The Left’s Shameful Targeting of Lawmakers’ Homes

/in , , , , , , /by

If at first you don’t succeed, burn down your opponent’s house.

Or at least protest right outside, bringing fear and terror to the private quarters and lives of the nation’s lawmakers.

That seems to be the current mantra of 2020. In a year roiled by leftist violence, with small business owners in cities across the country left with looted and destroyed shops, with two dead in Seattle’s “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone,” no liberal leader seems to be willing to yell “stop.”

Now with emotions high over the unexpected Supreme Court vacancy, the politics of personal intimidation are back with a vengeance.

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

On Monday morning, there was a protest at Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham’s home in Washington, D.C.

There was also a protest at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s home in Kentucky on Saturday:

And an attempted protest at his Washington, D.C., home Friday night:

One individual decided to heckle McConnell at his Washington, D.C., home on Monday night:

And if you’re thinking, even a little, that, say, perhaps emotions were high right after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and that perhaps this was just some one-time poor behavior, think again:

What is going on?

Just to refresh everyone’s memory, in 2017, there was nearly a massacre of Republican lawmakers by a man whose politics leaned left.

“He protested with Occupy Wall Street and became an emphatic supporter of socialist Bernie Sanders, volunteering for the Vermont senator’s presidential campaign,” reported Washingtonian, adding: “’Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy,’ [the shooter] wrote in a Facebook post a couple of months after the 2016 election. ‘It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.’”

Before he began spraying bullets across the baseball field, the shooter checked with Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., who was leaving the practice, that the lawmakers present were Republican.

What happened next was unimaginable.

“I was probably 20 steps from the guy when he fired his first shot, and I was the first one to yell out to [Mississippi Rep.] Trent Kelly,” Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., told The Daily Signal. “He was at third base, I was at shortstop … I yelled out, ‘That was a gunshot.’”

“Trent said, ‘I know.’ And I turned and said, ‘There he is, get off the field,’” Palmer added.

“Instead of running in a straight line, [Kelly] zigzagged to his left and then to his right, a tactic he’d learned in the Army,” Washingtonian reported. “He was halfway to second base when he heard shot number two crack past his left shoulder. Convinced the gunman was still aiming for him, he darted to his right and raced toward first base. He cut behind the pitcher’s mound just as the third shot sizzled by his chest.”

Rep. Roger Williams, R-Texas, who would later fall off a chair during a hearing because he was so startled by the sound of the gavel, hid in a dugout with Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., and then-Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. “All we could hear was this guy firing this … weapon,” Williams told BuzzFeed.

“One of the staffers scrambled up over the fence,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told MSNBC in an interview. “It was probably a 15-20-foot fence, and he did it in about two seconds. I’m on the outside of the fence, and he and I are hiding behind the tree but the gunshots are landing in the dirt in the outfield and around us.”

Here’s how Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., described that moment to Washingtonian:

Steve Scalise knew he was shot instantly. He felt something as he was trying to turn away from the shooter. ‘My legs gave out, and I fell down.’

He knew he had to keep moving or risk another bullet. …

And so one of the most important politicians in America started crawling, using his arms to pull himself toward the outfield from second base. He started praying. He started moving less and less.

After he’d reached shallow grass in right field, his arms gave out.

“I can still taste the dirt in my mouth when I hit the ground, that parched dirt,” then-Rep. Mike Bishop, R-Mich., told The Daily Signal. “It’s just a sensation that you will never forget.”

So why am I sharing all this old news?

Because those who don’t know history repeat it.

Sentiments are high right now. And of course, peaceful protests—the actually peaceful ones, not the infernos CNN glibly describes as peaceful—are a proud and important part of our nation’s traditions.

If you don’t think Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s vacancy should be filled before the election, guess what? You’re welcome to let your lawmakers know your opinion (and they all have dedicated staffers to listen to your perspective). You are welcome to go to their offices or to the Capitol or the Supreme Court or any number of public places and protest. You can write letters to the editor. And yes, at the end of the day, you can vote for the lawmakers you think will do what you want.

But going to lawmakers’ homes is sick and twisted. It’s intimidating and it’s personal.

And unfortunately, it seems to be a tactic leftists are using more and more frequently. Protesters have targeted the home of acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf in protests four times this summer, per ALX Now.

In 2018, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson’s home was targeted. Carlson, who wasn’t home at the time, told The Washington Post that he called his wife. “She had been in the kitchen alone getting ready to go to dinner and she heard pounding on the front door and screaming. … Someone started throwing himself against the front door and actually cracked the front door,” Carlson recounted.

Is this the America we want, where families are terrorized in their own homes?

Do we want another shooting on a baseball field? Perhaps this time the Capitol Police—who heroically shot back and saved the lives of the lawmakers and others present—won’t be there.

Of course, there’s a wide gulf between a shooting and a protest at a home. But a protest at a home is a very real escalation from a protest at a government building.

Activists are playing with fire right now—and it’s incumbent on liberal leaders to tell them that enough is enough, that homes are for private lives, not public protests.

COMMENTARY BY

Katrina Trinko

Katrina Trinko is editor-in-chief of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast. Send an email to Katrina. Twitter: .

RELATED TWEET:

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.

FLORIDA: Governor DeSantis Takes a Rational Approach to Communist Insurgents and Rioters of All Kinds

/in , , , , , /by

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This video published by on the Vlad Tepes Blog is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Battle Against Big Brother: Churches Refuse to Yield

/in , , , , /by

By FRC’s David Closson

The magnitude of recent headlines pertaining to the new vacancy on the United States Supreme Court and the subsequent political maneuvering has understandably overshadowed the news cycle. However, another significant story that Americans (and especially conservative Christians) should care about is how various state and local governments continue to violate the First Amendment rights of churches.

In short, antagonism towards churches and houses of worship persists in certain areas throughout the country. Unfortunately, even as the coronavirus abates and America reopens, several states and cities have demonstrated a startling level of bias against churches. In fact, as of today, religious worship is still prohibited or subjected to unequal treatment (compared to secular activities) in six states — California, Nevada, Maine, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Virginia. In California, the state where some of the most egregious bias has surfaced, 30 of the state’s 58 counties continue to prohibit churches from holding indoor worship services. In counties where churches can meet indoors, singing and chanting activities are forbidden, and churches are subject to strict attendance limits.

However, despite the draconian measures still in place throughout the Golden State, there was good news out of Illinois last week when the city of Niles announced they had dropped charges against Pastor Daniel Chiu. The pastor of the Romanic church Logos Baptist Ministries had been issued a $800 fine for holding worship services. Mat Staver, who represents the church, announced that he will ask the Supreme Court to review the case.

Of course, it should be inconceivable that government officials would threaten churches for holding worship services. As I have noted previously, the overwhelming majority of churches complied with government mandates to suspend in-person worship in March. In fact, most churches suspended public meetings before being instructed to. However, as the summer wore on, and it became clear that initial predictions about the virus were inaccurate, churches began to meet again while implementing CDC-informed health and safety precautions to protect their parishioners and visitors.

But despite taking appropriate safety measures, churches were instructed not to open in some states. Although liquor stores and abortion facilities could resume operations in many of these states, churches — which were not deemed “essential” — were held to restrictive standards that made it virtually impossible to meet. When some pastors defied the unfair orders, many were threatened with arrest and jail time. Predictably, one of the worst perpetrators of bias against churches is Governor Newsom and local authorities in California.

For example, Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena incurred the wrath of local officials when they decided to reopen for worship a few weeks ago. After a judge denied an injunction from Harvest Rock, the church received a letter on August 13 from a city attorney demanding the cessation of all in-person worship services. The letter explained that if the church continued holding indoor gatherings, church owners, staff, and parishioners would be “subject to criminal penalties [i.e., fines], as well as the closure of the church.”

Senior Pastor Ché Ahn and other church leaders could face additional charges including fines for each violation and a potential one-year jail sentence. Worth noting is that Harvest Rock asks attendees to follow guidelines including social distancing, wearing a mask “when entering and exiting the auditorium,” and staying home if you are at risk or are feeling flu-like symptoms.

Earlier today, attorneys representing the church presented oral arguments before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and requested the church be allowed to meet indoors while appealing state and local orders against indoor worship services.

Another California church facing pressure from officials is Godspeak Calvary Chapel. On August 21, Pastor McCoy appeared before the Superior Court of Ventura County and was held in contempt of the court for defying the local ban on indoor worship services. Additionally, Calvary Chapel was fined $3,000 for holding six church services in defiance of local lockdown orders. Despite the fines, the church continues to gather for indoor worship. According to Pastor McCoy, gathering for worship is a matter of religious liberty and it is unfair for some businesses to be allowed to reopen while churches are forced to hold meetings outside.

Finally, Pastor Jack Trieber and North Valley Baptist Church have also been in the news recently for holding services. North Valley was fined $5,000 for every service they held with additional fines being issued for singing, leading to an eventual $112,000 in fines. A cease and desist letter posted on the front door of the church demanded that the church immediately stop holding services and acknowledged that agents had been sent into the church to observe the congregation. After a weeks-long legal battle, Pastor Trieber decided to move worship services to the church parking lot. Although Trieber has asked that the county remove all fines, the county has said that it will not forgive the fines they imposed on North Valley Baptist Church.

While the recent news from Illinois was a welcome development, the foregoing examples from California reveal that the First Amendment is under assault. Under the guise of enforcing emergency public safety guidelines, too many officials have overstepped their authority and unfairly targeted churches. It is time for Americans of all faiths and religious backgrounds to stand up for their constitutionally protected freedoms and remind officials that church is essential.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Supreme Court Vacancy Pours Rocket Fuel on 2020 Election

Abortion: The Defining Issue in a Defining Election

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

DOJ Designates NYC, Portland, Seattle as ‘Anarchist Jurisdictions,’ Federal Funds Withdrawn

/in , , , , , , , /by

“We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance. It is my hope that the cities identified by the Department of Justice today will reverse course and become serious about performing the basic function of government and start protecting their own citizens,” Attorney General William Barr said in a statement.

Department of Justice says New York City, Seattle, and Portland permit anarchy and violence

By: Oma Seddiq, Business Insider, September 21, 2020:

The Justice Department designated New York City, Seattle and Portland as “jurisdictions permitting violence and destruction of property” on Monday.

President Donald Trump released a memo earlier this month instructing the department to find ways to slash federal funding after determining which US cities are “anarchist jurisdictions.”

“We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance,” Attorney General William Barr said.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said on Monday: “You can’t bully New Yorkers.”

The Department of Justice escalated its threats to cut federal funding to major US cities by designating New York City, Seattle, and Portland as jurisdictions that permit anarchy and violence on Monday.

The department said the cities have “permitted violence and destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities,” according to a statement Monday.

The move is in response to a memo from President Donald Trump earlier this month instructing Attorney General William Barr and Department of Homeland Security acting secretary Chad Wolf to find ways to slash billions of federal dollars directed to the three cities.

“When state and local leaders impede their own law enforcement officers and agencies from doing their jobs, it endangers innocent citizens who deserve to be protected, including those who are trying to peacefully assemble and protest,” Barr said in the statement Monday. “We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

TERRIBLE VIDEO: Antifa Mob Forces Truck Driver to Make a Black Power Salute

Poll: Majority of Americans want Senate to move on Supreme Court decision

DOJ Designates NYC, Portland, Seattle as ‘Anarchist Jurisdictions,’ Federal Funds Withdrawn

Oregon Democrats Organized, Encouraged Portland Rioters

WATCH Brain-Dead Biden: ‘200 Million People’ Will Be Dead From COVID By the Time I Finish This Speech

Enormous ‘F**K Cuomo and de Blasio’ mural painted on NYC streets by FURIOUS New Yorkers

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

BOOM! GOP senator will vote for Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, ensuring nomination proceeds

/in , , , , /by

Grand slam!

Gardner supports moving forward on Ginsburg seat, striking blow to Dem chances of halting nomination

By: Christal Hayes, USA TODAY, September 20, 2020:

WASHINGTON – Sen. Cory Gardner, a Republican in a tough reelection race in a swing state, said Monday he supports moving forward on a Supreme Court nomination to fill the vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, significantly lowering Democrats’ chances of stopping the process until after the November election.

Gardner, who is facing a re-election challenge from former Gov. John Hickenlooper in Colorado, was viewed as one of the last potential holdouts that could halt the Senate from voting to approve President Donald Trump’s nominee to the high court. But a statement Monday evening made clear he will support moving forward in the process, likely leaving Republicans the votes to clear a nominee even if such a process comes before the November election.

“When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent,” Gardner said in a Monday evening statement. “I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm.”

RELATED TWEET:

 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Facebook, Google Partner with Far-Left Radical Org for 2020 Election Strategy

Brake line cut on NYPD car

FBI Agent Who Uncovered Weiner Laptop with Hillary’s Emails says FBI Leadership Told Him to Erase All of His Findings

‘Beloved Staten Island tavern loses liquor license days after suing over restaurant ban’

Democrats Pass Resolution Condemning Terms Such As “Chinese Virus” And “Wuhan Virus”

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

Is the Fawning Coverage of RBG Making You Sick?

/in , , , /by

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE “NOMINATE GINSBURG’S REPLACEMENT NOW!” PETITION

I know, I know, it isn’t kosher to speak ill of the dead, but really, can we now stop gushing over Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg?

I began paying a little attention to her while writing many posts at Refugee Resettlement Watch about the hellhole that South Africa has become since Nelson Mandela and his ilk took over the country and turned it into a supposed Nirvana, claiming it is now the “rainbow nation” where love and peace reign and fairness for all is written in their constitution.

(If you haven’t seen my archive on the “rainbow nation” click here.)

Have a look at that constitution (it says everyone has a right to everything!) and you will see why Africans from across that continent flooded there only to experience xenophobia on a level greater than any country in the world.

Ginsburg reportedly praised that commie constitution over the US Constitution, although her fan base claimed her comments were taken out of context.  See Foreign Policy for one version of the 2012 controversy.

One writer who isn’t sending air kisses to Ginsburg is Frank Miele opining at Heartland Diary (hat tip: Paul):

RBG has a remarkable legacy — but so do Lenin and Mao. Please stop praising her if you are a conservative!

Democrats are accusing Republicans of being hypocritical, and they are, but not because they want to vote to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg during an election year.

The real reason they are hypocritical is because they don’t have the cojones to call Ginsburg what she was — a hard-left Democrat extremist who was only interested in using her position on the Supreme Court to fundamentally transform the United States into a politically correct, disarmed socialist republic. Her support for a woman’s right to choose to kill her unborn child is partly responsible for the deaths of millions of babies.

How do Republican senators square that with their effusive praise of her? Simple. As I already said — hypocrisy. Can you imagine Democrats praising Donald Trump as the most significant president of the last 75 years (or more) when he dies? Hell no, because the Democrats know he was their sworn enemy. Republicans are too cowardly to tell the truth about Ginsburg.

A random sampling of the Republican praise for Ginsburg should prove the point:

Go here to read it all!

Thank God we have Trump in the White House!  Almost every other Republican you can think of (if he/she was President at this auspicious moment in history) would be tucking tail and running and attempting to show that they are good people by not pushing forward with a nominee for Ha! Ha! “Ginsburg’s seat!”

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

We The People White House Petition To #FillTheSeatNow Launched

/in , , , , /by

A White House petition to fill the empty  seat on the Supreme Court has been launched before November 3rd, 2020.

Nominating Ginsburg’s replacement now! was created by D.R. on September 19, 2020.

The petition reads:

We must have nine Justices on the Court before the November 3rd election. The Democrats are going to do everything possible to steal the Presidency, including taking their case to the Supreme Court. A 4/4 tie will throw the Country into a Constitutional crisis and possibly into a civil war.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE “NOMINATE GINSBURG’S REPLACEMENT NOW!” PETITION

©All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Comparing the Bolshevik Revolution with Today’s Antifa and BLM Movement

/in , , , , , , /by

By Wallace Bruschweiler & William Palumbo

Ever since George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police on May 25th, the United States – and to a lesser extent the Western world – has been up in arms, so to speak, allegedly about racial disparities and police brutality.

Now that the public has had nearly four months to observe their activities, we know that the so-called “protest movement” is an utter sham.  More precisely, the “protests” are a cover for something else.  The rampaging duo of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifascists (Antifa) – the two most identifiable “protest” groups – prove with each passing night that they are purveyors of hate and architects of destruction, murder, general chaos, and political boots on the ground.

Let us examine today’s “protesters” and compare them to other movements in modern history.  In reality, these “protesters” are a fifth column whose only discernible ideology is Marxism-Leninism.

The “Protesters” of the Past

In February 1917, a revolution that had been brewing for decades entered its final stage, as the Bolsheviks (and other allied communist groups) forced the abdication of Russian Tsar Nicholas II.  For the next several years Russia was engulfed in a civil war, pitting the Communists against the “White Russians” (traditionalists who supported the monarchy).  Following Communist victory, it took until 1991 – more than 80 years – for the Soviets to finally rid themselves of the “workers” regime.  In the meantime, Communism killed and enslaved tens of millions worldwide.

Bolshevik Revolution – 1917-1923

  • Belligerents: Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, etc. (Communists/Marxist-Leninists) vs. White Russians.
  • Outcome: Communist victory, followed by collapse of Soviet Union in 1991. White Russians and Jews escaped following defeat to three escape routes: Berlin, Thessaloniki, and Shanghai.
  • Modus Operandi: Civil war, secret police, show trials, murder, GULAGs, exile to Siberia, forced labor, ethnic cleansing, torture, etc.
  • Comments: Following Communist victory, Vladimir Lenin consolidated power to become first leader of the USSR. The Soviet regime reached the height of its domestic terrorism during the Stalin era (d. 1953), when during the Great Purge of 1937 approx. 1 million “undesirables” were eliminated.

Yet the allure of Marxist-Leninism is strong.  Indeed, Russia’s descent into the darkness of dystopian tyranny was not enough to prevent European malcontents from attempting to replicate the Soviet Union in western Europe.  During the 1970s and 80s, Europe was plagued by Marxist-Leninist terrorists intent on revolution.  Each country had their own “distinct” terrorist groups, although authorities later realized that they were not only connected to each other, but actively cooperating strategically.

European Terrorism – late 1960s – early 1990s

  • Belligerents: Italy: Red Brigades, Prima Linea, Potere Operaio ; Germany: Baader-Meinhof (aka Rote Armee Fraktion); France: Action Direct ; Spain: ETA ; UK and Ireland: IRA vs. European nations, and intelligence (BKA, MI5, MI6, SISMI, SISDE, etc.).
  • Outcome: Only after the European nations agreed to tackle the terrorism problem in unison, working across borders, was the bloody insurrection defeated.
  • Modus Operandi: Italy: kneecappings, kidnapping, bombs, etc. ; Germany: kidnaping, hostage taking, airplane rerouting, etc. ; UK and Ireland – killing, bombs, bringing down army helicopter.
  • Funding: The Soviet Union via Bulgaria funded European-based terror groups through local Communist newspapers. Also provided support to Palestinian/Arab terrorism. Muammar Gaddafi supported the IRA and ETA through direct bank-to-bank transfers and with weapons.
  • Comments: Political and intellectual support for the violent terrorist groups came from Communist parties in each country, who were often part of the government and intelligentsia.

Timing is Everything

For those unhappy with society for whatever reason, the Marxist-Leninist ideology is perennially attractive. Today’s violent Left – socialism – animated by Marxist-Leninism, shares many parallels with its predecessor movements.

“Protest Movement” – Present time

  • Belligerents: BLM, Antifa, Democrats, and media vs. the police, the public, Trump and Republicans
  • Outcome: TBD – Nov. 3, 2020 (or later)
  • Modus Operandi: Rioting, looting, assault, destruction of public property and monuments, blocking roads and highways, murder, arson, inflicting blindness
  • Support: Soros: funding “racial justice” organizations ~$220 million, the selection, election and support of local DAs ; Media: selective coverage ; China, and also Iran: known to support BLM.
  • Comments: China is America’s main geopolitical foe, and billionaire George Soros is a primary financier of the Democrat Party and global left. Both view President Trump as a threat to the globalization movement.

For the record, both China and Soros back Joe Biden.

Where do we stand at this point in history?  It’s said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Ignoring the harsh and brutal reality of Communism in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution, terrorists tried to topple Europe and establish their own “workers’ republic.”  But for the dedication of European governments they would have succeeded.  Today, a modern-day socialist, Marxist-Leninist movement has metastasized throughout the US and its political system – we have to stop them in their tracks!

©All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: BLM Leaders in Their Own Words – PragerU.

Sen. Ted Cruz explains the grave danger of not filling SCOTUS vacancy before election: ‘A constitutional crisis’

/in , , , , , /by

It’s now or never, folks. If we postpone, you can bet your last dollar they will steal the presidency.

Ted Cruz explains the grave danger of not filling SCOTUS vacancy before election: ‘A constitutional crisis’

‘I think we have a responsibility — a responsibility to do our job’

By: Blaze News September 19, 2020

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) explained late Friday why the Supreme Court vacancy, caused by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, must be filled before Election Day.

What did Cruz say?

Speaking with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Cruz said the integrity of the election depends on the court having nine justices, especially considering the enhanced likelihood of a legally contested contest this year.

“I think it is tremendously important that not only does the nomination happen next week but that the confirmation before Election Day,” Cruz explained. “Democrats and Joe Biden have made clear, they intend to challenge this election, they intend to fight the legitimacy of the election. As you know, Hillary Clinton has told Joe Biden ‘under no circumstances should you concede. You should challenge this election.’”

“We cannot have Election Day come and go with a 4-4 court,” Cruz said.

If the seat is not filled prior to Election Day, America risks a “constitutional crisis,” the Texas senator went on to say.

“A 4-4 court that is equally divided cannot decide anything. And I think we risk a constitutional crisis if we do not have a nine justice Supreme Court, particularly when there’s such a risk of a contested litigation and a contested election,” Cruz explained.

“Twenty years ago, I was part of the legal team that litigated Bush v. Gore and went to the Supreme Court. Thirty-seven days the country did not know who the president was going to be, and if we had a 4-4 court it could have dragged on for weeks and months,” he continued.

“So, I think we have a responsibility — a responsibility to do our job,” Cruz said. “The president should nominate a principled constitutionalist with a proven record, and the Senate is going to take a lot of work to get it done before Election Day but I think we should do our job and protect the country from the constitutional crisis that could result otherwise.”

Earlier in his interview, Cruz said, “This nomination is why Donald Trump was elected. This confirmation is why the voters voted for a Republican majority in the Senate.”

It’s not yet clear who President Donald Trump will nominate to fill the high court vacancy.

However, just last week, the White House released an updated list of potential nominees for future Supreme Court vacancies. Cruz’s name is on the list, although he has since stated that he is not interested in serving on the Supreme Court.

Judge Amy Comey Barrett, a conservative justice who was confirmed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017, is thought to be one of the top contenders for the seat.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell confirmed late Friday that the Senate will vote on Trump’s nominee before Election Day.

HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM

RELATED ARTICLES:

The GOP Senate Damn Well Better Confirm Whoever POTUS Appoints

45 Days Until Election: Three Supreme Court Justices, Including Ginsburg, Were Confirmed In Less Time

White House Deadly Package of Poison Ricin Addressed to President Trump

SPENCER: Why Hasn’t Reza Aslan Been Arrested?

Minneapolis City Council alarmed by surge in crime months after voting to defund the police

“We Have this Obligation, Without Delay!”: President Trump urges Supreme Court nomination ‘without delay’

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

VIDEO: Biden Scandal Update — Russians Trolling Joe Biden on Son Hunter

/in , , , , , /by

ed this from three pages of State Department records. They include a January 17, 2017, email from George Kent, the Obama administration’s deputy assistant secretary of state in charge of Ukraine policy, which was copied to then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, highlighting Russia-linked media “trolling” Joe Biden over “his son’s business.”

We obtained the records in response to our FOIA lawsuit filed in January 2020 seeking records of communications from the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv mentioning Burisma (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:20-cv-00229)). (The records had been separately released to Citizens United.)

An email was sent four days prior to the inauguration of President Donald Trump to a redacted recipient and CCd to Yovanovitch with the subject line “medvedchuk-linked vesti trolls Biden.” Kent writes: “Burisma – gift that keeps on giving. (With medvedchuk affiliated Vesti pushing the troll like storyline on visit day)”

Medvedchuk refers to Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian politician, lawyer, business oligarch, and People’s Deputy of Ukraine. He’s considered a Putin ally. Vesti is the pro-Russian newspaper in Ukraine.

Hunter Biden, son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, served on the board of directors for Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings despite having no previous experience in the energy industry.

Kent includes a “Review of Ukrainian Printed Press” that includes the Ukrainian newspaper Vesti, which described Biden’s visit to Ukraine, saying: “Will J. Biden arrive to secure his son’s business? According to experts, J. Biden, as the unofficial curator of ‘the Ukrainian question’, will give P. Poroshenko recommendations about working with the new US administration. Another aspect is the protection of his own business interests.”
On January 17, 2017, Biden was on his sixth visit in seven years to Ukraine. When Biden visited Ukraine in 2015, he threatened to withhold $1 billion if the country’s top prosecutor was not dismissed. Hunter Biden was under investigation by the later-fired prosecutor general.

Kent and Yovanovitch were both star witnesses for Democrats in the Trump impeachment hearings. Kent testified he warned the Obama administration about Hunter Biden’s work with Burisma: “My concern was that there was the possibility of a perception of a conflict of interest.” Kent answered the questions of Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL):

CASTOR: OK, but you know Hunter Biden’s role in Burisma’s board of directors. At some point you testified in your deposition that you expressed some concern to the Vice President’s Office. Is that correct
KENT: That is correct.
CASTOR: And what did they do about that concern that you expressed?
KENT: I have no idea. I reported my concern to the Office of the Vice President.

In April 2014, Hunter Biden joined the board of the Ukrainian gas company. He served on the board until early 2019. Burisma, which was under investigation by the Ukrainian government, stated at the time of his hiring that Biden would be “in charge of the Holdings’ legal unit and will provide support for the Company among international organizations.”

This email shows the Obama State Department had a longstanding concern about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden’s Burisma involvement – and how the Russians were using Biden’s conflicts of interest to undermine U.S. policy.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch video and column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

We Must Have 9 Justices to Adjudicate the Legal Challenges to the Trump Victory Planned by the Democrats

/in , , , /by

“Democrat Joe Biden is assembling a team of top lawyers in anticipation of court challenges to the election process that could ultimately determine who wins the race for the White House.” – Associated Press

Ruth Bader Ginsberg passed away late Friday after a long bout with cancer. Our thoughts and prayers go out to her family.

THE BIG QUESTION: Should a new Supreme Court Justice be appointed before November 3rd, 2020?

Why is this appointment so important?

Remember in Bush v. Gore, case in which, on December 12, 2000, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed a Florida Supreme Court request for a selective manual recount of that state’s U.S. presidential election ballots. The 5–4 decision effectively awarded Florida’s 25 votes in the electoral college, and thus the election itself, to Republican candidate George W. Bush.

Fast forward to today, ironically 20 years later. Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount who specializes in election law, in a Politico article when asked how many court cases have been filed leading up to the 2020 election responded:

…It’s 228 cases, and I haven’t added a couple, so it’s probably 230. It’s difficult to track. How many voters does this affect? I don’t honestly know. The better way to measure is this: There’s litigation now in 43 states, D.C. and Puerto Rico. [Emphasis added]

Twitter is alive with responses to this important question. Here are three:

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1307321159113936896?s=21

Will President Trump nominate a woman?

In an Axios article published on March 31, 2019 titled Scoop: Trump “saving” Judge Amy Barrett for Ruth Bader Ginsburg seat Jonathan Swan, Sam Baker wrote:

As he was deliberating last year over replacing Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, President Trump told confidants he had big plans for Judge Amy Coney Barrett [a protégé of former Justice Antonin Scalia].

“I’m saving her for Ginsburg,” Trump said of Barrett, according to three sources familiar with the president’s private comments. Trump used that exact line with a number of people, including in a private conversation with an adviser two days before announcing Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination.

Barrett is a favorite among conservative activists, many of whom wanted her to take Kennedy’s spot.

  • She’s young and proudly embraces her Catholic faith.
  • Her past academic writings suggest an openness to overturning Roe v. Wade.
  • Her nomination would throw gas on the culture-war fires, which Trump relishes.

But Trump chose to wait.

Will Trump use his Amy Coney Barrett card now?

President Trump has provided a list of twenty nominees to the Supreme Court from which he may select one and send that nomination to the U.S. Senate. Six of President Trump’s nominees are women. One, Barbara Lagoa, is from the key swing state of Florida.

  1. Allison Jones Rushing, 38, of North Carolina, on the 4th Circuit since March 2019. She clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas and then-Judge Neil Gorsuch on the 10th Circuit. She received her law degree, magna cum laude, from Duke University School of Law.
  2. Bridget Bade, 54, of Arizona, on the 9th Circuit since April 2019. Bade was both a U.S. magistrate judge and an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona. She received her law degree, cum laude, from Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law.
  3. Barbara Lagoa, 52, of Florida, on the 11th Circuit since December 2019. Previously a justice on the Supreme Court of Florida, she also was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida. Lagoa received her law degree from Columbia.
  4. Kate Todd of Virginia, former deputy assistant and deputy counsel to President George W. Bush. She clerked for Thomas and received her law degree, magna cum laude, from Harvard.
  5. Martha Pacold, 41, on the bench of the Northern District of Illinois since August 2019. She previously was deputy general counsel of the Treasury Department. A former clerk to Thomas at the Supreme Court, she received her law degree with honors from the University of Chicago.
  6. Sarah Pitlyk, 43, on the bench of the Eastern District of Missouri since December 2019. Previously special counsel at the Thomas More Society, she clerked for Kavanaugh at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.  She received her law degree from Yale Law.

Conclusion

The appointment of any Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court has now become political theatre. And so it will be if President Trump makes a nomination before November 3rd. The reason is that a President’s long term legacy is truly determined by the number of justices and judges appointed.

While both of these are important, the outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election could, as it was in 2000, ultimately be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Not having a full panel of 9 justices would only add fuel to the fire.

President Trump now has the ability to change the makeup of the SCOTUS for decades to come.

But more importantly it can and will ultimately impact the final adjudication of any and all legal challenges to a Trump victory by the Democrats, which are already in the works.

Not to appoint would be so very, very wrong!

Let the battle begin.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Meet the 11 Women on Trump’s Supreme Court List

7 Things to Know About Upcoming Supreme Court Process, Picks

Flashback: In 2016, Ginsburg said Senate should hold SCOTUS confirmation hearing during election year | Fox News

RELATED TWEET:

4 Voters Claiming NPR as Residence Turn Up in Search of California Voting Records

/in , , , , , /by

As regular listeners of National Public Radio know, the taxpayer-funded outlet regularly disparages the idea that any type of fraud occurs in our elections. Now, research by the Public Interest Legal Foundation has turned up information pointing to possible election fraud by NPR employees.

Many types of election fraud occur. The type found in the NPR case, instances of which appear in The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database, concerns individuals who violate eligibility rules by registering and voting where they don’t actually live.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation found four individuals who claimed NPR West headquarters in Culver City, California, as their residence and voted in 2018 via mail-in absentee ballots. More on that startling discovery in a bit.

When you register to vote, you are required by state law to register at your residential address, whether it is a home, an apartment, or a homeless shelter. You cannot register where you work and certainly not at other commercial addresses such as your local UPS Store, since your eligibility as a voter is tied to your residence and all of the local, state, and federal elected officials who represent that geographic area.

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

You basically are cheating the system and your fellow voters if you vote in races you are not entitled to vote in when you register somewhere other than where you live.

Rep. Steve Watkins, R-Kan., recently discovered that, no doubt to his chagrin, when he was charged with felony voter fraud for claiming a UPS Store as his residence when he registered to vote (and then voted) in a 2019 municipal election in Topeka, Kansas.

Can this type of fraud make a difference? Of course it can.

In 2012, a city council election in Vernon, California, was decided by a margin of four votes. A court overturned the election after it found that five individuals who were not residents of Vernon had voted.

When another court overturned the mayor’s race in Miami, Florida, in 1997 because of widespread absentee ballot fraud, the court noted illegal votes cast by registered voters who were not residents of the city.

California’s secretary of state explains in instructions for the voter registration form that individuals registering to vote in California must do so at their home address. Which brings us back to the NPR West headquarters building at 9909 Jefferson Blvd. in Culver City, California.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, in looking at California’s voter registration and voting history records in conjunction with matching nonresidential addresses, found four individuals who claimed NPR West headquarters as their residence and voted in the November 2018 elections via absentee mail-in ballots.

Their names: Juan Ramon Beristain, Isabella Beristain, Carrie Jane Kahn, and Anjuli Sastry.

Neither Beristain’s name appears in a search of the NPR website, and their affiliations with the left-leaning public broadcaster aren’t clear.

Kahn is listed as an international correspondent based in Mexico City. Her biography says she files reports for the NPR programs “All Things Considered,” “Morning Edition,” and “Weekend Edition.”

Sastry is listed as an associate producer at WAMU (88.5), the NPR station owned by American University in Washington, D.C., for the program “It’s Been a Minute With Sam Sanders.” Her biography says she previously worked for “All Things Considered,” too, which is one of NPR’s major news programs.

But according to the voter registration form that Sastry had to have completed under oath when she registered to vote, she lives 2,680 miles away from the nation’s capital at the NPR West building in Culver City.

All things actually considered, the question arises of whether the Beristains, Kahn, and Sastry engaged in the same type of behavior that led to Watkins being charged with voter fraud. In fact, NPR published a partner station’s report on Watkins in July in a story headlined “Kansas Rep. Steve Watkins Charged With Felonies Over Voter Registration at UPS Store.”

The Public Interest Legal Foundation’s findings on NPR stem from a newly unveiled research tool that allows the election watchdog to collect and audit the nation’s voter registration files. It’s called the SAVE Database.

And for those who claim that we don’t need to worry about noncitizens taking advantage of our honor system by registering and voting illegally in our elections, consider that the U.S. Attorney Matthew G.T. Martin of the Middle District of North Carolina just brought criminal charges against another 19 aliens for allegedly illegally registering and voting in the 2016 presidential election.

As the charging documents set forth, the alleged conduct violates three different provisions of federal law, one a misdemeanor and two felonies:

  • 18 U.S.C. § 611(a)—voting by a noncitizen;
  • 18 U.S.C. § 911—making a false claim of U.S. citizenship; and
  • 18 U.S.C. § 1015(f)—making a false statement in a voter registration application.

Making a false statement on a voter registration form—such as claiming that a commercial building where you work is actually your residence—violates Section 1015 (f), a felony punishable by a maximum of five years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000, or both.

Think this is an isolated problem in North Carolina? In 2018, U.S. Attorney Robert Higdon of the Eastern District of North Carolina brought criminal charges against 19 other illegal aliens for allegedly doing exactly the same thing: illegally registering and voting in the 2016 election.

And Georgia’s secretary of state just reported that his office found 1,000 registered voters who voted twice in the state’s June primary, once with absentee ballots and again in person on Election Day.

The numbers just keep adding up. Election integrity is something the public takes seriously, and prosecutors and election officials should, too.

Unfortunately, too many in the media (including NPR, it seems), in academia, and in the political halls of Washington and state capitols aren’t serious about clean and fair elections.

Editor’s note: NPR did not respond by publication time to an emailed request for comment.

COMMENTARY BY

Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. 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.

VIDEO: The Vortex — It’s All Connected. More so than the Marxists know.

/in , , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

As a reminder, please join us in our 54-day Rosary Novena in the run-up to the election.

It’s remarkable — historical really — the amount of attention the Church is receiving in this election cycle.

It’s of course amplified by the fact that fake-Catholic Biden is on the ticket. But more so because he’s allowed by the U.S. hierarchy to present himself as Catholic. That bunch of phonies strutting around in miters pretending to be shepherds would damage anyone’s faith.

They silence priests telling the truth about Biden — yank them from public sight. They hide behind their exalted “We aren’t allowed to talk about politics because of our tax-exempt status” when they know that excuse is a flat-out lie. They get billions in federal money in exchange for keeping their pieholes shut.

They publish a worthless document each election called Faithful Citizenship, which is good for nothing except lining the bottom of cats’ litter boxes, which actually improves the document. And they do nothing to actually form the consciences of Catholics, and that’s because many of their own consciences are malformed (so maybe it’s a good thing they don’t talk).

This has been going on for years, but suddenly, it has all become front and center across the secular media. For example, last week, Church Militant was interviewed for over an hour by the liberal magazine The Atlantic and then for about 90 minutes by Vanity Fair for upcoming articles.

Both interviews covered the same ground — the Catholic vote. A lot of it got into the weeds and will probably never see the light of day, but nonetheless, they were free-ranging interviews covering everything Church and State related.

When we become aware of the interviews’ publications, we’ll pass them along. But why the sudden interest in all things Catholic? Well, everything is connected because of the stakes in this election — as Church Militant has been saying for over a year.

We spend so much time on politics because it’s downstream from culture, which is downstream from religion (even when it is collapsing). In fact, the collapse of religion brings about the collapse of the culture, which then quickly gets downstream into politics and law and policy and court rulings and all that.

At some moment, there has to be pushback in order to preserve and restore. In truth, that moment may have come and gone already — the proverbial train having left the station. But we won’t know that for certain until sometime after Nov. 3.

In the meantime, we must fight as hard as we can to preserve whatever we can. An interesting focus on Catholics involves the handful of priests around the country declaring the truth about Biden’s fake and dangerous Catholicism.

And for the record, it was Biden himself who picked this fight with his advertisement about how much his Faith has influenced him: It hasn’t. And how about his ridiculous statement, issued last month, of how important his Faith is to him? It isn’t.

So it becomes fair game to critique his Catholic claims (even when bishops trample the First Amendment rights of their clergy when the clergy do so) because the bishops refuse. Bishops never bite the hand that feeds them: Never.

But every time one of these priests pops up — and instead of a handful, there should be thousands — the secular media suddenly picks up the story. The Freedom From Religion Foundation is even calling on the State to look into Fr. James Altman of La Crosse for his gall in denouncing the evil of the Democrats and Joe Biden.

The foundation would have gotten the job done much faster by just calling his bishop, the dishonorable William Callahan, who delighted in going after Fr. Altman’s tone in public as he claimed his public statement was private.

But Altman is a taxpaying American who has every right to say what he thinks in the public square. Heck, if zillionaire athletes can shoot off their mouths about racism and white privilege and injustice as they are cashing huge checks for playing with a ball (as well as somehow playing the victim) why can’t Fr. Altman speak?

But more importantly, as we discussed in both the interviews last week, Fr. Altman (a case both outfits knew very well; thanks, James Martin) has a higher duty to Almighty God. Unlike Joe Biden, who thinks he has nothing to answer for before the judgment throne of God in the area of child murder over decades and the advancement of sodomy as marriage, Fr. Altman does understand that his first allegiance is to Truth, the person actually sitting on the throne.

His bishop apparently doesn’t quite grasp that either. He will, unfortunately for him. But imagine: An atheist organization comes gunning for a priest, wanting federal charges of some sort leveled against him, and his bishop stays silent.

And the secular media is covering all of this blow by blow — the Catholic political world. Even here in Detroit, as a brave priest took the Fr. Altman route, his own pastor got up and condemned what he said, apologizing for the good priest’s denunciation of Marxist evil.

It should be stated that he spoke in that effected, feminized valley-girl voice so usual among a certain subset of the population. Of course, that got media coverage also. The reason the media are so interested, so intensely focused, is because they understand just how important the vote of Catholics is in the swing states, like Michigan.

They sense a danger for Biden, a Catholic, that he isn’t locking down the Catholic vote, which to their thinking should be easy. The Latino vote is now getting a ton of attention in the political press, and it’s because Trump is making giant strides there, actually closing the gap dramatically in Texas. And he’s in a tie or even ahead in Florida. The Marxists are nervous.

Both Catholics in general, as well as Catholic-heavy Latinos (47%), should be shoo-ins for Biden, but it’s not shaking out that way. Almost half of Latinos are Catholics. They didn’t swing for Biden in the primaries, and they aren’t now either.

This forced Biden to issue the ridiculous statement earlier this week that he would “work like the Devil” to capture their votes, probably not a wise choice of terms for an ethnicity steeped in religiosity, but likely revealing of Biden.

More Catholic news — a report from Pennsylvania is focusing in on the very heart of the issue for Biden, asking, “Can Biden win back support from Catholic Democrats?” Unlikely is the conclusion in the article — at least in Pennsylvania.

To understand everything in the details, you have to see the bigger picture. Only then can things come into their proper focus. That’s true in every aspect of life, as well as (most importantly) in the spiritual life.

Look at every single thing being thrown at Trump — from the secular world as well as from inside the Church. Then look at what Trump supports: A non-globalist view of the world and a world that cannot accept the horror of child slaughter.

Biden, a man with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, not only accepts the murder of preborn children by the millions, he embraces it; he cashes in on it.

That’s why they support him. Barring some last-second miracle of repentance, which is difficult to do when you are losing your mental acuity, Joe Biden will be lost, eternally. No one wants that, except Hell. Yet no bishop steps up and says this — especially his own bishop, Francis Malooly of Wilmington, Delaware.

Heck, Malooloy even gives the heretical Biden Holy Communion, adding sacrilege to both their lists of sins. The demon who inspires Biden to support and advance child slaughter for political gain is the same demon who inspires Malooly to profane the Holy Eucharist, placing the body and blood of Our Lord into hands dripping with the blood of tiny innocents.

Both men are very close in age; they are quickly approaching that divine judgment seat. How terrible to face the wrath of Almighty God — even the saints trembled before such a notion. Yet the press, especially the Catholic so-called press, never talks about this truth.

Because, for this lot, everything is connected to serving their master — just as various bishops who are worried about their acceptance by men and about their money and about their careers are serving the same master.

The truth is that everything is connected. They’re all just ignoring the very last piece: Eternity.

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

PODCAST: Antifa-BLM Violence Intensifies as Biden Fades

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JEROME R. CORSI

Jerome R. Corsi, New York Times Best Selling Author, Investigative Journalist and Political Analyst. He worked as a Senior Staff Reporter for WND.com. Since 2004, Dr. Corsi has published over 25 books, seven of which were New York Times Bestsellers, including two #1 New York Times best-sellers. In 2018, NewsMax published Killing the Deep State: The Fight to Save President Trump, a New York Times bestseller. He has written a first-hand account of his experience with the Mueller Office of Special Counsel in his book Silent No More: How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s ‘Witch Hunt,’. His most recent book, Coup d’État: Exposing Deep State Treason and the Plan to Re-Elect President Trump, and is available also in audiobook and eBook formats.

TOPIC: Antifa-BLM Violence Intensify as Biden Fades

JEFF CROUERE

Jeff Crouere is the host of, “Ringside Politics,” which airs weekdays on WGSO 990-AM in New Orleans. He is a political columnist, the author of America’s Last Chance and provides regular commentaries on the Jeff Crouere YouTube channel and on www.JeffCrouere.com.

TOPIC: Trump Deserved Higher Honor Than Nobel Prize

©Conservative Commandos Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Other Half of the Jacob Blake Conversation

A Retired Deputy Sheriff’s Perspective on the Jacob Blake Shooting

The Durability of the U.S. Constitution

/in , , , , , /by

“The American Constitution is, so far as I can see, the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.” So said 19th century British Prime Minister Sir William Gladstone.

September 17 marks the 233rd anniversary of the signing of the U. S. Constitution.

But some in our society might wonder—hasn’t this musty old document outlived its usefulness? Isn’t it arcane and irrelevant? Just the product of a bunch of rich white guys, and some of them were slave-owners. But, of course, the Constitution contained within the means by which slavery could one day be abolished. And it was.

Nonetheless, many today think the Constitution is out of date. During the recent protests and violence in the streets, some on the left have said things like, “F*** the Constitution.”

Billionaire George Soros has funded many attempts which, to put it gently, have frayed the edges of the Constitution.

In their 2010 book exposing George Soros, The Shadow Party, authors David Horowitz and Richard Poe tell of one such Soros attempt against the Constitution. The radical billionaire funded a symposium at Yale Law School in 2005, with the express purpose of initiating a fundamental transformation of the Constitution by this present year.

Horowitz and Poe note, “Yale Law School hosted a conference called, ‘The Constitution in 2020,’ promoted as an effort to produce ‘a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be.’” They opine, “We might think of it as a Shadow Constitutional Convention.” At the conference, participants referred repeatedly to the “evolutionary character of constitutional law.”

The WEEKLY STANDARD said of the Yale conference: “The left makes no secret of its intentions where the Constitution is concerned. It wants to change it…freeing [the left] from the tiresome necessity of winning elections….The new, improved Constitution will come about through judicial re-interpretation.”

Will the Constitution endure—even through all the various assaults on it, including bouts of judicial activism?

Well, it has endured all these years, including during the U. S. Civil War. I believe the answer is Yes—with the right actions by “we the people.”

I think the reason it has endured all these years has to do with Christianity. The Constitution benefited greatly from the Christian worldview that was held by the majority of the founders—even those who might not have believed in Jesus as their personal Savior and Lord.

Law professor and prolific author John Eidsmoe wrote a seminal book on the 200th anniversary of our key founding document, Christianity and the Constitution.

In a television interview on our nation’s Christian roots, Eidsmoe told me, “When you look to that constitutional convention, those fifty-five delegates, we find that, contrary to what is commonly being taught today, the overwhelming majority were actively affiliated with Christian churches. Twenty-seven of them were members of the Church of England or the Anglican Church, an orthodox church in those days with a Calvinist confession, the Thirty-Nine Articles.  About seven of them were Presbyterian Calvinists, about the same number were Congregationalist Puritans, again Calvinists, two of them were Dutch Reformed, two of them were Lutheran with a very similar theology in most ways. There were two Methodists, two Roman Catholics, one who we just don’t know for sure what his religious beliefs were, and that leaves maybe about three or four that you would call unorthodox in their religious beliefs.  That’s a very small minority: it’s about six percent.”

A key component to the Constitution’s success is that the founders believed the Biblical witness about man—that man is basically sinful. So the founders strived to create a government that would protect us from each other and that would protect us from the government, since the government is run by men. And men are sinful. James Madison says as much in Federalist #52.

Where did Madison learn such wisdom? Madison, a key architect of the Constitution and one of its biggest champions, was schooled at what is today Princeton. He studied under its president, Rev. John Witherspoon, a confirmed Calvinist who came from Scotland.

When Madison said things like, “All men having power ought not to be trusted,” he was echoing what he learned so well from his mentor Witherspoon. Eidsmoe points out that Witherspoon was the founding father who trained so many other founding fathers in a Christian worldview. He taught about 20 key founding fathers at Princeton.

In contrast to failed forms of government which always exalt man’s nature, the U. S. Constitution stands for the rule of law. By assuming the worst about human nature, it has brought about the best in men. As has been said, we are a nation of laws and not of men. Its Christian foundation explains the durability of the Constitution.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2024 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.