“I’ll respect you in the morning” is what I half expect to hear. Of course, the Democrats now invoking the Founding Fathers’ memory in their effort to impeach President Trump won’t respect our colonial progenitors at the next dawn anymore than they did at the last one.
Nonetheless, the Left has interrupted its regularly scheduled programming of trying to tear down the Founders’ reputations and life’s work — the Electoral College, the First and Second Amendments, and the Constitution generally — to claim that those Enlightenment men are on their side.
Nancy Pelosi (D-Fruits and Nuts) has proclaimed that Trump’s actions “are in defiance of the vision of our Founders.” Democrat Jerrold Nadler, from the state (NY) that allows prenatal infanticide up to birth and that’s giving driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, asked a shill college professor of an impeachment “witness,” “[I]f Washington were here today, if he were joined by Madison, Hamilton and other Framers, what do you believe they would say if presented with the evidence before us about President Trump’s conduct?”
My, my, as Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson put it Tuesday evening, “Democrats care deeply and passionately about the Founding Fathers.” For sure. Just watch a selection of them in Carlson’s segment below, if you have a strong stomach and high tolerance for shameless sanctimony.
Now, Nadler’s hypothetical is interesting because I’ve occasionally indulged the thought exercise of what would transpire if a Founder — let’s say, George Washington — could be resurrected from the dead. After he recovered from the shock of our technological advancement and moral debasement, I imagine he’d have lots to say.
How much of it, though, would be in praise of the Democrat program? What would he say about sex as social construct, personal pronoun tyranny, putting boys masquerading as girls in female spaces and the Sexual Devolution generally? Widespread prenatal infanticide? Open-borders cultural genocide? Rule by judicial and bureaucratic fiat? Proposals to eliminate the Electoral College and Senate? Feminism? Multiculturalism? Attacks on Christianity? The exalting of Islam? Hate crime law? High taxation? Federal overreach? The redistribution of wealth?
Speaking of which, how about socialism? Note that Founder Samuel Adams spoke for many of his comrades in warning of the “Utopian schemes of levelling, and a community of goods.” So is there one aspect of the modern Democrat agenda — just one — of which Washington or any other Founder would approve? Help me out here.
The notion is ridiculous, of course. The Founders would have an earful for most of us, don’t get me wrong, but they’d absolutely view today’s leftists as aliens.
That’s how the Left views them, too. Leftists don’t hide their disdain for “old white men,” whom they despise at least partially because that demographic most opposes their agenda. They also loathe the Founder fruit that is the Constitution — which Barack Obama bemoaned was merely “a charter of negative liberties” — basically because it’s a conservative document.
By this I don’t mean just the obvious, which is that it prescribes limited government. It’s also that conservatism is about conserving the status quo — standing “athwart history, yelling Stop,” as William F. Buckley put it — while liberalism is about changing the status quo. Yet since the Constitution’s Amendment Process makes it painfully hard to change, the document does (when adhered to) conserve a status quo.
So it’s no surprise that lawyer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin called the Constitution “broken” in 2013 and stated that outside “Washington, discontent with the founding document is bipartisan and widespread” (among pseudo-elites, yes).
Toobin pointed to a University of Texas law professor, Sanford Levinson, who, when asked if he would have signed the Constitution, reluctantly said yes in 1987 but no in 2003. Toobin was making his case for how a positive evolution of thought takes us beyond constitutional limitations, but he only demonstrated how Levinson managed to get not only older, but dumber in 16 years’ time.
But since the Democrats are now romancing the Founders, here’s another thought exercise: Imagine we could resurrect all those men and let them take the place of our current president, congressmen and senators for some years so that they could restore our government to founding principles. Would you agree? I’d sign on that dotted line.
No matter what the Democrats would say hypothetically, though, this would be their worst nightmare. Their feelings toward the Founders range from indifference to contempt to hostility, which is why they demean them in history books and propose removing monuments to Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
Oh, don’t think it’s really about slavery, either. Islam’s Mohammed was not only a warlord, caravan-raider thief, mass murderer and user of torture, but a slave owner and trader. Yet no leftist would dare besmirch his memory. Nor do our liberals trouble much over Muslims’ enslavement of blacks in Africa today. No, leftists hate the Founders because they hate Americanism.
If the Founders could live again and run for office in 2019, the Left would be vicious in its vitriol, calling them racists, bigots, homophobes, sexists, xenophobes, white supremacists and, well, you know the wash-rinse-repeat pattern.
Worse still, though, is what leftists are doing to the Founders right now: associating them with themselves. Why, if the Founders weren’t in a place beyond the reach of worldly defilement, they’d likely feel in need of a Silkwood-intensity shower.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Selwyn Dukehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSelwyn Duke2019-12-18 13:23:572019-12-18 13:23:57The Democrats’ One-night Stand with the Founders [+Video]
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana
“It’s been my experience, Langford, that the past always has a way of returning. Those who don’t learn, or can’t remember it, are doomed to repeat it.” ― Steve Berry, The Charlemagne Pursuit
I went to see the Warner Brothers film “Richard Jewell” produced and directed by Clint Eastwood. The film is a docudrama about the July 27, 1996 bombing in Centennial Olympic Park during the 1996 Olympics. Here is a video about the film:
Warner Brothers issued the following after the Atlanta Journal-Constitution took issue with the portrayal of Kathy Scruggs as a woman journalist who traded sex for stories. It was Scruggs who initially broke the story of the FBI’s targeting Richard Jewell as a terrorist:
The film is based on a wide range of highly credible source material. There is no disputing that Richard Jewell was an innocent man whose reputation and life were shredded by a miscarriage of justice. It is unfortunate and the ultimate irony that the Atlanta Journal Constitution, having been a part of the rush to judgment of Richard Jewell, is now trying to malign our filmmakers and cast. ‘Richard Jewell’ focuses on the real victim, seeks to tell his story, confirm his innocence and restore his name. [Emphasis added]
History has indeed repeated itself but in a much more nefarious way.
The Two Most Powerful Forces in The World – The United States Government and The Media
In the film Richard Jewell’s lawyer Watson Bryant, played by Sam Roswell, says:
His accusers are two of the most powerful forces in the world. The United States Government, and the media.
As I watched the film I could not help but think about how the FBI and media attacked an innocent man named Richard Jewell in 1996. Fast forward to today and we find that the FBI was once again used to attack people involved in the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and even the President of the United States himself.
Richard Jewell was an innocent man who was falsely accused of a crime he did not commit. Today we learn that innocent members of the 2016 Trump presidential campaign were falsely accused by the FBI of colluding with Russia. The twist is that today the FBI has become a weapon to be used against one’s political opponents. This is whole a new, and frightening, level of corruption. Why? Because no American is immune, not one.
In the end Richard Jewell was exonerated when on October 26, 1996 the US Justice Department announced that Richard Jewell was no longer a suspect in the Olympic Park bombing. February 2, 1998 Eric Robert Rudolph was named as a suspect in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing.
The FBI and Fake News
We have also learned, as was the case with Richard Jewell, that the President of the United States, members of his campaign and members of his administration have been falsely accused of collusion with the Russians. In the case of Roger Stone, who has been convicted and imprisoned, the story is ongoing. The lives of many individuals, like General Mike Flynn, have been ruined.
This is a who new level of corruption. This is a new level of hate. This is something that our Constitutional Republican form of government has never seen.
The FBI and fake news media have been the fuel that has driven the engine of impeachment of President Donald J. Trump.
Conclusion
As I write this on Wednesday, December 18th, 2019 it is expected that the U.S. House of Representatives will vote on the Articles of Impeachment against President Donald J. Trump.
I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. This impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat Lawmakers, unequaled in nearly two and a half centuries of American legislative history.
The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence. They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever. You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment!
By proceeding with your invalid impeachment, you are violating your oaths of office, you are breaking your allegiance to the Constitution, and you are declaring open war on American Democracy. [Emphasis added]
Every American is under siege. Every American is at risk.
President Donald J. Trump sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today, exposing Democrats’ partisan impeachment crusade for the unprecedented, unconstitutional sham that it is.
A few important excerpts from the President’s letter:
“The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence. They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever.”
“Speaker Pelosi, you admitted just last week at a public forum that your party’s impeachment effort has been going on for ‘two and a half years,’ long before you ever heard about a phone call with Ukraine.”
“Before the Impeachment Hoax, it was the Russian Witch Hunt.”
“You are the ones interfering in America’s elections. You are the ones subverting America’s Democracy. You are the ones Obstructing Justice. You are the ones bringing pain and suffering to our Republic for your own selfish personal, political, and partisan gain.”
“You and your party are desperate to distract from America’s extraordinary economy, incredible jobs boom, record stock market, soaring confidence, and flourishing citizens. Your party simply cannot compete with our record.”
“Our Founders feared the tribalization of partisan politics, and you are bringing their worst fears to life.”
President Trump’s next big move to help American students
In the United States, every student should have the chance to earn a high-quality education, regardless of background. This week, President Trump is signing a bill that will make that promise closer to reality than ever before.
The FUTURE Act, which stands for Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for Education, accomplishes two major objectives. First, it permanently reauthorizes funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), as well as other minority-serving institutions to the tune of $255 million. Second, it will simplify the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and the loan repayment process for all, significantly reducing the paperwork burden placed on borrowers.
President Trump has made fighting for struggling, historically forgotten communities a hallmark of his Administration. Support for HBCUs has been a key piece of that agenda. Barely a month after taking office, he signed an executive order to move the Federal HBCU initiative back within White House purview. This September, he spoke at the 2019 National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week Conference.
“Every day of my presidency, we’ll strive to give every child, of every background and every race, religion, color, and creed, the best chance to reach that beautiful American Dream,” he said. “We will never let you down, and we will never stop fighting for you.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png001600 Daily - The White Househttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png1600 Daily - The White House2019-12-18 04:40:422019-12-18 04:41:30Dear Madam Speaker
The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims.
They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); they fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); they claim that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); they love to listen to lies (5:41); they disobey Allah and never observe his commands (5:13). They are disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more. They are under Allah’s curse (9:30), and Muslims should wage war against them and subjugate them under Islamic hegemony (9:29).
“WATCH: Shocking Video Shows Muslim Woman Attack Jewish Woman on NYC Subway While Yelling ‘Allahu Akbar,’” Breaking911.com, December 16, 2019:
Video posted to Facebook Monday shows a Muslim woman berating and attacking a Jewish New Yorker on a subway train from Manhattan to Brooklyn. Lihi Aharon says she was assaulted due to her Jewish faith….
Current events always bring about the most powerful teaching moments. Today’s question can be generally formed as:
“What is the remedy when articles of impeachment are established that do not comply with the terms of the Constitution?”
The Constitution lays out very specific terms for impeachment in Article 2 section 4 of the Constitution. According to the Constitution impeachment can only be brought for four specific crimes: Bribery, Treason, High Crimes, or Misdemeanors. Any article of impeachment that is outside those four crimes is completely unconstitutional. So what can the people do, Constitutionally, when articles of impeachment are brought by the House outside those four authorized terms?
Those who ratified our Constitution knew that those in government would always be tempted, for reasons they would attempt to justify, to try to work outside the boundaries of the Constitution. James Madison, “Father of the Constitution” and our fourth President even called our Constitution a “parchment barrier,” knowing that the document itself would have no force to keep the politically ambitious within the Constitution’s limited and defined boundaries. It was always considered, and will always be the duty of the citizens to control those they place in government.
Understanding the constitutional solution to this political problem requires understanding that the structure of government created by the Constitution is not the structure of government we currently have operating outside the Constitution. When those holding the trust of public office leave behind the standard of the Constitution, the people have a duty to correct their course. When the power to impeach is exercised to satisfy political lusts rather than comply with Constitutional standards, what is the solution that exists within the established constitutional framework?
The first thing we must remind ourselves is, the people didn’t elect the president. The office of the president was not created to be a representative of the people; the president was created to be an ambassador for the States in foreign affairs. For that reason, the States elect the president through the electoral college. This is not a bad thing. As a matter of fact, the electoral college was established for specific reasons; first and foremost to protect the liberty and authority of the people. (If this principle seems strange to you, please read what those who drafted the Constitution said about the Electoral College.)
With that first principle in mind, here is the solution to the question: what is the check and balance upon unconstitutional articles of impeachment:
Because the president is a representative of the States, elected by the States, an improper impeachment is a disenfranchisement of the States.
Since it is the States’ vote that is being overturned, the remedy exists in the States. It is the obligation of every State Governor and Legislator to bring a lawsuit against the enforcement of the articles of impeachment and the members of Congress violating the specific terms of impeachment.
Because the purpose of the Senate is to represent the States in federal government, it is also imperative that those Senators representing States who chose the President, absent proper ground for impeachment, must not only oppose the House articles of impeachment, they must vote against conviction.
As a final note if truth, the Senators are representatives of their State as a whole, not the people of their State and not themselves. So if the State selected the president and if true grounds for impeachment are absent, a Senator MUST oppose the impeachment regardless of personal opinions and the opinions of a portion of the people of the State.
The designers of our Constitution crafted that document to be simply written so that the average person in 1788 could read and understand how their government was required to operate. The designed the solutions to be simply but necessarily applied by the people.
“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.” Federalist #33
However, because the American education system no longer teaches the essential principles driving the proper application of our Constitution, the remedies often evade our view and the people slip into overwhelming frustrations due to a perceived lack of options. As Thomas Jefferson remarked in a letter to Charles Yancy in 1816:
“…if a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was & never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the liberty & property of their constituents. there is no safe deposit for these but with the people themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information.”
Those who designed and ratified our Constitution gave us very powerful options, we simply need to apply those options to make the necessary course corrections. Application must begin with proper education. With this understanding, now we can demand our Governors and State Legislators exercise their duty in authority to be a necessary check and balance upon an unauthorized and unconstitutional behavior of those in the federal government.
KrisAnne Hall is a former biochemist, Russian linguist for the US Army, and former prosecutor for the State of Florida. KrisAnne also practiced First Amendment Law for a prominent Florida non-profit Law firm. KrisAnne now travels the country teaching the foundational principles of Liberty and our Constitutional Republic. KrisAnne is the author of 6 books on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, she also has an internationally popular radio and television show and her books and classes have been featured on C-SPAN TV. KrisAnne can be found at www.KrisAnneHall.com.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Rod Thomsonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRod Thomson2019-12-17 06:25:512019-12-18 04:21:44The Constitutional Remedy To A Bad Impeachment by KrisAnne Hall, JD
If there was ever a question of the Catholic crisis not being mainstream, those questions can now be laid aside.
Sean Hannity, the dominant star of prime-time cable news commentators, has made it official.
He is leaving the Catholic Church, and his reason — as stated in an interview published three days ago in the Christian Post — is the Catholic Church has “too much institutionalized corruption,” adding that it has not been rectified.
The 57-year-old Fox News star, to be certain, had already been on record years ago saying he disagreed with Church teaching on birth control, as was famously revealed in a 2007 Fox News interview with then Fr. Thomas Euteneuer.
But before we pigeonhole him and his latest announcement about leaving the Church into a specific box, we need to learn something here.
Given the near-daily reports now of corruption, it’s easy to think of the crisis in terms of these unfolding scandals of homosexual priests abusing teenage boys, or bishops covering them, or Vatican officials ripping off billions, using money for gay lovers, or misdirecting money donated for charity for investments or administrative costs. The scandals show no signs of abating.
But those scandals are only symptoms of the greater crisis — a crisis as Church Militant has been saying for nearly a decade — is of supernatural faith within the hierarchy.
Of course, when you lose your faith, all these horrible, sinful, wicked, evil things are going to happen. And how has that trickled down to the average Catholic, like Hannity in this case?
The lack of faith among the hierarchy has been an issue for decades now, and it would be preposterous to not understand the massive falling away from the Faith this has caused.
The dominant effect of the crisis has been this: the Faith not being transmitted to the laity. And that stands to reason; one of the first principles of philosophy is: You cannot give what you do not have.
So how could a clergy and hierarchy that no longer possessed the Faith themselves transmit it to a laity being besieged by a culture attacking the Church on every side?
At the very moment the laity needed fathers to stand and protect them, these men deserted them. But more than deserting, they also betrayed them by setting in motion the machinery to perpetuate the evil for generations to come.
In addition to just themselves, they also recruited thousands and thousands of other homosexual and faithless men into seminaries. They populated the seminary faculties with gay abusers. They kept orthodox men out of the seminary and ordained active homosexuals to go out into the parishes and corrupt the minds of the faithful.
These wicked men stood in pulpits and worked out their own psychological trauma instead of teaching the Faith, slowly perverting congregations and turning them away from the Faith.
Sean Hannity is responsible for his own choices. No one is saying anything else. But — and it is a big but — his public apostasy has not happened in a vacuum, as it hasn’t for tens of millions of other American Catholics who have also left the Church.
Interestingly, Hannity says since leaving the Church he is “closer” to God. That would be the expected response from any Catholic who was taught next to nothing as a child, and then has witnessed nothing except a steady flow of one story of corruption after another pouring out of the Church.
Of course, the correct response is to remain in the Church and fight for Her. But Hannity — like so many other Catholics, it would appear — apparently was never taught what the Church actually is — Who She actually is.
So he has no concept of staying and fighting for something because he doesn’t see the “something” worth fighting for.
One final thought: There is a parallel case here for Hannity.
American politics and journalism are rife with scandal; the country itself is being transformed into a socialist state. The nation itself is transforming into something it was never destined or designed to be.
Yet Hannity doesn’t throw in the towel on America and become a Canadian, for example. Why Because he has sufficient “catechesis,” if you will, in what America is. He is schooled in the founding documents; he is schooled and educated in the country’s history and so forth.
He understands it’s worth fighting for. But in the case of the Church, he has little to no understanding. He was trained in the Faith by faithless men — by men who were, in reality, actual enemies of the Faith.
His move away from and now out of the Church can hardly be a surprise.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-12-17 06:11:112019-12-17 06:11:11The Vortex — The Crisis Goes Mainstream. But not the crisis you think of every day.
At a time when some gun control advocates appear intent on painting lawful gun ownership as a danger to society, and the Second Amendment as little more than an outdated protection of a person’s right to hunt, it’s important to remember the regular role armed citizens play in defending inalienable rights.
As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention affirmed in a 2013 report, almost all major studies on defensive gun uses have concluded that Americans use firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times every year.
The vast majority of them will receive little or no media attention.
Every month this year, we have highlighted just some of the many times law-abiding citizens used their firearms to defend themselves or others. (You can read past articles here: January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, and October). Unsurprisingly, November was also replete with similar stories of Americans using guns to save lives and livelihoods.
The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>
Nov. 2, Everett, Washington: A concealed-carry permit holder intervened to stop a mentally disturbed man who was endangering drivers by throwing chunks of concrete and metal pipes at cars passing by on the interstate. The man had damaged almost a dozen cars and was holding a large piece of metal when the permit holder drew his handgun and detained the man until police could arrive. One of the drivers whose car was damaged told reporters that she was thankful the permit holder saved her and other drivers from further harm.
Nov. 5, Genesee County, New York: A 76-year-old man used his shotgun to fend off an armed home intruder, potentially saving both his life and the life of his wife. The man responded to a knock on his door during the night, only to have the intruder force his way inside at gunpoint and tell the couple to give him all their money or else he would kill them. The intruder then ordered the couple to go into the basement, where the man thought the intruder was going to kill them. Instead, the man was able to grab his loaded shotgun and shoot the intruder in the hip, then held him at gunpoint for 15 minutes until police could arrive.
Nov. 7, Glen Burnie, Maryland: A man was feeding chickens in his yard when his bulldog began frantically barking, and he heard commotion from inside his home. He walked inside to find two acquaintances had broken in and, armed with a gun and a knife, were assaulting his girlfriend. The man grabbed an antique shotgun that he kept loaded “in case anything ever happens,” and fired at the attackers, injuring one and causing the other to run away. The man told reporters: “They could have shot and killed both of us, and then what? The guys could have got away scot-free. But no, I am an American. I’m going to have my gun, and I’m going to shoot [intruders] when they enter my house.”
Nov. 10, Atascocita, Texas: A group of four masked would-be robbers charged into a jewelry store and began using hammers to smash into glass cases and grab expensive items. The storeowner saw the thieves from behind the one-way mirror in his office, grabbed his gun, and fired several rounds that wounded two thieves and sent all of them running. The four thieves were later arrested by law enforcement, and all of the stolen items were recovered.
Nov. 14, Port Charlotte, Florida: A disabled New York City firefighter recovering from serious injuries relied on his handgun for protection against a masked woman who broke into his home and assaulted him. The firefighter, suffering from a herniated disc in his back and a broken pelvis, warned the woman he was armed, but she punched his jaw and throat, and attempted to gouge his eyes. As the struggle continued, he feared he would be overpowered and shot the woman once in the stomach, causing her to flee the scene. She was subsequently arrested.
Nov. 17, Burlington, North Carolina: A homeowner used his shotgun to defend himself against an ax-wielding man who tried to break into his home through a back door. The homeowner did not need to fire his weapon, as the would-be intruder fled the moment he saw there would be an armed confrontation. Police later arrested the intruder and charged him with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a felony.
Nov. 21, Benton Harbor, Michigan: Two armed intruders broke into an apartment and ordered the occupants—including three children—to “get down.” The apartment renter heard the commotion from a separate room, grabbed his rifle, and shot at the intruders, killing one and sending the other fleeing. No one else in the apartment was harmed during the home invasion.
Nov. 25, Miami: When a man armed with an AK-47 attempted to rob a 60-year-old concealed-carry permit holder who was in his van, his son, and girlfriend, the permit holder drew his handgun and killed the would-be robber. The permit holder, who told reporters he is originally from Jamaica and a member of the National Rifle Association, said, “I am going to defend my life and those I love. My family is innocent, and just don’t put an AK-47 in my face. I will not allow that to happen.”
Nov. 27, Tulsa, Oklahoma: A man high on the drug PCP began stabbing his friend with a knife after the friend declined to give the man a ride. The friend, in fear for his life, pulled out his firearm and shot the man, who ultimately died from his wounds. The friend suffered serious injuries, but survived. Tulsa police said they think the shooting was justified.
Nov. 28, McCleary, Washington: A woman shot and killed her estranged husband after he broke into her house and attacked her and a friend with a knife. The woman already had a domestic violence protection order issued against the husband. In a statement to a local news station, she explained, “If it’s your life or theirs, you have to do what you have to do.”
Nov. 30, Ellenwood, Georgia: A deliveryman was unloading an order of bread at a Hardee’s fast-food restaurant when he saw several employees run out of the store in a panic, screaming for help. They told him that an armed robber had entered the store and was demanding cash while threatening other employees with a gun. The deliveryman grabbed his firearm from his truck and ran into the store. A gunbattle ensued, and the robber, who was shot several times, fled the scene. The wounded robber was later arrested. The local sheriff’s department named the deliveryman an honorary deputy and inducted him into its Posse Hall of Fame.
These types of defensive gun uses are not rare or anomalies, but common occurrences that make a meaningful difference in the lives of ordinary Americans.
When policymakers consider enacting laws that significantly restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, the people most affected are not the criminals who largely obtain firearms from the black market and who won’t be deterred by one more law telling them to “behave.”
No, the people most affected are those who, like the Americans noted above, are ready and willing to defend themselves and others from criminals. We must continue to ensure that they are able to do so.
With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:
Is socialism really morally sound?
The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.
They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2019-12-17 05:35:292019-12-20 10:09:0111 More Examples of How Firearms Save Gun Owners’ Lives, Property
You would think that after being one of the centers of the election storm in 2000 when the hotly contested Florida recount determined whether George Bush or Al Gore would be president of the United States, Palm Beach County would have gotten its act together.
But as is evident from a recent report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which shows problems such as the dead rising from their graves to vote, Palm Beach County still is not properly supervising the election process or maintaining accurate voter registration rolls.
This latest revelation comes on top of the decision last January by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to remove Susan Bucher, the county’s election supervisor, for incompetence and neglect of duty in the 2018 election. The news also follows the recent arrest and removal of the information technology manager of the elections office for shoving a police officer who was investigating child pornography.
The report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, titled “Calm Before the Storm,” is based on a three-month review of Palm Beach County’s records, practices, and procedures. Unfortunately, that review found numerous problems, ranging from clerical errors in voter records to evidence of double voting and ballots cast by the deceased.
The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>
The report found 68 voters who were not registered at their home addresses as required by law, but at businesses and even government addresses.
At least 10 used the address of the Boca Raton police station in their registration. Others used addresses of fire stations, city halls, and UPS stores. Using improper addresses on registration forms is another loophole that fraudsters use to erode the safety of elections.
The report found 225 individuals who double-voted across state lines in the 2016 and/or 2018 elections. In other words, 225 voters illegally cast ballots in Palm Beach County and elsewhere in the same election, which is almost half of Bush’s margin of victory in 2000 of 537 votes in the county. More than 400 persons also registered more than once in Palm Beach County.
The names of more than 2,200 deceased voters were still on the rolls, 139 of whom somehow cast ballots after they were dead, a remarkable achievement that obviously is not limited to Chicago. So while dead men may tell no tales, they do cast votes in Palm Beach County.
Perhaps most alarming, the Public Interest Legal Foundation found noncitizens illegally registered to vote, in some cases despite the fact that the county knew these persons were not citizens. Almost 70 noncitizens were still registered to vote after they contacted election officials and asked to be removed from the voter rolls.
The report found that county election officials registered some aliens to vote even when they checked the “No” box regarding U.S. citizenship on the application form, showing a fundamental problem in administrative procedures.
The report illustrates some specific examples, including a Venezuelan who twice admitted on the form to not being a citizen, yet was registered to vote anyway. He voted in the 2012, 2014, and 2016 elections.
Similarly, a Guatemalan citizen was registered to vote in 2015 despite admitting on her registration form that she was not a citizen. She voted in the 2016 presidential preference primary, likely in the Democratic contest, since she identified herself as a Democrat.
Palm Beach County’s failure to prioritize removal of the deceased from voter rolls constitutes a huge flaw in the system and a threat to the integrity of elections.
Absentee ballot fraud also has been such a problem in Florida that in 1998 the state’s Department of Law Enforcement issued a report on the numerous cases that had been prosecuted. In 2012, the “Final Report of the Miami-Dade Grand Jury” found serious problems with the absentee ballot process. Things have not improved much since then.
Unfortunately, Palm Beach County isn’t an isolated problem.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation just filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Detroit for failing to properly maintain its voter registration rolls.
The organization found thousands of deceased voters who remained registered, multiple registrations by the same individuals, and some registered voters who obviously are trying to compete with Methuselah to be the longest living humans in history. That includes the oldest, active registered voter who, according to city records, was born in 1823, before Michigan was admitted to the union.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation also just obtained a decision from a federal judge in Pennsylvania ordering the state to turn over the records of tens of thousands of noncitizens who have registered to vote in the state over the past 20 years. Pennsylvania has been fighting to keep these records secret, to avoid having to disclose the extent of this problem to the public.
The Election Fraud Database maintained by The Heritage Foundation highlights a sampling of cases that demonstrate the flaws in the security of elections across the country. The total number of proven cases stands at 1,241.
Heritage’s database does not yet include other important examples, such as the almost 300 noncitizens who Ohio’s secretary of state recently found were registered illegally to vote in the state, 77 of whom voted in the 2018 election.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation’s report on Palm Beach County calls attention to disturbing vulnerabilities in the election process. State and local officials must do more to prevent these problems.
The citizens of Palm Beach County and other places such as Detroit need to know that local election officials are doing everything they can to ensure that their votes are protected from administrative errors and fraud that could dilute or steal their votes and affect the outcome of future elections.
Democracy deserves no less.
Editor’s note: Hans von Spakovsky is on the board of the Public Interest Legal Foundation.
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: @HvonSpakovsky.
Kaitlynn Samalis-Aldrich is a research assistant in the Meese Center for Judicial and Legal Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:
Is socialism really morally sound?
The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.
They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2019-12-17 05:12:492019-12-17 05:12:49Election Irregularities Persist in Palm Beach County 20 Years After Bush-Gore Standoff
As Virginia gun owners have shown their displeasure with Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s proposed attack on their rights in city and county meetings across the Old Dominion, Northam has been forced to answer questions about he and gun control financier Michael Bloomberg’s gun ban agenda. In doing so, the governor has proclaimed that he supports the Second Amendment and that his gun ban does not violate the U.S. Constitution. In truth, Northam’s proposed gun ban would violate the Second Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
On Monday, Northam told reporters, “I’m a supporter of the Second Amendment,” adding, “I hear people out there saying that they don’t want law enforcement to enforce unconstitutional laws. Well we’re not going to propose or pass any unconstitutional laws.”
In a Wednesday meeting with reporters, Northam offered a veiled threat to sanctuary jurisdictions that have promised to not enforce unconstitutional gun laws stating, “If we have constitutional laws on the books and law enforcement officers are not enforcing those laws on the books then there are going to be some consequences…” The governor went on to say “Any law that we pass in Richmond and the 8 pieces of legislation that I put on the table back in July – they’re constitutional, so that’s not going to be an issue.”
Northam’s allies in Richmond have proposed firearm confiscation legislation that would prohibit the sale and possession of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms like the AR-15. The governor has stated that he intends to push legislation that would ban such firearms but grandfather possession by gun owners who register their firearms with the government.
Banning commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms under either proposal is unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that governments cannot ban these firearms as they are “in common use” for lawful purposes.
Taken alone, Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in Heller is enough to dispose of Northam’s comments. In the decision, Justice Scalia made clear that the types of firearms protected by the Second Amendment include those “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.”
The firearms industry has estimated that Americans own more than 17.5 million semi-automatic rifles. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the U.S. and therefore indisputably “in common use” and protected by the Second Amendment.
Further, in the 1994 case Staples v. United States, the Supreme Court determined that semi-automatic rifles were common. The case concerned the criminal intent requirement for a conviction for possession of an unregistered machine gun. The subject of the case had argued that he was unaware that the AR-15 in his possession had been modified for automatic fire and was not simply a legal semi-automatic AR-15. In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas made clear that the mere possession of a converted AR-15 is not enough to infer intent sufficient for conviction, as some firearms are “so commonplace and generally available that we would not consider them to alert individuals to the likelihood of strict regulation.” Justice Thomas went on to write that most categories of guns, including semi-automatic rifles, “traditionally have been widely accepted as lawful possessions.”
All doubt as to whether the Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller and McDonald preclude bans on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms was settled in 2015. That year, Justice Scalia joined Justice Thomas in a dissent from the denial of certiorari in Friedman v. Highland Park, a case concerning a local ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.
Justice Thomas explained,
Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.
Northam’s attempt to portray his Bloomberg-sponsored gun ban as constitutional is an absurd and transparent attempt to forestall the surging Virginia grassroots gun rights movement. Virginia’s gun owners have every reason to take defensive action against Northam and Bloomberg’s unconstitutional gun control agenda.
All Virginia gun owners must organize to fight against unconstitutional Bloomberg-backed gun control in the Old Dominion. Please contact Gov. Northam and let him know you oppose his unconstitutional gun control measures. You can contact Northam using the Governor’s Office contact form below or call his office at 804-786-2211.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00NRA Institute for Legislative Actionhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngNRA Institute for Legislative Action2019-12-17 04:43:462019-12-17 04:45:44No Gov. Northam, Your Gun Ban is NOT Constitutional
Hillsdale College held a dedication ceremony for its new Christ Chapel on October 3, 2019, during a two-day gala to celebrate the College’s 175th anniversary. The following are excerpts from the dedication address.
This is a very special occasion—the 175th anniversary of Hillsdale and the dedication of Christ Chapel. This beautiful Chapel is a culmination of years of generosity, planning, and hard work. And the end result is at once stunning and glorious.
The Chapel’s enduring beauty highlights the transcendence, the sovereignty, and the grace of God. It truly illustrates how architectural design can reflect the character of God and evoke a sense of reverence for His majesty.
Everyone involved in the financing, planning, and construction of this Chapel should rightly be proud. It is a magnificent accomplishment. But we’ve gathered here today not just to admire this beautiful Chapel—we have gathered here to dedicate it.
The word dedicate in this context means “to set apart and consecrate to a deity or to a sacred purpose.” To dedicate this Chapel appropriately, then, it is worthwhile to reflect on the purposes for which we are setting apart this sacred place on a college campus.
The primary purpose of a chapel is to provide a place where man can enter the presence of God. It provides a sanctuary in which man can withdraw from the chaos of our world and seek a sacred stillness. For as Elijah learned on Mount Horeb, God so often comes to us not in the storms, not in the earthquakes or fires of life, but in stillness—in a “gentle whisper.”
Accordingly, men and women have long sought respite from the noise and commotion of daily life, where they can “be still, and know that [He is] God,” where they can seek an inner calm and a transcendent peace. Beautiful chapels, such as this one, provide that sacred space for stillness, a place for an encounter with the Divine. As the architect of this Chapel has written, “When you enter a church, it is as if you are entering through a gateway from the profane toward the sacred.”
It is difficult to overstate the significance of the role that this Chapel will play in the life of Hillsdale College.
[ … ]
Although a chapel is a place for many activities, it also serves as a statement about the importance of those activities. The construction of a college chapel, in particular, is a public declaration that faith and reason are mutually reinforcing. And in 2019, the construction of a chapel is a bold act of leadership at a crucial time in our nation’s history. So I would like to underscore briefly the broader significance of the decision that Hillsdale College has made in building Christ Chapel.
Beginning in the early 1900s, many elite private colleges and universities began to face questions about the continuing relevance of religious instruction on campus. These questions would have surprised the founders of those schools, many of which were created in part for the express purpose of providing religious instruction. But as time went on and as schools moved away from their religious roots, the relevance of religion to higher education was increasingly questioned, and campus chapels, in particular, came to be viewed as relics of a bygone era.
With the completion of Christ Chapel, Hillsdale College has staked out its position in this debate, and its decision serves as an example for all of us. The construction of so grand a chapel in 2019 does not happen by accident or as an afterthought. Christ Chapel reflects the College’s conviction that a vibrant intellectual environment and a strong democratic society are fostered, not hindered, by a recognition of the Divine. Hillsdale College affirms, with the writer of Proverbs, that, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.”
By constructing this Chapel, the College upholds the continued importance of its Christian roots, even as it respects the rights of each person to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. Our country was founded on the view that a correct understanding of the nature of God and the human person is critical to preserving the liberty that we so enjoy.
John Adams wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” He recognized that the preservation of liberty is not guaranteed. Without the guardrails supplied by religious conviction, popular sovereignty can devolve into mob rule, unmoored from any conception of objective truth.
As I think about our political culture today, I am reminded of Ronald Reagan’s warning that, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. The only way they can inherit the freedom we have known is if we fight for it, protect it, defend it, and then hand it on to them . . . [to] do the same.”
Each generation is responsible both to itself and to succeeding generations for preserving and promoting the blessings of liberty. Faith in God, more than anything else, fuels the strength of character and self-discipline needed to discharge ably that responsibility. That is why I am so encouraged by the construction of Christ Chapel.
Hillsdale College’s Articles of Association affirm that “inestimable blessings” flow from “the prevalence of civil and religious liberty and intelligent piety in the land.” The College was founded on the belief that “the diffusion of sound learning is essential to the perpetuity of these blessings.” Thus Hillsdale College was founded on the understanding that the battle to preserve and promote freedom in our country will be waged in the hearts and minds of the people.
Rather than shrinking from the battle, Hillsdale is rising to the occasion by investing in the intellectual and spiritual development of its students, so they can provide God-honoring leadership in our country. Let it be said of them what was said of David, that he “served the counsel of God in his own generation.”
Students, faculty, administrators, and friends of Hillsdale, let this Chapel be more than just an impressive building. Let it be a place where people enter the presence of a majestic God. Let it be a house of worship, of prayer, of meditation, and of celebration before God. Let it be a haven of rest for the weary, a place of healing for the wounded, a place of comfort for the grieving, and a source of hope for the despairing and forgotten.
Let it point to a day when “the dwelling of God” will be “with men,” when God himself will “wipe away every tear” and mend every wound. Let it be a place where tomorrow’s leaders discern their callings and grow firm in their convictions. Let it stand as a bold declaration to a watching world that faith and learning are rightly understood as complements, and that both are essential to the preservation of the blessings of liberty.
Let this Chapel equip and inspire us to honor God in whatever He calls us to do. For as Saint Paul wrote in his Letter to the Romans, “From Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.”
May God bless each of you. May God bless Hillsdale. And may God bless this wonderful country.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Imprimis Digesthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngImprimis Digest2019-12-16 07:03:212019-12-16 07:04:13“Faith and reason are mutually reinforcing” by Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice U.S. Supreme Court
House Republicans sought to get a minority hearing to call their own witnesses during the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, as was done in previous such processes. House Democrats, in the majority, rejected the proposal.
That’s among the reasons many in the GOP were disappointed when Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News Channel that the Senate impeachment trial—if there is one—should be short and not include witnesses.
Graham said Thursday that he doesn’t “want to give it legitimacy” because Democrats’ case against Trump is “a crock.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday night: “My hope is that it will be a shorter process rather than a lengthy process.”
The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>
House Republicans said they wanted to hear testimony from potential witnesses such as Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden; Alexandra Chalupa, a former Democratic operative with reported Ukraine ties; and the whistleblower whose complaint set in motion the impeachment investigation over Trump’s July 25 phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
According to an official White House transcript, Trump and Zelenskyy briefly discussed Trump’s interest in Ukraine’s investigating its own possible interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and the younger Biden’s lucrative employment by a Ukraine energy company while his father was President Barack Obama’s point man on Ukraine policy.
“It has been a phenomenal and frankly frightening display of injustice that the Democrats have been allowed to have. So the motion to recommit was to say, ‘Let us have a minority hearing.’ Every Democrat voted against it,” Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., told The Daily Signal.
“So, they are voting against their own rules. The Democrats have just railroaded this thing through,” Hice said.
The House Judiciary Committee, in two 23-17 votes Friday morning along party lines, approved impeachment charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress against Trump, setting up a full House vote as early as Wednesday.
Noting the reported coordination between House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff’s office and the whistleblower in the case, Hice said he thinks the California Democrat also should answer questions if there is a Senate trial.
“When it goes to the Senate, assuming it’s going there for a trial, at that point the president should have the right to have input as to who needs to be called to testify under oath,” Hice said. “I would think under that context that individuals like Hunter Biden, the whistleblower, a host of others [would appear], I would like to even see Adam Schiff.”
Regarding Schiff, Hice said:
He is the architect behind all of this. He ought to give testimony under oath. How did all this get started? What kind of coordination did he and his staff and the whistleblower have? These are all pertinent witnesses that have yet to be brought forth for testimony. I would like to see that sort of thing happen.
Now that the Judiciary Committee has adopted two articles of impeachment, a simple House majority is all that is required to send the charges to the Senate for a trial.
Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, one of two Democrats who voted against opening the impeachment inquiry, is expected to change parties and become a Republican after he met Friday with Trump. (The only other “no” vote Oct. 31 among Democrats was Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota, but party leaders expect others among 31 Democrats in districts won by Trump in 2016 to vote “no” on impeaching him.)
After the House committee’s votes Friday, Trump seemed open to either a short trial or a longer one with more witnesses.
“I’ll do whatever they want to do,” Trump said, referring to McConnell and the rest of the Senate’s Republican leadership:
It doesn’t matter. I wouldn’t mind a long process because I’d like to see the whistleblower, who is a fraud. The whistleblower wrote a false report and I really blew it up when I released the transcript of the call. Then, Schiff gets up and he–I blew him up too. He made a statement in front of Congress that was totally false. Then, a long time after he made it, when he got caught, he said, ‘Oh, well, that was a parody.’
In the Senate impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999, Republican House managers did not hear live testimony on the House floor, but showed three video depositions to the full Senate.
Asked whether Trump would be disappointed if the Senate did not attempt to hear from Hunter Biden and others, presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway said he is looking for a fair process.
“The president is confident he will get a full and fair true trial that Americans can relate [to], rather than whatever this has been, this multilayered process in the House that is unserious and was executed upon in a very unserious way,” Conway said Friday in response to a question from The Daily Signal during a press briefing.
“It was very difficult to follow, and I’m admitted to practice law in four jurisdictions,” she said. “I couldn’t follow it at all because it didn’t resemble any legal proceeding that any of us had ever witnessed.”
In response to another question, Conway agreed that Schiff should testify.
“I hope he [Schiff] is practicing, because he is a fact witness,” Conway said. “He ought to testify in front of the Senate. Everybody named Biden should too.”
She said that if the Senate trial is “organized” and “focused,” then it’s possible to hear depositions or testimony from fact witnesses and still have a short process.
But bringing forth witnesses could be problematic, said Thomas Jipping, a former chief counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee who was involved in two impeachment trials of federal judges.
“There has been some criticism that the House launched an illegitimate impeachment,” Jipping, now deputy director of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “So, the Senate would be reluctant to have complicating factors.”
Jipping added: “One reason the Republican Senate majority is reluctant to go down that path is that they want to get this over with.”
The Senate could force Hunter Biden and others to testify or face prosecution for contempt of Congress, said former independent counsel Robert Ray, who was involved in the investigation that led to Clinton’s impeachment.
“The Senate has the power to compel witnesses. So, subpoenas would be enforceable. Contempt of Congress is illegal. I don’t know that they have the votes, as a political question,” Ray told The Daily Signal.
Although the president’s side likely would win, a Senate subpoena could be fought in court by Biden and others before being enforced, which could drag out the trial.
“It would take time to be adjudicated in court,” Ray said. “So the political question is, why prolong the agony? Both parties have budgeted the month of January. The president says he wants his day in court, but does he really want a long process?”
This article has been updated to include Van Drew’s expected party switch.
With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:
Is socialism really morally sound?
The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.
They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!
We’re constantly getting warnings about giving out our personal data. Many of the warnings emanate from big data companies like Microsoft, Google, and, ironically, Facebook. We’re warned to guard against phishing emails, downloading files, and sharing details that might be useful for hackers.
These companies even provide us with a range of software to use to protect ourselves. They advise us to make use of email-scanning programs and other anti-phishing measures.
Which, when you think about it, is pretty ironic considering the amount of information that the giants like Google, Facebook, and so on already keep on us. You might think that your partner knows you best. You’re probably wrong.
Google knows what sites you like to visit, what topics you’ve been researching, and a lot more besides because they track your every move. Do they listen in to your conversations online? We’re told not, but how do we know for sure?
Big Data Companies Have a Bad History
In fact, if history is anything to go by, we can’t always take these big companies at their word. Facebook has been embroiled in a lot of data scandals over the last few years. Most concerningly was a story broken by TechCrunch where it came out that Facebook had been paying users to download their research app onto their phones.
This app would check all the data on the phone – the websites you visited, the purchases you made, and so on. For around $20, you were giving Facebook free license to root around on your phone. The company defended their actions by saying that they were upfront about what the app would do, but you have to wonder if users really understood the extent of what they were getting into.
They’ve since withdrawn the app, but apparently, they even listened in to Whatsapp conversations.
Scandals and big data companies seem to go hand in hand. Concerningly for clients, it would seem that there’s an attitude to ask forgiveness instead of permission. This also points to the fact that the companies often act in an immoral way, and then deal with the fallout when they get caught.
You Have No Idea How Your Data is Tracked and Used
As bad as the Facebook scandal revealed by TechCrunch was, Facebook did have a point. They were upfront about their intentions. The world’s favorite search engine, on the other hand, is not quite as upfront.
They track your movements online by default. They say it’s so that they can improve your search results and ensure that you get targeted advertising that you’re interested in. Here’s the thing, though, there’s no option to opt-out. Just by using Google, you’re tacitly agreeing that they can track your every movement.
And, while they say that they’re using the information to improve your user experience, that’s not entirely true. Why would they need to know what you do on Facebook if that was the case? And yet, run a search for a particular product on Amazon, and you’ll see ads for similar products from Amazon showing up in social media feeds banner ads, and so on.
Final Notes
The fact is that big data is big business. This information is packaged and sold on to market research companies. It’s used to provide you with advertising that you’re most likely to be interested in. So, while we’re out there guarding against phishers looking for a few files of information, the real threat is a lot more insidious.
What the big companies do is not considered technically illegal, but amounts to the same thing – the theft and misuse of your data. And, if that’s not frightening enough, what happens if one of these companies gets hacked?
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Chris Usatenkohttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChris Usatenko2019-12-15 08:01:552019-12-15 08:01:55The Greatest Cybersecurity Threat May Be from Big Data Companies
The weaponization of impeachment has utterly failed. I called this long ago and my media interviews, weekly video commentaries and articles will serve as a track record. The real and only concern about this is the potential precedent this creates moving forward into 2020 and beyond for President Trump and for future Presidents.
It’s our turn. We are now ready. Timing is everything. We shall now weaponize the truth. Team Trump has all the goods on everyone. They are all going down. And as a side note to all this, there have been nine horrific shootings over the past few weeks. Like I have stated before, the deep state orchestrates and triggers events prior to and during such times, to clog up the news cycle and divert attention away from them and their crimes. This short excerpt of a talk I gave covers it well.
30,000 Foot View
Taking a look at the big picture here’s the bottom line. First off, the grounds for impeachment has shifted with the wind day by day since day one along with the “kangaroo court” procedure for impeachment hearings, all of which are so far south from protocol, the founding fathers have been alerted and awakened and are shouting from their graves. Can you hear them?
There were no high crimes and misdemeanors. President Trump is not even remotely close to having done anything to impeach him. Even the two “articles of impeachment” drafted by Nadler and company do not cite any high crimes and misdemeanors but rather “obstruction of congress” and “abuse of power”. Lawyers, constitutional scholars and great legal minds both left and right, concur with the President, that this is a total sham, another baseless witch hunt. People like Alan Dershowitz, Mark Levin, Ken Star, Jonathan Turley, Gregg Jarret, my gosh even Gerardo Rivera, to name but a few.
Then in the midst of this sham, IGII FISA report is released along with testimony from IG Horrowitz, all of which was and is devastating to the FBI and the deep state players. Pay no attention to the fake news headlines and pompous James Comey’s statements since it’s release. Comey along with Clapper, Brennan, McCabe, Page, Strzok, Schiff and many others are among the low lying fruit about to be plucked in 2020. Like I said all along, FISA brings down the house. Indeed the findings in that report will. Then there is Durhams criminal investigation, NSA data collection, Epstein and Assange intel and Rudy Giuliani who has all the goods on Biden and more. Timing, my friends, timing. The deep state, the dems. and the fake news both here and globally, are panicking.
What’s Next?
AG Bill Barr has become activated (NBC interview) as has Prosecutor John Durham. Believe me, there is a plan and yes it is unfolding as it should. Next year, 2020, the world will begin to see what people perhaps like you and me have known all along. I will refer once again to the article I wrote back on June 13, 2018, “Scale of Discovery and Action“. Read it. Yes we are indeed now at steps 6, 7 and 8 on this twelve step program. And the fact that I wrote this and scores of other articles before and since, most of all highly accurate on forecasts, commentary and analysis, I ask you to follow my work and the work of others and to come aboard, for WWG1WGA. Meanwhile this was sent to me as pulled from the article by Sharyl Attkisson of Epoch Times.
Below are 24 points Barr felt the need to make after the release of the Horowitz report. (All of the information is attributed to Barr.)
1. Don’t expect Durham’s findings to be announced before late spring or summer 2020.
2. The FBI did spy on the Trump campaign. That’s what electronic surveillance is.
3. Regarding the FBI’s actions in surveilling Trump campaign associates, it was a “travesty” and there were “many abuses.”
4. From “day one,” the FBI investigation generated exculpatory information (tending to point to the targets’ innocence) and nothing that corroborated Russia collusion.
5. It’s a “big deal” to use U.S. law enforcement and intelligence resources to investigate the opposing political party, and I cannot think of another recent instance in which this happened.
6. Evidence to start the FBI’s investigation into Trump associates was “flimsy” from the start and based on the idea that Trump aide George Papadopoulos expressed he may have had pre-knowledge of a Democrat National Committee computer hack. However, it was actually just an offhand barroom comment by a young campaign aide described merely as a “suggestion of a suggestion, a vague allusion” to the fact that the Russians may have something they can dump. But by that time, May 2016, there was already rampant speculation online and in political circles that the Russians had hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails in 2014 and that they might surface. So the idea that Papadopoulos’s comment showed pre-knowledge of the Democratic National Committee hack and dump “is a big stretch.”
7. It was “wrong” for the FBI to presume the Trump campaign was part of a plot. They should have gone to the campaign and discussed their suspicions.
8. The normal thing to do would be to tell the campaign that there could be attempted foreign interference. There is no legitimate explanation as to why the FBI didn’t do this. The FBI’s explanation for this was that they only do “defensive briefings” if they’re certain there’s no chance they’re tipping someone off. But this simply isn’t true, isn’t plausible, and doesn’t hold water because our intelligence officials and President Barack Obama repeatedly contacted the Russians, the guilty party, to tell them to “cut it out.”
9. If the purpose were to protect the election, you would have given the Trump campaign a defensive briefing. You could have disrupted any foreign activity in time to protect the U.S. election.
10. As to the FBI’s motive, “that’s why we have Durham.” I’m not saying the motivations were improper, but it’s premature to say they weren’t.
11. The inspector general operates differently as an internal watchdog. Horowitz’s approach is to say that if people involved give reasonable explanations for what appears to be wrongdoing, and if he can’t find documentary or testimonial evidence to the contrary, he accepts it.
12. Contrary to much reporting, Horowitz didn’t rule out improper motive; he didn’t find documentary or testimonial evidence of improper motive. Those are two different things.
13. Instead of talking to the Trump campaign, the FBI secretly “wired up” sources and had them talk to four people affiliated with the Trump campaign, in August, September, and October 2016.
14. All of the information from this surveillance came back exculpatory regarding any supposed relationship to Russia and specific facts. But the FBI didn’t inform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court, which approved wiretaps against former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page four times.
15. At one point early on, the FBI didn’t have enough probable cause for a wiretap warrant, so it took the “Steele dossier” information against Trump, “which they’d done nothing to verify,” and used that to get the wiretaps.
16. The wiretaps allowed the FBI to go back and capture Page’s communications, emails, and other material from weeks, months, and even years ago.
17. Should the four FBI applications to wiretap Trump campaign aide Carter Page have ever been made, considering there were 17 critical omissions or errors by the FBI making it appear they had better evidence than they had? This is the meat of the issue, and “if you spend time to look at what happened, you’d be appalled.”
18. The FBI withheld from the court all of the exculpatory information and the lack of reliability of the main FBI source, Christopher Steele, who was being paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign to find evidence connecting Trump to Russia.
19. The major takeaway is that after the election in January, the FBI finally talked to one of Steele’s important sources to try to verify some of the “dossier” information and sourcing, as they’re required to do. This Steele source told the FBI he didn’t know what Steele was talking about in the dossier, and that he’d told Steele that the information he’d provided was “supposition” and “theory.” At that point, “it was clear the dossier was a sham.” Yet the FBI didn’t tell the court, and continued to get wiretaps based on the dossier.
20. Further, the FBI falsely told the court that Steele’s source had been proven reliable and truthful. In fact, what the source had told the truth about was that “the dossier was garbage.” It’s hard to look at this “and not think it was gross abuse.”
21. Were the four Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act judges who approved the four wiretaps against Trump associate Carter Page badly misled by the FBI? Yes.
22. Are people going to be held accountable, including at the very top of our intelligence agencies and FBI? Well, they’re all gone.
23. The whole Russia collusion hype was a “bogus narrative hyped by an irresponsible press” that proved entirely false in the end.
Are former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI official Andy McCabe and others implicated in the Durham investigation? I think there was a failure of leadership in that group. Quoting the inspector general, the explanations he received “were not satisfactory. You can draw your own conclusions.”
24. Why haven’t we already thrown people in prison? “These things take time.” The government has to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt before we indict; it’s a substantial hurdle. Nobody is going to be indicted and go to jail unless that standard is met.
In his interviews this week, Barr provided a treasure trove of information about what stands to be one of the most important investigations into our U.S. intelligence community of our time. His signposts indicate that we can expect a shakeup of a system that may have been broken for decades.
What’s Next?
Know this. We, Trump, AG Barr, Durham, others and we the patriots, are in control.
Seems like Mitch McConnell, and the White House Council on behalf of the President have a plan. Will the House reject these articles due to no actual impeachable evidence and procedural violations? Will this go to the supreme court to decide? Will these articles now get to the full House for a vote? How many Democrats will not vote in favor for impeachment? How many will vote only based on fear of blackmail since that’s how the swamp works? I know one thing, if it gets to a full House vote and it seems like it will, we know it is DOA in the senate. If it gets to the senate will they fast track it by not going to trial? Will they go to trial and extend the process as the President seems to indicate he is willing to do? The days and short weeks ahead will tell. I do know one thing of which I have stated all along, the President will not be impeached and removed from office. Oh and Trump’s polling numbers are soaring and the battleground states are now in jeopardy for the dems. It’s a wonderful thing.
Summary
The weaponization of impeachment and abuse of power by the dems. has utterly backfired since day one out of the gate. My position remains the same. They are all going down and President Trump, (barring successful voter fraud), will win in an absolute landslide both electoral college as well as the popular vote. In 2020 and beyond the exposure of the individuals and their crimes, along with justice finally being served, will be the bottom line. But get ready for more and more battles and false flags as time is running out on the deep state and the dems. Their time is up and they know it. They have 11 months to remove or derail Trump to avoid his forgone re-election. Pray for the President and get busy waking others and getting others to vote for freedom versus a tyrannical socialist police state.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Michael Chambershttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Michael Chambers2019-12-15 07:05:502019-12-15 07:05:50Weaponization of Impeachment Has Utterly Failed
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” – Frédéric Bastiat
“Honesty is of God and dishonesty of the devil; the devil was a liar from the beginning.” – Joseph B. Wirthlin
“‘Liar’ is just as ugly a word as ‘thief,’ because it implies the presence of just as ugly a sin in one case as in the other. If a man lies under oath or procures the lie of another under oath, if he perjures himself or suborns perjury, he is guilty under the statute law.” – Theodore Roosevelt
The absence of God leaves a void of darkness; without the light, evil prevails. We have seen this evil in its full horrible array since the day Donald Trump declared his candidacy for president. We know there was full bias by many in the DOJ, especially the FBI and CIA. Strzok and Page called Mr. Trump “awful,” “loathsome,” a “disaster,” a “f***ing idiot,” an “enormous do*che,” and other disparaging names that were laced with profanity. And those of us who supported this billionaire businessman were branded as “hillbillies,” “deplorables,” “retards,” and “crazies” who “smell.” Strzok and Page sent over 50,000 texts to each other while at work in the FBI.
Their hatred of Donald Trump poisoned their entire investigation into Russian Collusion, their secret “insurance policy” to rid America of the man the electorate put in our White House. When it failed, Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler, along with the new breed of young hardcore socialist Congress creatures pushed for another attack, this time against Trump for doing what all Presidents prior to Trump have done…talking to leaders of other countries. And no quid pro quo like so many previous presidents and vice presidents, i.e. Biden and Al Gore. This impeachment scam was corruptly formed and is being corruptly pursued.
Pelosi Appoints Shifty Schiff
When Pelosi put Congressman Schiff in charge of the impeachment inquiry, she had to know he would trample the law and abrogate legal responsibility to justify going after President Trump. Trump Derangement Syndrome has proven the Democrats hate Trump far more than they love this country, as their desire to turn it into a socialist third world nation has become obvious.
There has been little effort to disguise the relentless desire by the Democrats to remove Trump from office come hell or high water, from the moment he won the 2016 election. We know that Obama’s intel community spied on Trump from the moment he announced his candidacy and the bias was evident.
The Russia Collusion came to naught, but impeachment was on the back burner. On January 20, 2017, The Washington Post published an article entitled The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun. Matea Gold wrote about how the website, ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org went live right as Trump took his oath. This is the evil of the socialist leftists. They will destroy America because they cannot accept an exchange of executive power to another party, a party who may undo their globalist agenda, especially when the executive is not one of their chosen establishment elitists.
Pelosi Prays for the President
After Pelosi’s crazed announcement of impeachment plans, reporter James Rosen asked her if she hated Trump. She went ballistic and answered that she doesn’t hate anyone, and that she’s a Catholic and she prays for Trump. Well, Speaker Pelosi, I’d like to know exactly what you pray for regarding our President, certainly not for his success as a president. And as for not hating anyone, you certainly seem to hate unborn human babies who are dismembered, burned, murdered at the point of delivery, their body parts sold by the evil entity, Planned Parenthood, to the highest bidders and their pain upon death seems to not even enter your Christian Catholic conscience.
And Nancy, you seem to have no trouble as a Catholic with the organs of these babies being taken while they’re still alive, I’m talking about their hearts. How dare you call yourself a Christian who loves everyone. Your hatred is an abomination in God’s eyes and you should be denied communion and ex-communicated from the Church via Canon 915 for your filthy stances against the unborn human babies who cry out to God for mercy.
Nadler’s Law Professors
Oh yes, the most Obama/Hillary supporting law professors were chosen by Nadler to speak about whether or not President Trump was impeachable for his phone conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky. I want to scream when I look at the three leftist professors chosen by Schiff and the ultra-weak leftist chosen by our Republicans to represent us, Jonathan Turley. They couldn’t find someone better?
Pamela Karlan is a professor of public interest law at Stanford Law School, oversaw voting rights at the Justice Department under former President Barack Obama and served as a law clerk to Associate Justice Harry Blackmun at the U.S. Supreme Court. Karlan was on Hillary’s short list for the Supreme Court. Yep, she’s ticked she didn’t get the appointment, so this academic attacked young Barron Trump’s name thinking her boorish humor would gain her points. Link
Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, said that President Donald Trump’s behavior is “worse than the misconduct of any prior president.” The remarks were submitted as part of his prepared opening statement.
Schiff Subpoenas Phone Records
Pelosi’s Consigliore, House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Adam Schiff, extended his smear campaign by subpoenaing the phone records from AT&T and Verizon of Republican Devin Nunes, Nunes’ aide, and Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Jay Sekulow. Initially it was reported that John Solomon, former Hill journalist was also subpoenaed, but they were not. Schiff also went after former Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, and the White House itself. Requested data included phone numbers and length of calls but not the content of the calls.
Congressman Nunes said that a new precedent has been set by obtaining phone records with a subpoena without a warrant and the phone companies complied without question! Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton said the subpoena of Trump’s lawyers’ conversations most likely violated attorney-client privilege, but that didn’t stop the FBI from doing the same thing to Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen.
When the democrats gained control of the House, they had subpoena powers but it’s quite evident that the civil rights of Republicans have been violated by Schiff and his cadre of corrupt democrats.
In a series of Twitter posts during his travels this month, Giuliani alleged that billions of dollars were “stolen by crooks, from both countries, at the highest levels.”
One America News is doing a three-part series with Giuliani on Ukraine. Part three is in the works now, and parts one and two have already aired. Both the Wall Street Journal and The Epoch Times have covered the investigation by OANN.
Former Ukrainian MP, Alexandr Onyshchenko, says Burisma financed the Clinton Campaign with $10 million of unmarked cash and Biden personally prevented the money laundering witness from entering America.
The former MP describes in this article how he was approached by prosecutors in the U.S. to testify in the United States on American corruption in Ukraine. He produced a copy of the letter from the Department of Justice in 2016 where they provided him a temporary visa to come to the U.S. to testify on the theft and money laundering aid to Ukraine as well as the illegal cash to the Clintons. Then his visa was cancelled due to personal involvement by Vice President Joe Biden.
Onyshchenko also reiterated that former FBI agent Karen Greenaway was pushing hard during this time for him to not talk to the press about his knowledge of the Biden scandal, holding the threat of American law enforcement action against him to do so. Greenaway has since retired from the FBI but remains in Ukraine involved with one of the Soros foundations. “She was pushing hard…for me to say nothing,” he declared. “She was running everything for the Democrats, all the coverup for the corruption.” CD Media reported corroborating information on his testimony. Here is their investigative reporting on the entire story.
Mayor Giuliani recently made the comment that the worst thing he did was pass by the opportunity to be President Trump’s Attorney General. The former New York Mayor is a champion against corruption. He should have accepted the job.
Greenaway, Soros and Ambassador Yovanovitch
In a March 2019 Hill article, investigative journalist John Solomon reported that in 2016 Ukrainian prosecutors ran into some unexpectedly strong headwinds as they pursued an investigation into the activities of a nonprofit in their homeland known as the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC). The focus on AntAC was an investigation to see if $4.4 million in American aide to fight corruption in the Ukraine had been improperly diverted.
Obama’s Ambassador to the Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch was following orders from the President to press the Ukrainian government to back off of its investigation of U.S. aide and the AntAC. Yuri Lutsenko replaced prosecutor Shokin after Vice President Biden held back American funds from Ukraine to force out Shokin because of his investigation of Hunter Biden and Burisma. Yovanovitch testified for Schiff’s impeachment inquiry, but she never heard the call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky. She’s sour grapes for being fired by President Trump.
Lutsenko told John Solomon that he was stunned when the ambassador “gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute.” The list included a founder of the AntAC group and two members of Parliament who vocally supported the group’s anti-corruption reform agenda.
It turns out the group that Ukrainian law enforcement was probing was co-funded by the Obama administration and liberal mega-donor George Soros, who has extensive business interests in Ukraine. And it was collaborating with the FBI agents investigating then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s business activities with pro-Russian figures in Ukraine.
The U.S.-Soros collaboration was visible in Kiev. Several senior DOJ officials and FBI agents appeared in pictures as participants or attendees at Soros-sponsored events and conferences. One attendee was Karen Greenaway, then the FBI supervisor in charge of international fraud cases and one of the lead agents in the Manafort investigation in Ukraine. She attended multiple such events and won glowing praise in a social media post from AntAC’s executive director.
The implied message to Ukraine’s prosecutors was clear: Don’t target AntAC in the middle of an American presidential election in which Soros was backing Hillary Clinton to succeed another Soros favorite, Barack Obama, Ukrainian officials said.
FBI agent Greenaway recently retired, and Soros’s AntAC soon after announced she was joining its supervisory board.
Inspector General’s Report
Despite mainstream media hosts slobbering over Inspector General Horowitz’s report, the FBI is not exonerated. What the report said was that the FBI screwed up at every level, and they failed to pay attention to problems with Christopher Steele and his past work which was never investigated. That’s an understatement if there ever was one, Steele’s dossier was absurd from day one. Even the Washington Post stayed away from the dossier, it was Buzzfeed who printed it. Yet the Obama administration used this POS to spy on the Trump campaign in an effort to destroy Hillary’s opposition.
Carter Page was a former naval officer, an Annapolis grad, and had done nothing wrong, but his life was destroyed by the lies within the Steele dossier. Horowitz’s report stated that the FISA applications were in many ways incomplete, inaccurate and unsupported. The FISA warrant to spy on Page was repeatedly renewed and the FBI not only lied, but excluded exculpatory information in order to keep the FISA warrant alive. The FBI lied to the FISA judges.
This report was looking into whether there was abuse in the FISA process, and there is no doubt the IG found rampant abuse of the FISA process.
It was recently reported that we will not hear from federal prosecutor John Durham regarding his investigation until June or early summer. And to date, we’ve seen no indictments by AG Barr.
Conclusion
Mueller supporter, Senator Lindsey Graham and Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell have said there will be no trial in the Senate on impeachment. The President would like to have his day in court to call witnesses and prove his innocence, but it’s a given according to some recent reports that the Senate has their own skeletons in the closet regarding the Ukraine and corruption. Biden’s son Hunter, Romney’s top advisor, Cofer Black, Pelosi’s son Paul Jr., and Kerry’s stepson were all involved.
Since the evidence adduced thus far fails to establish treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors, Congress should not vote to impeach. If it does vote to do so along party lines, it will be acting unconstitutionally and placing itself above the supreme law of the land.
President Trump’s battle is against unknown entities. The Democrats are just the footmen for the powers that be…pawns in the game of America’s destruction.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Kelleigh Nelsonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngKelleigh Nelson2019-12-15 05:17:252019-12-15 07:48:30Pelosi and Her Consigliore, Adam Schiff [+Videos]
If you’re indifferent about the crisis of pornography, the New York Times can change that — almost instantly. The paper jolted an entire nation into caring last year with its jarring exposé, “What Teenagers Are Learning from Online Porn” (warning: extremely graphic). What kids think is normal will shock and sober you. Because these aren’t Playboy magazines stashed under a teenage boy’s bed. These are raw, violent, and nauseating videos that they don’t have to sneak into a store for. Every time they hold a cell phone or log on to a laptop, the door is open to a life-changing experience that could kill the relationships in their lives forever.
Girls talk about learning how to “perform” from what they see online, using the scenes like a study guide. The boys’ stories are even more disturbing. They talk about aggressively hurting, choking, and punishing women as if it’s routine. “Women in porn like it,” one said. So, they assume all women do. They don’t realize that these are actors who are being exploited for an industry that’s tied to the dark world of sex trafficking, domestic violence, child abuse, and abortion. They don’t realize that this is a sinister trade that’s teaching men to dehumanize women, leading spouses to stray from marriages, and killing love and intimacy the world over.
To dads like Congressman Jim Banks (R-Ind.), the idea that his daughters could get caught up in this world is terrifying. “There are political issues that we deal with on Capitol Hill that are important,” he explained on “Washington Watch,” “but then there are political issues that are personal. And this is a very personal issue because I have three daughters 10 and under.” Like a lot of parents, he’s amazed at how much they’re in front of a screen or on the Internet watching YouTube videos. “As much as my wife and I try to police the amount of time they’re in front of a screen,” he says, “we find that they are sometimes we just can’t stop it. That’s just a part of the era that we’re in. And I’m horrified when I read stories or see statistics about the prevalence of obscene pornography that’s so readily available that our kids, even at a young age… That’s why I led this letter.”
For eight years, conservatives like Banks watched the Obama administration look the other way on pornography cases. Then, in 2010, the Justice Department quietly closed the doors on the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, which was prosecuting hard-core offenders. It’s time, he insisted, to bring the issue back and make it a priority. Together with Reps. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), and Brian Babin (R-Texas), the group is asking Attorney General William Barr to start cracking down on a cancer that’s destroying our country from the inside out.
“Attorney General Barr can declare the prosecution of pornography a criminal justice priority. He hasn’t done that yet. I’m not attacking him or the administration. He’s new to the job, and he has a lot of other issues on his plate — like this impeachment fiasco… But he can direct the U.S. attorneys to investigate and bring prosecutions against the major producers and distributors of obscene pornography, just like he did under President George H.W. Bush. That’s what we’re hoping that our letter will motivate him to do,” Banks explained.
Luckily, the president’s team wouldn’t have to start from scratch. As Jim pointed out, there are already laws on the books to outlaw the worst kinds of material. The problem is, no one’s enforcing them. And a time when the states are lining up to declare pornography a public health hazard, it only makes sense for the administration to do the same. Too many people, including Christians, know how deadly pornography can be — to relationships, children’s innocence, and the thousands of women lured into an industry that exploits, demeans, and ensnares them. It affects our playgrounds, our politics, even our pulpits.
In surveys like Barna’s Porn Phenomenon, almost two-thirds of Christian men admitted to viewing porn at least once a month. For church leaders, the struggle is just as real: 57 percent of pastors and 64 percent of youth pastors admit they’ve used porn, “either currently or in the past.” There is a deep spiritual component to this crisis that’s corrupting people’s hearts and minds. It ties us up to the point that we’re not effective in our families. We’re not effective in the kingdom. And it stops us from speaking truth because we’re convicted of ourselves.
It’s time to deal with this, as a community, yes — but also as a church. FRC has some compelling resources, including Patrina Mosley’s “Women and Porn” publication. It starts: “I’m not being dramatic when I say that one wrong click changed by life…” But we also had the privilege of hosting one of the most authoritative voices on the subject, Josh McDowell. I strongly urge you to take the time to watch and share what he had to say at one of our recent pastors’ conferences. It just might change your life.
Tony Perkins’s Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2019-12-14 06:48:482019-12-14 06:48:48PODCAST: Returning to the Obscene of the Crime
