillary Clinton’s emails posted on U.S. State Department website

The U.S. State De­part­ment has re­leased more of Hil­lary Rod­ham Clin­ton’s email cor­res­pond­ence, re­viv­ing scru­tiny of her ser­vice in the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW HILLARY CLINTON’S EMAILS.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Breaking Down the Illusion of Systemic Racism

Wilfred Reilly on Breonna Taylor, Riots & Beyond


“Every system you could possibly think of produces some kind of racial or sexual or class discrepancy. And this allows the radicals to be radicals eternally, and to claim that everything is racist,” says Wilfred Reilly.

Headlines tell us that blacks get shot by police officers more often, get paid less than whites, and tend to do worse on standardized tests. Many point to systemic racism as the cause of these apparent discrepancies, but in most cases, this argument ignores basic facts, says Wilfred Reilly, Associate Professor of Political Science at Kentucky State University. He’s the author of “Hate Crime Hoax” and “Taboo: 10 Facts You Can’t Talk About.” This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

WATCH:

©American Thought Leaders – The Epoch Times. All rights reserved.

New Jersey Mail Carrier Charged With Throwing Away Mail-In Ballots

A New Jersey postal worker was arrested and charged Wednesday with discarding multiple pieces of mail, including election ballots, CBS News reported.

Over 1,800 pieces of mail were retrieved from dumpsters, 99 of which were ballots, according to CBS. Federal prosecutors told the network that the postal worker, identified as Nicholas Beauchene, 26, was scheduled to deliver mail in parts of Orange and West Orange, New Jersey.

Nearly 300 campaign flyers promoting candidates for the West Orange Council and the township’s school board also were recovered from local dumpsters, CBS reported.

Beauchene faces up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000, FOX29 Philadelphia reported.

The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>

News of the incident comes amid ongoing concerns regarding mail-in ballots and voter registration forms in several states.

President Donald Trump tweeted his concern Tuesday for states such as North Carolina, saying: “11,00[0] North Carolina residents get incorrect voter registration forms.” [The president mistyped “11,000” as “11,00.”]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313661368856457217?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1313661368856457217%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailysignal.com%2F2020%2F10%2F08%2Fnew-jersey-mail-carrier-charged-with-throwing-mail-in-ballots-away%2F

COLUMN BY

BERNADETTE BRESLIN

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kamala Harris Fabricated ‘Honest Abe’ Quote In History Lesson On Supreme Court Vacancies

Report: Durham Using Grand Jury To Investigate Debunked Trump-Russia Allegation

Here’s Who Won The Debate, According To A Drudge Poll

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

‘Infidel’: At Last, a Film That Deals Realistically with Islamic Terrorism

It is a staple of the Muslim victimhood industry to complain that Hollywood frequently features Muslim terrorist villains, and seldom depicts Muslims as anything other than terrorists. Reality is just the opposite: can you think of even one major motion picture that featured Islamic terrorists as the villains? In a typical instance, Tom Clancy’s The Sum of All Fears, jihadis were the villains, but when the book was made into a movie, the villains were changed to neo-Nazis. Moviemakers routinely shy away from depicting the grim reality of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women and others. But not Cyrus Nowrasteh.

Nowrasteh, who gave us the eye-opening and heart-rending 2009 film The Stoning of Soraya M., which focused on an honor killing, has written, directed, and produced the new movie Infidel, starring Jim Caviezel, Claudia Karvan, and Hal Ozsan. Infidel is as startling, on many levels, as it is gripping. Caviezel plays a Christian blogger who is kidnapped by a Hizballah cell (headed up by a cheerfully villainous and thoroughly engaging Ozsan) and taken to Iran.

That this is the storyline is in itself remarkable. Were Infidel the production of virtually any director besides Nowrasteh, Caviezel’s Christian character Doug Rawlins would turn out to be stupid, evil, or both, while Ozsan’s Ramzi, even while being a Hizballah kidnapper, would be depicted as wise, noble, or even heroic. Muslims are victims of Islamophobic, racist, redneck American yahoos — that’s the general Hollywood narrative, played out in innumerable films.

Infidel instead opts to be more realistic, recalling actual events that seldom gain Hollywood’s notice, such as the 1987 kidnapping of journalist Charles Glass by Hizballah in Lebanon. Infidel unflinchingly portrays the gleeful brutality and inhumanity of Rawlins’ captors, as well as his own struggles to maintain his Christian faith amid torture and isolation. Amid all this, the film’s realism is thoroughgoing: once the movie’s perspective was established, it was refreshing to see Caviezel portray Rawlins as alternately angry, afraid, and confused, rather than as a plaster saint, above the fray and singing hymns even as he is being beaten and verbally abused.

Nor is that all. Besides being one of the few feature films to portray the reality of jihad terror in a realistic manner, Infidel is also one of the first, if not the first, major motion pictures to depict the pervasive but seldom-noticed reality of secret Christians in majority-Muslim countries, as well as the Sharia death penalty for leaving Islam, honor killings, and even the “Islamophobia” scam. Early in the movie, before Rawlins has left the U.S. and been kidnapped, investigators are searching the home of Javid, a Muslim friend of Rawlins. They find that Javid’s basement is filled with unmistakable evidence that he is a jihad terrorist, or at very least a terrorist sympathizer.  All the while, however, a lawyer does her best to impede the search, proclaiming that it is “Islamophobia” to think that anything is amiss with Javid at all.

That is a recurring reality of life in America today: for years now it has been routine that any honest examination of jihad terror and Sharia oppression, and any effort to impede it, is “Islamophobic” and hence to be eschewed by all decent people. Up to now, the closest movies got to this phenomenon was their producers’ own fear of being tarred with the “Islamophobic” label if they got too close to depicting jihad violence in an accurate manner, or at very least without some kind of assurance to the audience that Islam is really not like that, but gentle, peaceful, and altogether benign. For a film to show how the “Islamophobia” weapon is actually wielded in order to stymie counterterror efforts is nothing short of astonishing.

But Infidel is much more than the sum of the topics that are usually ignored or obfuscated, and that it dares to depict. Infidel is, above all, a terrific story, well-acted and superbly presented – a story of love, of passion, of hatred, of commitment, of self-sacrifice, and much more. I would have written that they don’t make them like this anymore, but clearly, as long as Cyrus Nowrasteh is writing, directing, and producing movies, they still do.

RELATED ARTICLES:

France: Muslim migrant on trial for plotting jihad massacre at Sunday Mass in Paris church

Turkey: Religious Affairs top dog says ‘the goal’ is for Hagia Sophia to become a center of knowledge about Islam

Pope’s new encyclical praises imam who supports wife-beating and death penalty for apostates

Congo: Muslims murder at least 58 people, kidnap 17 in jihad attacks on predominantly Christian villages

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

PODCAST: Sen. Marsha Blackburn Previews Barrett’s Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, joins the “Daily Signal News” podcast to talk about the committee’s confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, set to begin next week.

Senate Democrats, who generally have supported virtual hearings during the pandemic, now demand in-person hearings to consider Barrett. How is the Judiciary Committee’s Republican leadership responding? What kind of questions will Barrett face? Blackburn breaks it down.

We also cover these stories:

  • The White House physician, Sean Conley, announces that President Donald Trump no longer has symptoms of COVID-19.
  • Trump tweets: “Flu season is coming up! Many people every year, sometimes over 100,000, and despite the Vaccine, die from the Flu.”
  • The president breaks off negotiations with congressional Democrats over a new coronavirus relief bill.

The “Daily Signal News” podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple PodcastsPippaGoogle Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts may be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You also may leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

Rachel del Guidice: I am joined today on “The Daily Signal Podcast” by Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. Sen. Blackburn, it’s great to have you with us on “The Daily Signal Podcast.”

Sen. Marsha Blackburn: I am thrilled to join you. Thank you so much for the invitation.

Del Guidice: Well, it’s great to have you with us. And you are part of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Next week, the confirmation hearings will be starting for Judge Amy [Coney] Barrett, who is President [Donald] Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Can you tell us a little bit about how you expect these hearings to go given the whole current situation with coronavirus?

Blackburn: Yes. We are going to follow a model which has been in place for the Senate since COVID hit, and that is called a hybrid model. With this, the hearing is convened in person, but members and witnesses are allowed to attend virtually. All total, the Senate has done about 150 hearings under this model, and the Senate Judiciary Committee itself has done 21 hearings on this model.

So, that’s the model that we are going to use, and we will begin on the 12th. We will wrap up on the 15th. We will vote her out of committee on the 22nd. Then I expect she’ll be on the floor the 26th or 27th.

Del Guidice: Well, Democrats have been supportive of virtual hearings up until now, but now they’re demanding in-person hearings. What is your perspective in response to all this?

Blackburn: They are trying to do anything they can do to delay this confirmation.

What they would like is to have a liberal justice on the court. The reason for that is because they don’t want to have a constitutionalist there who would block them from implementing socialized medicine and taking away the health insurance from 170 million Americans. They don’t want a justice who would block their implementation of the Green New Deal and step on your private property rights.

They want to be able to pack the Supreme Court. They want to be able to abolish the Electoral College and give statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico. They have a very aggressive first 100-day agenda if they take the White House, the House, and the Senate, and that is what they are planning to move forward on. They know that the Supreme Court could get in their way of achieving their goal of implementing that agenda.

Del Guidice: How is the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican leadership responding to this pressure from Senate Democrats?

Blackburn: We’ve set the schedule, and we’re moving forward on the schedule. We just understand what it is that they are trying to do and why.

Del Guidice: Well, you’re very passionate about the judge’s personal life story. Can you talk to us a little bit about that?

Blackburn: She is a role model, and it should be an encouragement to all women that, indeed, you can be a wife, a mother, a lawyer, a law professor, a judge, and have a wonderful family and home life.

That is what Judge Barrett and her husband have done. They have seven children—two are adopted from Haiti, one has special needs—and they have figured out this work-life balance that so many of us … working moms have been able to figure out.

It is really encouraging to see her. She’d be the first mother with school-age children on the court. So what a great role model for so many women.

I find it also really interesting that what they’re trying to do is use her religion against her—but isn’t this what the left does? They take something that is a strength, and then they try to turn it into a negative. That is what they’re doing with Judge Barrett.

Basically, what they are saying, if you’re a woman of faith, if you’re active in your church, in your religion, if you take your children to church every Sunday, then that should be a disqualifier from serving on the federal bench.

We know that that is not right. It is expressly prohibited from having a religious litmus test in this country for people that want to serve on the judiciary. We know that a lot of the left would like to have only atheists or secularists on the federal bench.

Del Guidice: Sen. Blackburn, I want to get back to the judge’s role as a mom and some of the attacks she’s seen there, but I do want to ask you a little bit more about the attacks we’ve seen on her faith.

We saw them in 2017 with Sen. [Dianne] Feinstein, and I wanted to ask you, do you think it’s appropriate—we talked about this a little bit, but I want to talk about it a little bit more—to attack someone’s faith or religion during a confirmation hearing?

Blackburn: No, I don’t. This came up during her circuit court confirmation hearing. I have to tell you, to refer to your faith as dogma, to ask about orthodoxy in the manner that Sen. [Dick] Durbin did, to attack the Knights of Columbus—which is something we’ve heard come from Sen. [Kamala] Harris—in my opinion, it is just really misplaced and unseemly.

We have religious liberty in this country. We have the right to worship. For them to then begin to attack her and use this as a negative because she is a woman of faith is, I think, very unexpected and is something that’s going to turn a lot of people off.

Del Guidice: Going back to some of the attacks the judge has seen for her … serving as a mother to her children, there is a Boston University professor who had said that Judge Barrett was a racist and a white colonizer for adopting the two black children that she has. I just was wondering, do you have any response or perspective to that statement from this professor?

Blackburn: They feel as if you are pro-life, pro-family, pro-religion, pro-business, pro-military, then your voice does not deserve to be heard. Because of that, we know that they are going to be attacking her and continuing to attack her.

I thought it was so interesting when the reporter came out and said, “Oh, she has seven children. Does she have time to do this job?” Would they ever have said that about a liberal woman? …

So now, they’re going to attack her for those values, for the actions that she has taken, for not staying home and taking care of her children all day long, every day.

Del Guidice: Multiple Democrat senators—including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, Richard Blumenthal, a few more—have said that they are even refusing to meet with her before these hearings [start]. They said that this past week. What is your perspective on them refusing to even meet with her?

Blackburn: I think it’s so disrespectful to just not even show up because you want to make a point. Now, think about what they’re sending to millions of young girls and how they are completely discounting Judge Barrett.

Del Guidice: What do you suspect, Sen. Blackburn, [are] some of the questions she’ll receive from your colleagues, as well as the colleagues across the aisle?

Blackburn: Yeah, I think there’ll be questions about the issue of abortion, Roe v. Wade. You’re probably going to hear some about presidential overreach and immigration. You’ll hear some about campus free speech.

Then the Judge has done over a hundred opinions, so there are plenty of things for us to work through and filter through to glean questions. I would imagine most of my colleagues are like me, they’re working through that right now.

Del Guidice: How will you respond? Or how do you think it will be appropriate to respond if we see attacks that mirror what happened to now-Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings? Are you expecting anything like that? How do you think that should be responded to if it does in fact happen?

Blackburn: Well, we certainly think that it’s going to happen. They have said as much. They want to delay the hearing so that she doesn’t get through prior to the election. So we’re going into it expecting to hear that.

The response should be, the president is doing his constitutionally-mandated duty by appointing someone. He is following the historical precedents of our nation in making this nomination. He’s not the first one to do it. It has happened 29 times in our nation’s history.

Now, we are going to do our constitutional duty. We’re going to take up the nomination to confirm her. We will vote either to confirm or not to confirm, and then we’ll send it back to the president.

Del Guidice: We’ve talked a little bit about how Judge Barrett is a mom of seven, she’s a professor at Notre Dame, served in the courts, and we’ve talked about the attacks that she has seen [from] people in this country for everything that she has done. I wanted to ask you, what is all she has done in the attacks we’ve seen on her really demonstrated about the president’s confidence in nominating her to the Supreme Court?

Blackburn: The president felt like she was the best individual for the job. She is a constitutionalist, she’s an originalist, and that is the type of justice he wanted to see serve on the Supreme Court. You’re going to hear her talk a little bit about that when she comes up for the hearings.

Del Guidice: Finally, Sen. Blackburn, we’ve talked a little bit about this, but given what we saw with Justice Kavanaugh and some of the attacks we’ve already seen on Judge Barrett, what is your overall perspective on how the media has handled the coverage of Judge Barrett so far?

Blackburn: They have shown their bias and their prejudice against her, and we expect it will continue next week.

Del Guidice: Well, Sen. Blackburn, it’s been great to have you with us on “The Daily Signal Podcast.” We hope to have you back talking about the hearings once they’ve started. Thank you so much for joining us.

Blackburn: Bye-bye.

PODCAST BY

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a congressional reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG

RELATED ARTICLE: Barrett’s Former Colleagues: ‘No One … Better Suited to Be on the Supreme Court’


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


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

WhyWould.com Launches Petition Against Mail-In Voting

PLYMOUTH, Minn.Oct. 5, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — The mail in voting system is flawed and imperfect.  It is fraught with abuse, incompetent and potential criminality that could plunge this nation into a constitutional crisis, the likes it’s never seen in its youthful 240+ year history.  The current situation has already illustrated a dangerous lack of oversight and supervision that will eventually lead to fraud, chaos and a tear in the constitutional fabric of our great nation.

Whywould.com LLC is spearheading a drive to seek a million patriotic signatures to prevent the current drive for mass mail-in voting during the coming election.  There is still time to persuade the national board of elections to curtail and possibly halt all mail in voting this year.

Voting by mail without a secure and methodical oversight encourages voter fraud, intimidation and the further erosion of our constitutional protections afforded the sanctity of the secret ballot process.

If it were held to the same standard as the absentee ballot system verified via a photo ID and proof of eligibility, there would be no need for this action.  However, if an ID is required to cash a check, board a plane, purchase everyday items including food, prescriptions and or to gain entry into a secured building.  Voting is the tenant upon which this great nation was founded not afforded the same respect and attention?  There is simply, no justification for denying this most basic and fundamental right only American citizens are afforded.

At the time of this release, there have already been instances of blatant fraud involving mail-in voting throughout battleground states.  Our servicemen and women have been denied their casted ballots in a flagrant attempt to nullify their voices and some have proactively resorted to the illegal harvesting of ballots in favor of a particular ideology.

We need to prevent this fraud before it turns to chaos and we are counting on one million patriots across the nation to sign our petition and make their voices heard.

For more info, visit: https://www.whywould.com/

©Whywould.com LLC . All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Trump Begins to Get Tough on Communists Immigrating!

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

FRED LUCAS

Fred Lucas, award-winning journalist and veteran White House correspondent.

TOPIC: “Abuse of Power: Inside the Three-Year Campaign to Impeach Donald Trump.”

DR. GERARD LAMEIRO

Dr. Gerard Lameiro is an author, philosopher, economist, and engineer.

TOPIC: Who Lost the Presidential Debate?

DR. RICH SWIER, ED.D., LTC, U.S. ARMY (RET.)

Dr. Rich Swier publisher of “drrichswier.com report”.

TOPIC: Trump Begins to Get Tough on Communists Immigrating!

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

VIDEO: Biden’s Legacy of Character Assassination

Former VP set precedent for vicious hearings.


WASHINGTON (ChurchMilitant.com) – Joe Biden mutated Senate hearings of Supreme Court nominees into a “blood sport,” according to a Washington attorney who has worked on three Senate confirmations.

“As we head toward Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearings on her nomination to the Supreme Court, let’s not forget that former Vice President Joe Biden is responsible for turning the high court confirmation process into a blood sport driven by character assassination,” attorney Mark Paoletta commented on Thursday.

A senior official for the Trump administration, Paoletta worked on the Senate confirmations of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

“Biden, now the Democratic presidential nominee, claims to work across the aisle with Republicans,” Paoletta observed. “But his vicious conduct as a Democratic senator from Delaware in the confirmation hearings for Robert Bork (whose nomination was not confirmed) and now-Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is a permanent stain on the Senate’s reputation.”

Paoletta observed that Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, behaved in like manner during the 2018 Senate hearing for Brett Kavanaugh, smearing the now-Justice’s reputation with “baseless and absurd allegations.”

“We are fortunate that neither Biden nor Harris is chairing the confirmation hearings scheduled to begin Oct. 12 in the Judiciary Committee for [Amy Coney] Barrett, who is currently a judge on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and was nominated to the Supreme Court Saturday by President Trump,” continued Paoletta.

Paoletta recalled President Ronald Reagan’s 1987 nomination of U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, noting Bork “was considered one of the finest legal scholars and well-regarded public servants in our country, earning an extremely well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association.”

“But the left — led by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Biden — decided to savage Bork through character attacks and false claims in a craven and unprincipled tactic for political gain,” he explained.

Character Assassination of Justice Clarence Thomas

Biden behaved even worse with the smear campaign against now-Justice Clarence Thomas in 1991, according to Paoletta.

“Thomas seemed on his way to Senate confirmation with more than 60 votes when, prodded on by Democratic staff, Anita Hill lodged last-minute, baseless accusations of sexual harassment against Thomas, which were leaked by these same Democratic staffers,” Paoletta recalled.

Anita Hill accused Thomas of sexual harassment as her supervisor at the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Paoletta explained that “Biden used his position as Judiciary Committee chairman to execute the character assassination,” allowing “Hill’s lawyer to sit in on her key corroborating witness interview, bending the rules to help hype Hill’s salacious lies by trying to selectively stifle what senators could discuss.”

Spotlighting Biden’s duplicity at the time, Paoletta said:

Biden now says he always believed Hill. But that is a lie. Biden told Clarence Thomas that if Hill’s allegations were leaked, he would defend Thomas’ character. Biden told Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, during the hearings that he did not believe Hill. And Biden told Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., in a 1998 interview that he did not believe Anita Hill was telling the truth.

Paoletta was with Justice Thomas the night he was confirmed when the phone rang.

“It was Joe Biden calling to congratulate Thomas on getting confirmed, telling him not to let this get him down and that Thomas had many years to show the American people what he was — a person of character,” he recollected. “Does that sound like a man who believed Anita Hill’s allegations?”

“I was a young attorney at the time and had worked closely with Thomas through that awful ordeal, and I could not believe that Biden had allowed this circus — this “national disgrace,” as Thomas called it — to happen when Biden never believed Anita Hill,” he added.

Robert Bork‘s Wife in Agreement

Published on Monday in the Wall Street Journal, Mary Ellen Bork, Robert Bork’s widow, offered comment in a piece titled, “Joe Biden and the Borking of Supreme Court Nominees.”

“The week of hearings in 1987 showed me Joe Biden’s partisanship and pragmatism,” she noted. “Most people don’t remember the hearings on Robert Bork for nomination to the Supreme Court, but I do.”

“I was there during the four months of vicious political campaigning against this judicial nominee, my husband, and in the Senate hearing room as then-Sen. Biden presided over a rigged hearing full of an unprecedented level of lying and distortion of a man known for his integrity and judicial wisdom,” she continued. “Democrats flagrantly lied about Bob’s record of opinions.”

Biden was running for president at the time.

“On day four of the hearings Sen. Biden was accused of plagiarism and had to drop out of the presidential race,” Bork remembered. “In the course of one week Sen. Biden orchestrated a vicious lying assault and was caught passing off someone else’s words as his own.”

Now, thirty-three-years later, Biden is running for president again — “still a man without a compass, guided now by prevailing progressive winds,” says Bork.

“After Bob left the court in 1988 to devote himself to writing and teaching, Democrats would often come up to him to apologize for the way the Democratic politicians treated him and would leave with tears in their eyes,” she shared. “We will all have tears in our eyes if Joe Biden is elected president.”

Robert Bork died a Catholic, having credited his wife for his conversion.

COLUMN BY

William Mahoney, Ph.D.

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

Voter Fraud the ONLY Issue in 2020 Election

No, it’s not “the economy, stupid.” In spite of the bipolar stock market since the China virus hit the world last March, our remarkably resilient economy––thanks to President Trump––is now on the ascent, employment rates growing once again, and consumer confidence increasingly robust.

And no, it’s not domestic policy, where, among his unprecedented accomplishments:

  • Prison reform is in the process of transforming entire populations of mostly black lifelong recidivist losers into potential lifelong contributor winners.
  • A border wall––hotly contested by Democrats who never once protested the invasion of drug cartels, criminals, and disease-ridden illegals––has already yielded a significant reduction in these plagues.
  • Hundreds of conservative judges have been appointed and probably three Constitution-respecting Supreme Court judges.
  • Democrat mayors in a dozen states are proving their jaw-dropping incompetence by not only failing to stem the tide of rampant arson, theft, and murder by the anarchist groups Black Lives Matter and Antifa, but encouraging these criminals when they refuse the help offered to them by President Trump.

And no, it’s not foreign policy, in which Pres. Trump has succeeded in having:

  • European nations pay their fair-share to NATO.
  • Our troops coming home from Syria and Afghanistan.
  • Tariffs having China off balance.
  • Not one international conflict in almost-four years.
  • A now-flourishing relationship between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, a historic Kosovo-Serbia economic deal, an Israel-Bahrain deal (with Saudi Arabia not far behind), and three richly-deserved Nobel Peace Prize nominations for President Trump.

NONE OF THE ABOVE

Why? Because Democrats simply don’t care for policies that benefit America and Americans.

The only thing Democrats have cared about for the past hundred years is winning elections at any cost, the better to inflict their strangulating socialist/communist and now Islamist style of government on the American people.

And in the past four years in particular, all they’ve been maniacally obsessed with is deposing, impeaching or insuring that President Trump not be reelected even if the perpetual sore losers of the left have to buy the guns they say they hate to wage a Civil War!

Why? Because the business mogul and non-politician Citizen Trump won the last election by exposing:

  • “The Swamp’s” systemic depravity, corruption, and treason.
  • The Democrats’ America-Last policies.
  • The bias of the bought-and-paid-for leftist Media Whores of the Fake-News Media for all the world to witness.
  • The Democrat racism that has kept blacks with broken families, mal-educated, imprisoned, and impoverished for decades on end.
  • The horrific trade deals that benefitted foreign nations but not America.
  • The fallacy that no Mideast peace is possible without striking a deal with the exploited-by-their-brethren people who call themselves Palestinians.
  • The craven deals that made our country dependent on foreign oil by––POOF!––making America completely energy independent.

As I often and regretfully state because of space limitations, the above is the short list.

THE METHOD TO THEIR MADNESS

Dozens of books have spelled out in scandalous detail how Democrats have stolen elections over the past many decades by enlisting the votes of illegal aliens, absentee voters who simply don’t exist, and of course dead voters.

Among the most riveting are:

Then there is Ballot Harvesting, a scheme exclusively used by Democrats to, ahem, win elections. How does it work? According to CA political commentator Stephan Frank, anyone––campaign workers, minors, illegals, et al––go door to door to “help” people fill out ballots that strangely favor Democrats, and refuse to collect ballots from anyone they suspect of voting the “wrong” way. They even pay them to vote the “right way.”

Intimidation is common and nothing stops them from altering ballots or throwing out ballots for the undesired candidate.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, currently 26 states allow this fraudulence, a practice being aggressively and successfully challenged by Tom Fitton of electionintegrity@judicialwatch.org.

Not to omit the now-defunct ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a massive group of over 500,000 members which operated nationwide since 1970, registering voters and helping people sign up for government-financed programs.

ACORN was exposed for its criminal activities in 2009 by James O’Keefe, founder of The Veritas Project, resulting in multiple convictions for massive voter fraud in several states, and it closed its doors in 2010, although it is believed that splinter groups formed and are active to this day.

Writer Barbara Kralis maintains  that “America’s election mail-in ballot scam has been a huge problem the last four national elections. Democrats and organized union officials keep ‘miraculously’ finding lost mail-in ballot boxes (fake ballots) on the days following each of the last four elections…” leading to highly suspect Democrat victories.

LET ME COUNT THE WAYS

The following is a tiny example of the vote-rigging methods used exclusively by Democrats:

Here’s a beauty from Doug Ross@Journal: In PAMIMINN, and WI, Democrat activists dressed in black robes have fundamentally rewritten state election laws. Among them are:

  • Mail-in ballots can be received up to seven days after the election and still be counted.
  • These ballots can be missing postmarks and still be counted.
  • The signature on the ballot doesn’t even have to match with that of the registered voter.
  • As a bonus, they have banned the Green Party from the ballot to prevent erosion of the Biden vote.
  • All these illegal proclamations directly contravene state law and are a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.
  • More than 534,000 mail ballots were rejected during primaries across 23 states this yearnearly a quarter in key battlegrounds for the fall…(Washington Post).
  • In June, Democrats in NY signed into law a plan to give driver’s licenses to the state’s 725,000 illegal aliens, giving them the ability to vote.
  • In NC, voters reportedreceiving two ballots in the mail.
  • MN Sued Over Mail-In Ballot Ruling.
  • A top PA lawmaker called on the state to immediately expunge the names of 11,198 non-citizens whom the state confirmed are registered to vote despite not being eligible.
  • FBI Finds Discarded Military Mail-in Ballots Cast for Trump (see below picture).
  • Reports in WI of three trays of mail containing absentee ballots foundin a ditch.
  • Election Watchdog Finds 350,000 Dead Registrants on Voter Rolls in 42 States.
  • GA Investigating 1,000 Cases of Voter Fraud.
  • The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) of IN found the following: there may be as many as 350,000 dead people still registered to vote in U.S. elections; NY, TX, MI, FL, and CA accounted for 51 percent of the dead registrants; 40,000 likely duplicate voters may have voted twice; many state registrars have been forbidden to cull their voter rolls by the courts because hysterical Democrats claim some voters might be disenfranchised; NV’s largest county sent out more than200,000 mail-in primary ballots to the wrong addresses, while 84,000 mail-in presidential primary ballots cast in NY City were disqualified.
  • Hillary Clinton: Biden “Should Not Concede Under Any Circumstances”––Mmm…does this pathologically sore loser know something We the People don’t know?
  • Study: 12 Percent of Voters in VA Could be Registered Illegally.
  • NV Sent More Than 200,000 Mail-In Primary Ballots to Wrong Addresses.
  • IL Sued After Refusing to Disclose Statewide Voter Data (the above six items reported by Joe Schoffstallof The Washington Free Beacon).
  • CA Man Finds THOUSANDS of Unopened Ballots in Garbage Dumpster, Workers Quickly Try to Cover Them Up Cover Them Up.
  • Again, CA political commentator Stephan Frank reports: Trump IS Right: Post Office Is Discarding, Hiding Absentee Ballots! (Well, whaddaya know––Joe Biden just received the endorsement of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union!).
  • Not that proof is needed, but recently a Democrat operative told The NY Post’s Jon Levine: “You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.”

Again, space limitations prevent me from listing hundreds upon hundreds more examples of Democrat voter fraud.

PARTNERS IN CRIME

Not satisfied to leave voter fraud in the hands of paid lackeys, ACORN splinter groups, or state governors, the new Masters of the Universe in Big Tech have let their fellow leftists know that they’re all in.

According to a Google whistleblower in Allum Bokhari’s new book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal the Election, “When voters find out what Big Tech companies have done to meddle in the coming election, they’ll be rightly furious” at the attempts of Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other tech companies to sway the coming election in Biden’s favor.

“There is even a one-hour recording of Google’s co-founders and executives lamenting Trump’s election and vowing not to let it happen again,” according to Bokhari.

Democrats Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi are closely aligned with groups like Majority Forward (created in 2015) that funnel millions in secret cash into 2020 elections, according to FreeBeacon.com. While Democrats “have long railed against dark money in politics, they now outpace Republicans in its usage.”

Linda Goudsmit, author of The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’, sees the upcoming election as another “sinister leftist, Islamist, globalist attack on America.” We are only weeks away from the election,” she said, and “the enemies of America are desperate and behaving like cornered animals poised for attack. Their survival is at stake because if POTUS is reelected, he will take down the Deep State and expose them all. They know it and Trump knows it.”

Goudsmit’s point is really the crux of the Democrats’ desperation these past four years. With a Trump victory, you can be sure that over the next few months, both Attorney General Bill Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham will be handing out indictments to the many criminals from Barack Obama’s Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Central Intelligence Agency, Homeland Security, State Department, and every other department of our government, including the Military, in which he implanted his hate-America agents to commit either sedition or treason in the name of actualizing a genuine coup d’état against both a sitting president and America the Beautiful itself

It must be incomprehensible to them––they with all their prestigious college degrees, high IQs, impeccable credentials, fancy job titles, and positions in the highest reaches of the American government––that every ploy they used in the past, every arch machination, every exquisitely formulated plan of action…all resulted in four years of crashing failures.

Notwithstanding the fake polls showing the president’s faltering opponent ahead, it is clear that the internal polls of the president’s enemies tell them that he will win a second term handily, in fact in the proverbial landslide.

But now, quite suddenly and quite chillingly, President Trump is in the hospital fighting Covid-19. Is this the Deep State’s last malevolent attempt to prevent his reelection…and to save themselves from Leavenworth? Sounds about right to me. I only hope the president has several private armed guards and a food taster!

©Joan Swirsky. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Corporate Communism and The Deep State

The following is the transcript from an exclusive special report which premiered on “Making Sense of the Madness” daily broadcast. This is part of an ongoing series of reports researched and submitted by independent investigative journalists and contributors. This report, Corporate Communism and the Deep State, was submitted by Alexandra Bruce of ForbiddenKnowledgeTv.net

What you are about to view, may be considered to be a disruptive uncomfortable truth. Information that is not typically addressed in the main stream media but we consider the information to be not only timely, but of great importance. Welcome to your life. Welcome to the great awakening. Be sure to share this far and wide.

Corporations and Organizations

Black Lives Matter is a Marxist organization that claims to fight the power on behalf of the powerless, yet they have the backing of the most powerful corporations on Earth. It may come as a surprise that the same can be said about the original Communist Revolution, which was financed by the banker elite. In fact, we see the exact same tactics being used by the Deep State today to finance the current Communist insurrection in the U.S. as was used by them for the Russian Revolution in the early twentieth century.

In July of 2020, following the death of George Floyd, one hundred of the largest companies in the U.S. committed to donating over one point six billion dollars to organizations fighting racism and inequality. Companies that specifically pledged money to the Black Lives Matter Foundation included Amazon, Microsoft, Intel, Xbox, Warner Records, Pepsi, Gatorade and Uggs, among others. That same month, Hungarian billionaire George Soros announced that he was donating an additional two hundred and twenty million dollars to the Black Lives Matter movement, with much of the money going into efforts to control 2020 voting systems and to de-fund the police.

Soros

As a wave of protests and rioting swept across the United States, Soros’ Open Society cheered that this was “the moment we’ve been investing in for the last 25 years.” They say seventy million dollars will be immediately spent on plans for, quote “ongoing efforts to fight voter suppression and disinformation and ensure safe and secure elections in the midst of the pandemic,” unquote. This likely refers to vote-by-mail programs and overturning ballot security laws. The remaining one hundred and fifty million dollars of the funds are part of a five-year plan to de-fund the police.

Alex Soros, George Soros’ son and deputy chair of the Open Society Foundations said, “This is the time for urgent and bold action to address racial injustice in America. These investments will empower proven leaders in the Black community to reimagine policing, end mass incarceration, and eliminate the barriers to opportunity that have been the source of inequity for too long.” Soros’ group blames America’s founding for racial injustice and vows to stop it, saying “We recognize that the struggle to dismantle systemic racism is an ongoing one; it has existed from the dawn of the republic to the present day and is embedded in every level of government and in our penal and justice systems.” It is clear from their tactics that George Soros and his Open Society Foundations are agents of the same central banking establishment that financed the Russian Revolution in 1917 and that Black Lives Matter and Antifa are instruments of the descendants of these same invisible trillionaires.

Wall Street and the Communist Revolution

In his 1993 book, Wall Street and the Communist Revolution, Professor Anthony Sutton wrote that, “One of the greatest myths of modern history is that the Communist Revolution in Russia was a popular uprising of the downtrodden masses against the hated ruling class of the Tsars.” What we find instead, is that the planning, the leadership and especially the financing of the Revolution came entirely from outside of Russia, mostly from financiers in Germany, Britain and the United States.

This amazing story begins with Jacob Schiff, who was head of the New York investment firm Kuhn, Loeb and Company. He was one of the principal backers of the Communist Revolution. He was also a major contributor to Woodrow Wilson’s presidential campaign and an advocate for passage of the Federal Reserve Act. During the Russo-Japanese War in 1904 and 1905, when Russia sought to gain control of a warm water port in the Pacific – and failed miserably – thousands of Russian soldiers and sailors were taken as prisoners by the Japanese. Forces hostile to the Tsarist regime outside of Russia paid for the printing of Marxist propaganda and had it delivered to the prison camps. Russian-speaking revolutionaries trained in New York were sent to distribute the pamphlets among the prisoners and to indoctrinate them into rebellion against their own government. When the war ended and these Russian soldiers returned home, they played a major role in creating mutiny among the military during the Communist takeover of Russia.

On March twenty third of 1917, a mass meeting was held at New York City’s Carnegie Hall to celebrate the abdication of Nicolas II and the overthrow of Tsarist rule in Russia. Thousands of socialists, Marxists, nihilists and anarchists attended to celebrate the event. The following day, on page two of the New York Times, was the telegram from Jacob Schiff, which had been read aloud to this audience, in which Schiff expressed regrets that he could not attend but which described the successful Russian revolution as quote, “what we had hoped and striven for these long years”, unquote. Years later in 1949, Schiff’s grandson, John, was quoted by a New York newspaper as saying that his grandfather had given about twenty million dollars for the triumph of Communism in Russia. That was a lot of money back then. One of the best-known Russian revolutionaries at that time was Leon Trotsky. In January of 1916, Trotsky was expelled from France and he came to Brooklyn, New York. Many believe that his expenses were paid by Jacob Schiff.

Watch 14 Minute Special Report:

Trotsky

When Trotsky returned to Russia in May of 1917 to organize the Communist phase of the Russian Revolution, he was arrested by Canadian and British naval personnel, when the ship on which he was traveling was docked at Halifax, Nova Scotia. He was found carrying ten thousand dollars for travel expenses, a very large sum considering the value of the dollar at that time. World War I and the Communist Revolution could have been stopped, right then and there, had he been detained but Trotsky was allowed to continue to Russia, due to the intervention of President Woodrow Wilson, who had given him his American passport. What emerges is a clear pattern of strong support for Communism coming from the highest financial and political power centers in the United States; from men who supposedly were capitalists and who, according to conventional wisdom should have been the mortal enemies of Socialism and Communism.

In Trotsky’s book, My Life, he tells of a British financier, who in 1907 gave him a quote, “large loan” unquote, to be repaid after the overthrow of the Tsar. That financier was identified as Lord Alfred Milner by White Russian General, Arsène de Goulevitch. “In private interviews”, Goulevitch said, “I have been told that over 21 million rubles were spent by Lord Milner in financing the Russian Revolution.” Another name specifically mentioned by de Goulevitch was that of Sir George Buchanan, the British Ambassador to Russia at the time. Milner would later become the UK’s Secretary of Defense and a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War One. In Winston Churchill’s book, The Follies of the Victors, he quoted Milner as saying of the treaty:  “If humanity is to be saved from the nightmare of another Armageddon it will only be by the creation of a New World Order. These million-odd words of the Peace Treaty, with all its seals and signatures, will mean nothing if there is not a change in heart, not only in Germany, but in all nations. The League of Nations by which we set so much store will be reduced to impotence if it is not backed by the moral forces of an enlightened public opinion…”Indeed, the League of Nations was founded by Woodrow Wilson after World War One but it failed to prevent World War Two it and was folded into what became the United Nations.

Deep State and the Red Cross

Sutton wrote that in Russia prior to and during the Revolution, there were many local observers, tourists and newsmen, who reported that British and American agents were everywhere, particularly in Saint Petersburg, providing money for the Communist insurrection. For example, one report said that British agents were seen handing out 25-ruble notes to the men of a regiment just a few hours before it mutinied against its officers and sided with the Communists. It was a repeat of the ploy that had worked so well for the Cabal many times in the past. Once again, the Deep State was working both sides of the conflict to weaken and topple a target government. Tsar Nicholas believed that since the British were Russia’s allies in the war against Germany, that the British officials would be the last to conspire against him. Yet it was the British Ambassador, himself who represented the hidden group, which was financing the regime’s downfall.

In America at the time, the Deep State didn’t have the advantage of using the diplomatic service as cover, so they used a tactic that has become familiar to us today. They used a highly-respected non-governmental organization and came disguised as Red Cross officials on a humanitarian mission. The group consisted almost entirely of financiers, lawyers and accountants from New York banks and investment firms. The demands of World War I had crushed he American Red Cross and it was taken over by these New York bankers, who purchased the organization with large contributions to operate in its name. As Professor Sutton tells us, the Red Cross raised two million dollars in 1910 from wealthy residents of New York City, like J.P. Morgan, who personally contributed one hundred thousand dollars.

For the duration of the war, the Red Cross was nominally made a part of the US Army and wore the uniform of Army officers. The entire expense of the Red Cross Mission in Russia, including the purchase of uniforms, was paid for by the man who was appointed by President Wilson to become its head, ‘Colonel’ William Boyce Thompson. Thompson was the classic specimen of the Deep State at the time, coming from the world of high finance. When he attended the opera in Saint Petersburg, he was given the imperial box. People on the street called him the American Tsar. Socialist Revolutionary leader, Alexander Kerensky viewed him as the real Ambassador of the United States. Thompson coordinated the Wall Street purchases of Russian bonds, totaling ten million rubles. In addition, he gave over two million rubles to Kerensky for propaganda purposes inside Russia.

Together with J.P. Morgan, Thompson gave the ruble equivalent of one million dollars to the Bolsheviks for the spreading of revolutionary propaganda outside of Russia, particularly in Germany and Austria. The agitation made possible by this funding led to the German Communist uprising, known as the Spartacus Revolt of 1918. The Morgan group provided funding for both Kerensky and Lenin. And although both were Socialist revolutionaries, they were in fact bitter competitors for control of the new Russian government. By then, the tactic of funding both sides of a political contest had been raised to a fine art by the Deep State.

America Under Siege Today

So, when we look at what’s happening in America today, we can see that many of the destabilization tactics being used against us are at least a century old and they were deployed by the financial elite to create the Soviet Union. When you go to the Anarcho-Communist website, Antifa.com you are automatically re-directed to JoeBiden.com. Although Biden may not tacitly approve of Antifa, he hasn’t really condemned them, either. However, Antifa clearly approves of Biden.

Biden’s Soros-backed running mate, Kamala Harris approves of the protests. She says the riots aren’t going to stop before the election and they won’t stop afterwards. Moreover, she says that they shouldn’t stop. She says that *we* shouldn’t stop. As President, Kamala Harris would double down on the current Communist insurrection. That’s why she was picked by George Soros.

HR7120

House Bill 7120: the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020 was introduced by Kamala Harris, Corey Booker and Karen Bass and it passed in Congress on June twenty-fifth but it has yet to pass in the Senate and to be approved by the President. Trump would never approve of it but Biden or Harris certainly would. House Bill 7120 does to local law enforcement what the Trans-Pacific Partnership aimed to do to the US economy, which was to circumvent US Sovereignty and hand our power over to a transnational consortium.

Dismantling the police is the tried-and-true plan that NATO has used in countries all over the world to take over a country’s police departments, city-by-city. It is a tactic that was outlined in Doug Valentine’s book, called ‘The Phoenix Program’. When you make a donation to the Marxist group, Black Lives Matter, the payment is processed by ActBlue. ActBlue is the activist arm of the Democrat Party, a party that has become Communist, almost overnight. ActBlue distributes these donation funds as they see fit, with most of it going to Joe Biden’s campaign. If Joe Biden wins the presidency, the Deep State, comprised of the banking, corporate and media elites will have succeeded in ushering in a nascent Communist regime in the United States.

Summary

The Deep State and Shadow Government will stop at nothing. We are at a crossroads for humanity. It’s either us-or them. This one is for all the marbles and this story is not yet over. We have an awesome responsibility to expose the lies and crimes and to reveal the truth. Freedom? It’s up to us. This is John Michael Chambers. Thank you for reading this special report and be sure to share it far and wide. And remember, stay the course, trust the plan, heed the call for WWG1WGA. God Bless.

©John Michael Chamber. All rights reserved.

Here’s a List of Democrats Who Have Attacked Amy Coney Barrett for Her Faith


A number of Democratic lawmakers and liberal media figures have attacked Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett for her Catholic beliefs.

The Catholic mother of seven first came under fire for her Catholic faith at her 2017 confirmation hearings, when Democratic senators suggested that her beliefs might make her unfit to serve as a federal judge.

Barrett has faced renewed attacks on her faith ever since it became known that President Donald Trump was considering her for the vacancy, such as comedian Bill Maher saying she is a “f—–’ nut,” and “really, really Catholic—like speaking in tongues.”

And Maher isn’t alone in levying attacks against Barrett’s faith.

Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein

“Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling that dogma and law are two different things, and I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different,” Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein told Barrett when she came before the Senate Judiciary Committee in September 2017.

“The conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein added. “And that’s of concern.”

Feinstein refused in late September to address whether she would question Barrett in this way again, saying, “I’m not going to go there,” according to CNN.

“Let’s wait until she’s nominated,” she said regarding how Democrats would handle Barrett’s nomination. Feinstein and other Senate Democrats on Thursday requested a delay in Barrett’s confirmation process.

Democratic Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin

Democratic Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin also questioned Barrett over an article she co-authored as a law student that included the term “Orthodox Catholic,” asking Barrett: “Do you consider yourself an Orthodox Catholic?”

“If you’re asking whether I’m a faithful Catholic, I am, although I would stress that my own personal church affiliation or my religious belief would not bear on the discharge of my duties as a judge,” Barrett told him.

Durbin told The Daily Caller News Foundation after the hearing that he prefaced his remarks by saying that “going into a person’s religion is not the right thing to do in every circumstance.”

“But she’s been outspoken,” he said. “As a law school professor at Notre Dame she has taken on the tough challenge of how a person with strong religious beliefs becomes a judge and looks at American law.”

“So I think she has fashioned herself somewhat of an expert and I didn’t feel uncomfortable asking that question,” Durbin added.

Democratic Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono

Democratic Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono raised Barrett’s “closely held views” on Wednesday, suggesting that these views may make Barrett unfit to serve on the Supreme Court. Hirono questioned “whether her closely held views can be separated from her ability to make objective, fair decisions”

“She has very closely held views that will impact a woman’s right to choose,” Hirono said September 26, “and certainly she has already expressed her willingness to vote down the Affordable Care Act as well as other Supreme Court precedents.”

Hirono previously raised Barrett’s Catholic views during her 2017 confirmation hearing and in 2019 harangued a Catholic judge for his membership in Knights of Columbus, a Catholic charity.

Former Democratic California Rep. Katie Hill

Disgraced former Democratic California Rep. Katie Hill tweeted September 22: “If her religion never made it into her court decisions, she can believe what she wants. But, yes, personally, I DO object to any religion that still insists women be subservient.”

Hill denied that criticisms of Barrett are stemming from anti-Catholic bias, calling this “ridiculous,” according to Politico.

“This isn’t about Catholicism,” Hill said. “This isn’t even about religion. This is about extremism.”

“Someone’s religion is important when their religious beliefs are part of the way they make decisions that come before that court,” Hill told The New York Times.

The former congresswoman said Barrett holds “anti-women, anti-L.G.B.T.Q. positions, which are rooted in her religion” and would play into “her decisions on the court.”

Biden Campaign Deputy Data Director Nikitha Rai

Biden campaign Deputy Data Director Nikitha Rai criticized Barrett’s religious views in a Twitter conversation Monday night with Brookings Institute senior fellow Shadi Hamid.

“Wait, why is this news? Isn’t this the standard position for any orthodox Catholic?” Hamid asked about a tweet saying that Barrett was a trustee at a Catholic school that opposed same-sex marriage and said homosexual acts are “at odds with Scripture.”

“Unfortunately yes,” Rai responded.

Hamid noted that Orthodox Muslims and Jews also share this belief, to which Rai replied, “True. I’d heavily prefer views like that not be elevated to SCOTUS, but unfortunately our current culture is relatively intolerant. It will be awhile before those types of beliefs are so taboo that they’re disqualifiers.”

Rai has since locked her Twitter account. She did not respond to a request for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation and blocked The Daily Caller News Foundation’s reporter from sending her further messages.

DNC Committee Member Atima Omara

Democratic National Committee member Altima Omara compared Barrett to the character Aunt Lydia in the fictional dystopian novel and TV series “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

Aunt Lydia’s character, The Atlantic reported, “emotionally, mentally, physically, and sexually tortured the handmaids in her care” by cutting out their eyes and tongues, sewing their mouths shut, and tasing them for offenses. The publication noted that Aunt Lydia “enjoys” these cruelties in the show.

“Under the circumstances I’m pretty calm, yknow while the living version of Aunt Lydia in the Handmaid’s Tale gets nominated to the Supreme Court to replace a woman who literally spent her life fighting for gender equity,” Omara tweeted September 25.

Former 2020 Presidential Candidate Marianne Williamson

Amid reports that Barrett might be Trump’s choice to fill the Supreme Court vacancy, multiple news outlets falsely reported that the Catholic group People of Praise was the inspiration for “The Handmaid’s Tale” and highlighted Barrett’s reported connections with the group.

Former 2020 presidential candidate Marianne Williamson also highlighted Barrett’s associations to the group, calling People of Praise’s views “genuinely concerning.”

“Amy Barrett being Catholic is a good thing; Joe Biden is a Catholic too,” Williamson tweeted. “Republicans are trying to make it as though the Left is criticizing her Catholicism but it’s not true.”

“It’s the repressive tenets of the ‘People of Praise’ sect she belongs to that are genuinely concerning,” Williamson added.

People of Praise has not confirmed or denied Barrett’s membership, according to Reuters, ever since a 2017 New York Times article reported she was a member of the group.

“In suggesting a link between People of Praise and Margaret Atwood’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale,’ the burden of proof clearly lies with the news outlet making such a claim,” the group’s communications director Sean Connolly told The Daily Caller News Foundation in late September.

“Bottom line: There has never been any evidence whatsoever to suggest that the Indiana-based People of Praise played a role in inspiring Margaret Atwood’s book,” he added. He did not address whether Barrett is a member of the group.

Former Democratic Candidate for Colorado Senate Diane Bray

Diane Bray, a former Democratic candidate for the Colorado Senate, also likened Barrett to a character in “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

“Time to fight like hell or Handmaid’s Tale will be our reality,” she tweeted September 27. “Can’t wait to hear Amy Coney Barrett questioned on whether she ever had the role of ‘Handmaid’ in her People of Praise cult where women pledge subservience to men. You bet it’s relevant.”

COLUMN BY

Mary Margaret Olohan

Mary Margaret Olohan is a reporter covering social issues for The Daily Caller News Foundation. Twitter:@MaryMargOlohan.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

WATCH: President Trump Posthumously Pardons Boxer Jack Johnson

John Arthur Johnson, nicknamed the “Galveston Giant”, was an American boxer who, at the height of the Jim Crow era, became the first African American world heavyweight boxing champion.

According to Biography:

As Johnson became a bigger name in the sport of boxing, he also became a bigger target for a white America that longed to see him ruined. For his part, Johnson loved to brandish his wealth and his disdain for racial rules.

He dated white women, drove lavish cars and spent money freely. But trouble was always lurking. In 1912, he was convicted of violating the Mann Act for bringing his white girlfriend across state lines before their marriage. Sentenced to prison, he fled to Europe, remaining there as a fugitive for seven years. He returned to the United States in 1920 and ultimately served out his sentence.

WATCH:

©All rights reserved.

Breonna Taylor Case: Black Kentucky Attorney General Called ‘Sellout,’ Compared to Slavemaster


Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who spoke at the Republican National Convention, declined to bring murder charges against the three white officers involved in the tragic shooting of Louisville’s Breonna Taylor, a black woman.

Contrary to the public assertion made by a Taylor family lawyer, Cameron, who is black, said the Louisville police did not go to the wrong address when executing a search warrant. Nor was Taylor shot and killed in her bed, as also publicly asserted by the family lawyer.

Ben Crump, a spokesman and defense attorney for the Taylor family, falsely claimed the police went to the wrong address. And in a statement full of inaccuracies, Crump, who negotiated a $12 million settlement with Louisville, said:

Taylor and her boyfriend were asleep in their apartment when Louisville Police burst into the home without warning using a battering ram, in search of a suspect who was already in their custody.


How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>


Cameron carefully, methodically, and with sensitivity to the Taylor family reviewed the evidence and explained why the law and facts did not warrant murder charges, however massive the intensity of the public’s passion for charges. Cameron said:

Evidence shows that officers both knocked and announced their presence at the apartment. The officers’ statements about their announcement are corroborated by an independent witness who was near, in a proximity to Apartment 4. … When officers were unable to get anyone to answer or open the door to Apartment 4, the decision was made to breach the door.

A man inside the apartment fired, striking an officer, and the officers returned fire, killing Taylor.

The anger over Cameron’s decision was fierce, ugly, and personal.

At a press conference arranged by the Taylor family attorney, Tamika Mallory, co-founder of the Women’s March, said:

I thought about the ships that went into Fort Monroe and Jamestown with our people on them over 400 years ago and how there were also black men on those ships that were responsible for bringing our people over here.

Daniel Cameron is no different than the sellout Negroes that sold our people into slavery and helped white men to capture our people, to abuse them, and to traffic them while our women were raped, while our men were raped by savages.

Sophia A. Nelson, who often appears as a pundit on CNN, tweeted: “Uncle Tom. Step & fetch Negro. The end.”

But perhaps the viciousness award goes to retired Los Angeles Police Department Sergeant Cheryl Dorsey, who said:

Let me say this as a black woman: He does not speak for black folks. He’s skin-folk, but he is not kinfolk. And so just like he thinks they can’t speak for Kentucky because he’s up there with a black face, he does not speak for all of us. This was not a tragedy. This was a murder. He should be ashamed of himself.

Cameron is also being attacked because he is not only a black Republican but also a black Republican who spoke passionately at the Republican National Convention in support of President Donald Trump.

About the opposition to him because he is a black Republican, Cameron once tweeted:

Yesterday, a liberal attorney said I should stop eating ‘coon flakes’ in a Courier Journal interview. I am a proud lifelong Republican, part of a diverse KY GOP ticket, and yes I support Donald Trump. It’s time to stop telling black Americans what we’re allowed to believe.

Mallory, the Women’s March co-founder, and Dorsey are exactly why I produced the documentary “Uncle Tom,” which addresses the attacks against black conservatives for the crime of thinking differently. The film, now available on iTunes, Amazon Prime, and Roku, has received a 9.4 rating on IMDb and a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

“Uncle Tom” asks simple questions: Are blacks free to think for themselves? Black conservatives support low taxes, strong borders, choice in public schools. They want to reevaluate the welfare state on the grounds that it destabilizes the American family, no matter the race.

Can a black conservative advocate for school choice and debate its merit without being dismissed as a black conservative “sellout” for supporting choice? Are blacks allowed to hold conservative views without being eviscerated by the Mallorys and the Dorseys as self-loathers, coconuts, Oreos, “Uncle Toms,” and other names unfit for family consumption?

The New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet, who is black, once admitted, “The left, as a rule, does not want to hear thoughtful disagreement.” Well, the black left doesn’t believe that there is such a thing called thoughtful disagreement—at least not thoughtful disagreement with a black conservative.

“Uncle Tom” does not tell viewers what to think. The film says blacks are free to think for themselves. We would be happy to provide copies of “Uncle Tom” for Mallory and Dorsey.

COPYRIGHT 2020 LAURENCE A. ELDER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. His latest book is “The New Trump Standard.” Twitter: .


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


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

How Low Can Far Left Go? Attacks on Barrett for Adopting Haitian Orphans Hit Rock Bottom

Just when you thought you’d seen the bottom of the political sewer as it relates to opposing Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett, along come some despicable, racist tweets by two college professors.

Their repulsive comments are, sadly, par for the course for some on the far left who oppose transracial adoption.

On the day Barrett was nominated to the Supreme Court, professor Ibram X. Kendi tweeted that Barrett and her husband are “white colonizers” for adopting two black orphans from Haiti, and that they were trying to “civilize” the children, who they supposedly think are “savages,” in the “superior ways of White people, while using them as props.”

Barrett and husband Jesse, according to Kendi, did that “while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.”


How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>


Don’t believe me?  Here is the tweet:

When some on Twitter pushed back, Kendi said that he is “challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently ‘not racist.’” In other words, Kendi is saying that just because the Barretts adopted two orphans from Haiti, that doesn’t prove they aren’t racists.

Kendi is, ironically, the founder and director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University. He is the Andrew W. Mellon professor in the humanities at the university, an author, and a fellow at Harvard, where he’s working on a book to be called “Bones of Inequity: A Narrative History of Racist Policies in America.” He also contributes to The Atlantic and is a contributor to CBS News.

Kendi has received some criticism for his racist tweet, most notably on Twitter and in a Newsweek piece. But the silence from Boston University, Harvard, CBS, and The Atlantic is deafening—and telling.

Imagine if a white conservative professor had tweeted similar bile about a black Supreme Court nominee who had adopted a white child.

Then there’s the similarly vile tweet by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a New York University professor of Italian and history. According to her NYU webpage, she is an expert on “fascism, authoritarianism, war, propaganda, and Donald Trump.” Oh.

She praises Kendi’s tweet, and adds: “Many authoritarians seized children of color for adoption by White Christians,” she tweeted. “Pinochet’s regime did this with indigenous kids and Nazis took Aryan looking Poles for German families. Trump takes migrant kids for adoption by Evangelicals.”

These two professors ignore the fact that millions of children across the globe are orphans, and that parents around the world have opened up their homes to them. Those parents—black, brown, and white—do so because they care deeply about the needs of others, to build or add to their families, and out of love.

They don’t care about the color of the child’s skin. They care about the child, who needs a loving family, a stable home life, and a chance at fulfilling his or her God-given talents.

Set aside the fact that millions of Americans have adopted children internationally, and that hundreds of thousands have adopted children who happened to be a different race.

Moreover, they never criticize notable white Hollywood stars who have adopted black children. That list includes Sandra Bullock: two kids (a son and a daughter), both adopted out of the Louisiana foster care system; Tom Cruise: a son, adopted from Florida; Jane Fonda: a daughter; Angelina Jolie: a daughter, adopted from Ethiopia; Madonna: four kids (a son and three daughters), adopted from Malawi; Michelle Pfeiffer: a daughter; Steven Spielberg: a son; Connie Britton: a son from Ethiopia; Joey Mazzarino: a daughter from Ethiopia; Jillian Michaels: a daughter from Haiti; and Mary-Louise Parker: a daughter from Ethiopia.

Sadly, Kendi and Ben-Ghiat are not alone in their warped views about transracial adoption.

As Jason Riley noted Sept. 29 in The Wall Street Journal, the National Association of Black Social Workers has been opposed to transracial adoption since 1972. It established a written position statement on the subject, linked here, and takes “a vehement stand against the placements of black children in white homes for any reason.”

According to the association, “black children in white homes are cut off from the healthy development of themselves as Black people, which development is the normal expectation and only true humanistic goal.”

Its position statement includes highly disturbing assertions, including: white parents of black children “seek out special help with their parenting”; a white mother will “panic” as she ponders who her black son will date; white parents need “special programming in learning how to handle black children’s hair”; and white parents have to “prepare their neighbors for their forthcoming Black child.”

Perhaps the group’s position, taken 38 years ago, was understandable then, but this is 2020. Yet, it hasn’t changed its position on transracial adoption to account for the changing nature of the American family, or recent social science research on the subject, which shows how out of the mainstream it is.

Furthermore, the National Association of Black Social Workers’ position discourages white parents from adopting orphans and children in need of a stable home when those babies are black.

Riley, who is himself black, also points out that social science research on interracial adoption supports the practice, and reveals no evidence of harm to black children.

He cites the 2018 book “Saving International Adoption,” by economists Mark Montgomery and Irene Powell, in which they analyzed the literature on interracial adoption and found that, when comparing black adoptees in white families with those in black families, “there is no statistical difference between the groups in terms of self-esteem, self-concept, and family integration.”

Montgomery and Powell wrote that the “overwhelming conclusion of studies of transracial adoption is that it is not bad for children. This greatly weakens the case of the opponents of transracial and transnational adoption on the grounds that it harms children.”

The Barretts adopted their son John Peter from a Haitian orphanage after the devastating earthquakes on the Caribbean island nation in 2010.  He was 3 years old when he was adopted. That natural disaster killed almost 250,000 people and displaced more than 1.5 million Haitians.

Earlier, the Barretts adopted their daughter Vivian from a Haitian orphanage where she was 14 months old. At the time, she was so malnourished that she wore size 0 clothes and couldn’t pull herself up or even make vocal sounds.

Haiti is one of the poorest countries on the earth. Forty-six percent of its population is malnourished, and citizens there have a life expectancy of just 63 years, so it’s not surprising that many children are available for adoption.

Does anyone really think John Peter and Vivian would have been better off growing up (if they survived) in Haiti, rather than in the Barretts’ home in South Bend, Indiana?

Today, John Peter and Vivian are thriving in a loving, large family.

So, before anyone else decides to stir the “white colonizer” pot in the run-up to Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, they might want to learn a bit about international adoptions, and adoptions from Haiti in particular.

Armed with that knowledge, they will see how cumbersome the process is, why it’s lengthy, and the protections built into the system to protect the rights of the child.

The United States is a party to the Hague Adoption Convention, an international treaty that provides important safeguards to “protect the best interests of children, birth parents, and adoptive parents who are involved in intercountry adoptions.”

That convention entered into force in the United States in 2008, but even before that, there were international rules in force and in each country where the orphan lives, which protect the rights of the child.

The preamble to the Hague Adoption Convention reads:

Every child benefits from a loving home in deeply profound ways. Intercountry adoption has made this permanently possible for hundreds of thousands of children worldwide.

When children cannot remain with a relative, and new parents within their communities cannot be found, intercountry adoption opens another pathway to children to receive the care, security, and love that a permanent family can provide.

Since Haiti is also a party to the Hague Adoption Convention, adoption requirements of both countries have to be followed. Americans who want to adopt internationally have a mountain of paperwork and process to endure, even before the adoption agency they contract with works with the host country to get them on a waiting list, which often takes years.

To adopt internationally, Americans must be at least 25 years old. If you’re married, you must jointly adopt the child. You must undergo a criminal background check; go through an exhaustive home study conducted by a licensed provider; provide your financial data and credit history; and undergo other scrutiny.

Furthermore, prospective parents must meet eligibility and suitability requirements as determined by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Once the prospective parents are in country, and the eligible child is identified for adoption, they are all required to be interviewed by the U.S. consulate in the host country.

Haitian law requires prospective adoptive parents to obtain a full and final adoption decree under Haitian law before the child can emigrate to the United States.

Haitian regulations require prospective parents to work through a U.S. adoption service provider authorized to operate in Haiti by its adoption authority. Private adoptions, where the prospective parents work directly with the biological parents or custodians, are prohibited, nor can prospective parents “select” a child on their own.

Haitian law requires that prospective parents prove that they are employed and financially stable. It also requires them to travel to Haiti before the adoption is finalized, and that for married couples (which can include same-sex couples), at least one member be at least 30 years old.

For a Haitian child to be eligible for adoption, the biological parents must have relinquished the child, be deceased, or be unknown. Then, and only then, can the state make the child available for international adoption.

As an adopted person, who married an adopted person, who together adopted four children internationally, my wife and I can attest to the fact that the process is frustrating, maddening, lengthy, emotionally draining, and extremely difficult. 

Our children, like those of the Barretts, had unique medical and psychological needs. But we, like so many other people, persevered because we believe that orphans—of any color—need a loving, stable home.

Sadly, as Riley pointed out, there are “more black children in need of adoption, here and abroad, than there are black families who have expressed a willingness to take them.”

Liberals who oppose adoption in general, and interracial adoption in particular, are in the extreme minority, and their views, especially in 2020, are backwards and repulsive.

The Barretts should be applauded for adopting a sickly, malnourished orphan girl and an orphaned boy from Haiti.

They, like so many other adoptive parents, did so out of pure love and gave those children a better life than the ones they would have suffered in their birth country.

COMMENTARY BY

Charles “Cully” Stimson is a leading expert in national security, homeland security, crime control, immigration, and drug policy at The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. Read his research. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: Barrett Will Be ‘Role Model’ for Our Daughters and Granddaughters, Female GOP Senators Say


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


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