Portland State University’s College Republicans chapter invited conservative radio host, Lars Larson, to speak at the university.
The university demanded that Larson, a Second Amendment advocate, state that he would not concealed carry on campus.
Conservative radio host Lars Larson compared campus gun culture to National Lampoon in an exclusive interview with Campus Reform after Portland State University told him he could not carry on campus.
The school’s College Republicans chapter invited a local pro-Second Amendment radio host, Lars Larson, to live stream his show at their Second Amendment Celebration event planned for Monday. Portland State, however, has a policy prohibiting anyone from bringing firearms on campus, and as a result, the school ruled that the invitation would be rescinded if Larson chose to conceal carry a firearm.
“We are requiring you to affirmatively state that you will not intend to and will not carry a firearm on PSU’s campus, either openly or concealed, during the event hosted by the Portland State College Republicans on October 22, 2018,” PSU General Counsel Cynthia J. Starke said in a letter to Larson.
“If your group invites a guest to campus, and you know your guest inten[d]s to violate any PSU policy, your group would go through SALP community standards, and in addition, your individual group leaders who assisted with the event planning may go through the conduct process with the Dean of Student Life Office,” PSU College Republicans advisor Virginia Luka said in an email exchange with the group’s student leadership.
The College Republicans told Campus Reform that its members saw this as a threat of academic sanctions, group defunding, and pulling recognition from the group entirely if Larson were to show up to the event armed.
“It’s like National Lampoon,” Larson told Campus Reform. “‘Buy this magazine or we’ll shoot this dog.’ Come to campus, and we will, metaphorically, shoot these students.”
“What the university says is, in effect, you have the right to carry, and if you do, we’ll kick you out,” the radio host said. “It would be like saying ‘Yeah! You have a right to practice whatever religion you want, but you Muslims? Leave your niqabs at home. Don’t cover your face.’”
“I just think the University was being jerks,” Larson added.
The group ultimately did not hold the event. By Larson’s account, the school disinvited him, but by the school’s account, as Kenny Ma, PSU’s Director of Media & Public Relations, told Campus Reform, the group canceled the event themselves.
Larson asserted that PSU’s firearm policy is contradictory to Oregon state law.
“The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power,” The State Right to Bear Arms in Oregon states.
Larson went on to cite the Oregon state court of appeals ruling made in 1995.
“Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly,” the statute says.
Larson referenced an incident pertaining to gun rights in Oregon.
Western Oregon University suspended a student in 2011 for carrying a gun on campus. The case progressed to higher courts, which eventually ruled that licensed concealed carry holders are permitted to carry on public school grounds.
“The Oregon Constitution, the wording of it, is even stronger than the 2nd Amendment to the federal Constitution,” Larson said. He emphatically claimed that what the school is doing is unconstitutional and illegal and that no public institution can infringe one’s right to bear arms.
The radio host tried inviting the group to his studio, but this was allegedly limited by a month-long waiting period necessary to register a student group field trip.
“[The school] is gonna find a way to stop [the event] through other mechanisms of threatening the students for having done it,” Larson said, referring to that development. “And I think that’s an evil thing for PSU to do.”
When asked why he wouldn’t just leave his firearm at home to avoid trouble, he asserted that doing so would set a precedent.
“It would be the height of hypocrisy, for me to say ‘I’m going to go talk to these kids about the importance of their Second Amendment rights,’ while voluntarily forfeiting mine,” the radio host told Campus Reform.
He compared it to “coming up [to campus] to talk about Christianity but [the school says] take your cross off and don’t you dare bring the book.”
Larson stressed that he would hate to see a student’s education ruined over him coming to an event, explaining why he would not break PSU’s rules by concealed carrying at a College Republicans event.
He filled Campus Reform in on his plan of action moving forward, as well.
“Later this week, my producer and I will walk up, sit down in the student union, and I’m gonna do five or ten minutes on a Facebook live-stream, explaining the entire background,” Larson said. “I cannot speak to the students unless I give up my civil rights, I cannot do the broadcast that I wanted to do, and the students have been threatened.”
Larson told Campus Reform that he plans to conceal carry his firearm when he live-streams from the school.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Concealed_Carry_Gun-e1540501632992.jpg382640Campus Reform Campus Wirehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCampus Reform Campus Wire2018-10-25 17:10:212018-10-25 17:21:08EXCLUSIVE: Radio host speaks out after PSU says he can’t concealed carry
Mine is a love-hate relationship with Geraldo Rivera. I find him comical and light-hearted most of the time. But then he goes off and says the stupidest things; so dumb it makes Juan Williams look professorial.
In particular, Geraldo Rivera tends to fall off the deep end when he speaks of immigration, and yesterday was no exception. In an article expressing his proposal at resolving the immigration crisis, Geraldo wrote,
“In exchange for leniency and a path to citizenship for long-time undocumented residents already in this country — who were brought to the U.S. as children by their parents — pro-immigration advocates, like me, should announce our support for President Trump’s border wall. It will help restore order along the southern border, and mitigate the hysteria currently gripping the national immigration debate and tainting the mid-term elections.”
Never mind that the position of immigration advocates regarding the President of the United States has no bearing on the state of affairs in Central America; the notion that continued opposition to President Trump’s border wall will have any effect on his resolve to pursue it is also ill-conceived. Moreover, it is increasingly clear to most Americans that advocating for an open border is an absurd position that only serves to work against the interests of the United States and its citizens.
But included in Geraldo’s article is a statement that crosses the border between political discourse and unsubstantiated, discriminatory speech. Specifically, Geraldo wrote,
“It is, in my opinion, fear of our nation being over-run by poor, hungry, brown people in sufficient numbers to change our basic national character, which motivates most critics of this caravan and, more broadly, illegal immigration.”
I can confidently speak not only for my position, but also for that of anyone I have spoken to regarding border protection, and I have been discussing this issue a heck of a lot, that in absolutely no case has anyone factored the color of one’s skin or the nationality of those crossing illegally in the analysis of immigration. Quite the opposite; the only topics that keep coming up are our national sovereignty, our economy, and our national security. And for me, the most important of these is our national sovereignty.
So, in response, let me tell share with you my proposal on how to address this issue.
First, the necessity of building the wall, at this point, is a foregone conclusion. With the chaos we are witnessing to the south of us, there is no valid argument against it to be made. Build the wall, and build it now!
Second, the more immediate question is what to do about the thousands of individuals who are heading to our southern border at this moment. Here, I think the United States is making a big mistake in playing defense. Like prevent defense in football, the United States is sitting at the end zone waiting for its opponent to arrive in the hope that once it gets there it will be able to stop it, or the clock will run out. But there is not clock on the massive caravan coming our way, nor the one forming behind it.
I say, the United States needs to go on offense.
The United States needs to coordinate an affirmative effort with Mexico to dissuade the “dissidents” from proceeding. The effort should begin with the airdropping of leaflets, in Spanish, letting the migrants know that they are continuing their journey at their own peril and that if they should choose to continue, they will be stopped, by force if necessary, at the border. Helicopters would deliver the same message using megaphones, urging them to turn back. Included in this message is the offer to have those wishing to turn back transported to their home country, free of charge.
Next, in a coordinated exercise with Mexico, the United States should begin crowd disbursement activities. This will help to further diminish the size of the crowd eventually confronting our officers at the border. The topic of forcibly repatriating those who remain while still in Mexico should also be discussed with Mexican officials. If amenable, the United States should engage with Mexico in joint exercises accomplishing this end.
Those arriving at the border despite all these civil obstacles are more likely than not eager to engage in nefarious activities. These will be engaged, forcefully if necessary, at the border, and repelled.
Having regained control in the short run, and while building the wall, the United States would then have to evaluate the issues that are allowing for an appetite for emigration in the first place. We already know these include the many economic and governmental challenges plaguing Central American countries. The United States should immediately begin a mutually beneficial, long-term strategy aimed at reforming Central America with the goal of improving living conditions while benefiting the American economy and trade. Unquestionably, if these nations partner up, the results can be lucrative for each; and for their citizens.
As opposed to empty promises of support for the President, this plan will offer short-term control and long-term stability, making it much more worthy of pursuit.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/aaron-burson-242131-unsplash-e1540484124901.jpg353640Dr. Julio Gonzalezhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Julio Gonzalez2018-10-25 12:15:332018-10-26 14:58:40It’s Time For America To Go On The Offensive On Immigration
Maryland officials have resorted to desperate measures to avoid giving Judicial Watch voter registration records—as required by federal law—by suggesting Judicial Watch is connected to Russian government agents.
The absurd implication was made in a federal court document involving a lawsuit filed last summer as part of a national Election Integrity Project to clean up voter rolls. Maryland is one of 11 states with more registered voters than citizens of voting age, according to U.S. Census Bureau data examined as part of Judicial Watch’s ongoing investigation.
In notice-of-violation letters Judicial Watch warned it would sue the 11 states if the problems weren’t fixed. In Maryland’s case, there are more registered voters in Montgomery County, the state’s most populous, than citizens over the age of 18. Besides threatening legal action, Judicial Watch’s notice letter to election officials requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists to evaluate efforts to ensure the accuracy of eligible voter rolls during the past two years.
Section 8(i) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter lists. Maryland officials refuse to provide them, claiming that state law restricts the release of voter registration information to Maryland registered voters. The NVRA trumps any reservation the state may have and Judicial Watch is confident it will obtain the records.
Nevertheless, Judicial Watch had to sue in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to gain access to the voter registration lists under federal law, noting that Section 8(i) of the NVRA contains no requirement that only an individual person or a registered voter may request the documents that the statute describes.
Accordingly, Section 8(i) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter lists. Maryland officials have chosen to dodge the law, refusing to provide the records and stonewalling with outlandish assertions during the pretrial discovery process. In a federal court document filed on behalf of State Administrator of Elections Linda H. Lamone, Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh tries to associate Judicial Watch with Russian government agents.
Here is the excerpt straight from the interrogatory filed in court by Maryland’s attorney general: “Identify any Russian nationals or agents of the Russian government with whom you have communicated concerning this lawsuit, Judicial Watch’s request for a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, the purposes for which you are seeking a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, and/or any broader effort to obtain copies of similar lists from other jurisdictions of which Judicial Watch’s request for a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, is a part.”
This shows that Maryland officials are using a baseless allegation to retaliate against an organization and its supporters because of their conservative political views, a violation of the First Amendment.
This week Judicial Watch responded to the plainly frivolous request as part of the pretrial process. There is not a shred of evidence or allegation in any pleading, document or even news report of any communications or associations between Judicial Watch and Russian nationals or agents of the Russian government.
Maryland officials knew that when they made the egregious request for documents they believed did not exist solely to associate Judicial Watch with an inflammatory, partisan fight making national headlines. This reflects negatively on Lamone and the Maryland State Board of Elections and both should be ashamed. “It’s completely outrageous,” said Robert Popper, director of Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project and a former deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. “A government agency is taking Democratic talking points to beat someone up for suing them.”
Other states that Judicial Watch is forcing to clean up voter rolls include Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee. In California, Judicial Watch found more registered voters than voting-age citizens in 11 counties, including Imperial (102%), Lassen (102%), Los Angeles (112%), Monterey (104%), San Diego (138%), San Francisco (114%), San Mateo (111%), Santa Cruz (109%), Solano (111%), Stanislaus (102%), and Yolo (110%).
Under Section 8 of the NVRA, states are required to make a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from official lists due to “the death of the registrant” or “a change in the residence of the registrant,” and requires states to ensure noncitizens are not registered to vote. Many states don’t bother conducting reasonable voter registration list maintenance as mandated under the NVRA.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Paweł Czerwiński on Unsplash.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/pawel-czerwinski-730619-unsplash-e1540238877376.jpg366640Judicial Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJudicial Watch2018-10-22 16:09:292018-10-22 16:11:16Maryland Implies Judicial Watch Has Ties to Russian Agents in Shameful Effort to Hide Voter Rolls Mess
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (ChurchMilitant.com) – Long before Pope Francis lifted sanctions from serial sexual predator Theodore McCarrick, he covered for a raft of predator priests in his native Argentina.
Father Sasso was first accused of molesting children while stationed in a poor, rural province in eastern Argentina in 1994. In 1997, he was sent to Domus Mariae, a treatment center for sexually abusive clergy located in the diocese of Zárate-Campana in the province of Buenos Aires. There, he was diagnosed as a pedophile.
In 1998, Sasso was discharged from the facility with orders never to be allowed around children.
Just three years later, Bp. Rafael Rey of Zárate-Campana assigned Fr. Sasso — by then, a known abuser — to work at a soup kitchen for impoverished children. Over the next two years, Sasso went on to sexually assault at least five girls, ages 11 to 14, by luring them to his bedroom with offers of candy and television.
Fr. Mario Napoleón Sasso under arrest.
Sasso threatened his victims to guarantee their silence, but in 2003, one of the girls reported her abuse to Lia López, who worked in the parish soup kitchen. López immediately notified the diocesan vicar, who reportedly informed Bp. Rey.
But Rey did nothing to remove the predator priest.
Refusing to back down, López reported Sasso to the police herself, and in December 2003, authorities ordered the priest’s arrest.
Sasso escaped Argentina briefly, but was captured a month later while trying to re-enter the country from Paraguay.
Over the next two years, more Sasso victims came forward. Together with their attorney, in 2006, the girls’ families asked to meet with Cdl. Jorge Bergoglio, archbishop of Buenos Aires and the newly elected president of the Argentine bishops’ conference.
Though Bergoglio’s cathedral was just 25 miles from the scene of Sasso’s crimes, the cardinal did not respond to the families’ request. He offered them no apology or financial restitution. And he took no action against Sasso.
In 2007, Sasso was convicted of first-degree sexual abuse of minors and handed a 17-year prison sentence. While in prison, he was voluntarily laicized. He married and has since been paroled.
The clerical sex abuse scandal triggered by the June revelation of McCarrick’s crimes awakened Catholics across the world to what many in Argentina already knew: Though preaching “zero tolerance” for clerical sex abuse, Pope Francis’ actual record is one of silence and cover-up.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/2018-10-17_Cdl._Jorge_Bergoglio-e1540160928110.jpg377640Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2018-10-21 18:29:402018-10-21 18:29:40VIDEO: Francis Snubbed Sex Abuse Victims, Families as Buenos Aires Archbishop
Is Andrew Gillum a “Manchurian Candidate?” Is Andrew Gillum dangerous for law enforcement in Florida?
Big League Politics shows that George Soros, a Gillum supporter/major contributor, is trying to give convicted felons the right to vote in Florida. In a column titled “George Soros Tries To Give Voting Rights To Florida Felons” Patrick Howley reports:
Democrats are making a full-court press to elect Andrew Gillum over Trump supporter Ron DeSantis, which would give Democrats the governorship when Trump comes up for re-election, and would give Democrats as many as four picks on the Florida Supreme Court, according to close observers.
But the dirtiest play they’re pulling in Florida is known as Amendment 4.
Amendment 4 is a ballot initiative to restore voting rights to felons in the state of Florida, similar to Terry McAuliffe’s ploy to give felons voting rights in Virginia. This would have a big impact on the 2020 election.
The answers to these questions are essential in order to VOTE INTELLIGENTLY on November 6, 2018!
The below video exposes Gillum’s past, radical views towards law enforcement officers in such a way that make it impossible for clear-thinking people to want Gillum as the next Governor of Florida.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Andrew Gillum and George Soros is by Big League Politics.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/GillumSoros-e1540070971641.jpg362640Defend The Borderhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDefend The Border2018-10-20 17:29:442018-10-20 17:33:31VIDEO: Broward County Deputy Sheriffs Endorse Ron DeSantis. Disgusted with Gillum.
We reported in September that Google was suspected of working with the Chinese government to develop a search platform which fit China’s goals to stifle free speech.
Now Google has admitted that it is doing this. Via Hot Air earlier this week:
Last night, Google CEO Sundar Pichai confirmed months of rumors in a presentation hosted by Wired Magazine last night. Not only has Google worked on a new platform called “Dragonfly” to launch in China, they have perfected it for China’s censorship regime — which is tasked with stamping out dissent.
The good thing is that 2ndVote consumers in America still have the freedom to tell Google to take a hike. You can fight back against Google by changing search engines. DuckDuckGo prioritizes consumer privacy and is neutral on all of 2ndVote’s issue categories. And we have found Brave.com to be a similarly neutral web browser option, founded by former Mozilla executive Brendan Eich.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is from Shutterstock.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/shutterstock_86640124-1-990x556-e1540031942333.jpg3596402ndvote .comhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png2ndvote .com2018-10-20 06:40:002018-10-21 07:08:07Google Confirms That It’s Working With Chinese Communists To Stifle Free Speech
A mere three weeks ago, the nation witnessed liberal groups and even some Democrat leaders argue that U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh did not deserve a presumption of innocence. Still others argued that he did not even deserve the guarantees of due process. They argued — largely for political purposes — that the mere accusation alone without any evidence to back it up was enough to destroy him.
For the conservative and traditionalist Americans, the contention was simply absurd, but many failed to see matters in the same light and passionately called for the disqualification of the judicial nominee simply based on the mere accusation of sexual assault, despite the absence of any corroborating evidence in support of the charges. The discussion was, quite frankly, surreal.
Separately, on Oct. 12 America witnessed another set of surreal events when American Pastor Andrew Brunson was released from house arrest and allowed to leave Turkey for the first time since being detained in 2016. By Saturday, Brunson was in the White House thanking President Donald Trump for his interventions and openly praying that God’s wisdom fall upon the President. Make no mistake, this was Trump’s doing — which the media largely downplayed.
Interestingly, the evils that befell Brunson in Turkey are the same ones against which conservative Americans have been preciously guarding in protecting now-Justice Kavanaugh. America is based on certain rights, including a presumption of innocence.
In October 2016, Brunson and his wife, Norine, were summoned in Turkey to renew their visas. Upon their arrival, they were arrested. Their due process rights completely ignored, they were held without even being told what the charges against them were. Norine was released without explanation 13 days later, but Brunson continued to be held.
It would not be until December 2016 when charges were formally brought against Brunson accusing him of being a member of an armed terrorist organization. And in August 2017, those charges were broadened to include charges of espionage, attempting to overthrow the Turkish parliament and government, and attempting change to change the constitutional order of Turkey.
Again, it is important to remember that at no time were any of the charges against Brunson corroborated or was evidenced supplied in support of them. There was no evidence that he was actually a terrorist, and no evidence that he, in any way, tried to overthrow the government.
No evidence at all. Just an accusation. Sound familiar?
But those things do not matter because in Turkey. They do not have America’s Constitution and heritage of rights, so it’s okay there to bypass another’s due process rights and to ignore another’s presumption of innocence; precisely the road Democrats have been encouraging Americans to traverse.
Brunson was held as part of a political ploy to use him as a pawn in an international game of chicken. His innocence was immaterial to his captors. Similarly, his release was part of a political ploy to improve relations between that country and the United States. Again, his guilt or innocence was immaterial. The only thing that mattered was the benefits to the Turkish government secured by his imprisonment and subsequently, by his release.
Many argue that the status of civil liberties in the United States is far removed from those in Turkey. I agree. But if Americans’ civil liberties are protected, it is only because Americans demand that due process rights and innocence presumptions be honored.
The road Democrats and the Kavanaugh protestors would put us on, although seemingly long, point directly to the reproduction of the events in Turkey here in the United States. And Americans can ill afford to take even one baby step in that direction.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/unhinged-democrats-e1523141210877.jpg361640Dr. Julio Gonzalezhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Julio Gonzalez2018-10-19 16:00:032018-10-19 16:00:03Eerie Similarities Between Turkey’s Treatment Of Pastor And Democrats’ of Kavanaugh
WASHINGTON (ChurchMilitant.com) – The federal government has issued subpoenas to multiple Pennsylvania dioceses in a criminal probe into sex abuse cover-up. The subpoenas were served last week, but news of the investigation only broke Thursday.
So far, seven out of eight Pennsylvania dioceses — Erie, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Allentown, Scranton, Pittsburgh and Greensburg — have confirmed they have received subpoenas, some stating they will cooperate with the investigation. Two Eastern Catholic dioceses are also being investigated: the Byzantine Archeparchy of Pittsburgh and the Ukrainian Catholic Archeparhcy of Philadelphia.
The investigation is being spearheaded by U.S. Attorney General William McSwain, who is asking clergy to testify before a grand jury in Philadelphia with regard to possible federal crimes. Bishops are being asked to turn over documents stored in their secret archives, which contain information about clergy misconduct including sex abuse. Bishops are also being asked to hand over evidence of: priests transporting children across state lines for illegal purposes, priests sending or receiving sexual imagery on their phones or computers, clergy being told not to contact law enforcement, predator priests being reassigned; or money being used for illegal purposes.
Mitchell Garabedian, the famous Boston lawyer who helped expose the sex abuse scandal in 2002, expressed surprise by the subpoeans.
“This is the first time I have ever heard of a federal investigation into child sexual abuse in a Catholic diocese or church,” he said. “This is a monumental moment for clergy sexual victims everywhere.”
After Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro published the bombshell grand jury report in mid-August, Shapiro explained that he had received phone calls from the Department of Justice.
In an interview with The New York Times, Shapiro was asked about the possibility of a federal probe into sex abuse cover-up in the Church. Shapiro said, “I have spoken to a representative of the Department of Justice. Beyond that, I do not think it would be prudent for me to comment.”
He continued:
I have heard from several attorneys general of both parties, from really across the country, trying to understand how we conducted our investigation, asking in some cases general — and in some cases very specific — questions about either the broad structure of an investigation, or a specific priest who might now be within their state.
Church Militant in previous weeks had also confirmed with government sources that the Department of Justice was seriously contemplating a RICO investigation into the Church.
RICO is a federal law created in 1970 to combat organized crime. It enables prosecutors to go after a criminal organization, rather than simply individual members connected to it.
An online poll taken by Church Militant found 88 percent of Catholics wanted decisive action by the federal government, answering “yes” to the question whether the U.S. government should launch an investigation to see if Church leaders have violated RICO statutes in covering up and transporting sexually predatory priest for decades.
The diocese issued a statement Thursday confirming the probe.
Several months ago, we received a call from the local U.S. Attorney’s office with a request to review documents. A subpoena was provided and after some discussion, an agreement was reached to produce documents. We have heard nothing since early June. As far as we know, our response has nothing to do with the current Pennsylvania investigation that has just begun.
Church Militant has published a series of investigative reports on the Buffalo diocese involving current Bishop Richard Malone, accused of grossly underreporting the number of accused priests (he publicly claimed his diocese had 42 accused priests when the number was more than twice that) as well as placing notorious abuser Fr. Dennis Riter, accused of forcing a six-year-old into oral sex, back into active ministry.
Malone is also implicated in the possible murder of whistleblower priest Fr. Joseph Moreno, found dead in his rectory in 2012 only days before he was scheduled to visit the papal nuncio with a file exposing homosexual abuse and corruption in the diocese. A number of irregularities at the crime scene — including two bullet wounds to the back of his head, lack of gun powder residue or blood spatter, the near-impossibility of shooting himself with his left hand, which suffered irreparable nerve damage, video footage showing three black-hooded men running from the rectory, and items broken into or missing from his rectory — throw into serious doubt the official story that Moreno committed suicide.
*10/18/2018: This article was updated with new information about dioceses under investigation.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images was republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/doj-logo-e1539960621774.jpg356640Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2018-10-19 10:50:432018-10-19 10:50:43Federal Government Launches Criminal Probe into Catholic Church in Pennsylvania
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., spoke to The Daily Signal this week about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the left’s embrace of mob rule. He also addressed the disappearance of Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi and Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test results. An edited transcript of the interview is below. Full audio of the interview is available on The Daily Signal Podcast.
Bluey: You are here at The Heritage Foundation’s President’s Club meeting to talk about Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh. During the Judiciary Committee hearings, you made some passionate remarks when he was defending himself. Many people felt he wasn’t afforded due process. He was presumed guilty. What prompted you to speak so passionately?
Lindsey Graham: He was being humiliated. I voted for [Sonia] Sotomayor and [Elena] Kagan because I thought they were qualified. It used to be that way. [Former Sen.] Strom Thurmond voted for [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. [Former Sen.] Fritz Hollings voted for [Antonin] Scalia. That’s the way it used to be, so obviously things have changed now.
What got me going so much is that I’ve known Brett for 20 years. We’re not close friends, but we’re friendly. I worked with him in the Bush White House. He’s the cream of the crop judicially. You want to reward President Trump when he makes a good decision. He could not have chosen better, and what I saw was an effort to humiliate a guy who didn’t deserve it. I can’t imagine me doing that to Sotomayor and Kagan.
What got me the most was, “If you’re really innocent, turn to Don McGahn and ask to continue the FBI investigation of your life, and keep ruining your own family.” Dr. [Christine Blasey] Ford was listened to respectfully. I think something happened to her, but I don’t think Kavanaugh had anything to do with it. It was just an effort to destroy a good man for political purposes, and I hope it backfires on them.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speaks at the President’s Club gathering hosted by The Heritage Foundation on Oct. 16. (Photo: Erin Granzow for The Daily Signal)
Bluey: It’s one of those situations where, as you’ve noted, you’ve supported President Obama’s nominees in the past. You even had Ruth Bader Ginsburg lamenting the state of the confirmation process for Supreme Court justices. Where do we go from here? Because obviously you have—
Graham: Good question.
Bluey: … I think 118 vacancies on federal courts.
Graham: Yeah, good question.
Bluey: Are you going to be able to confirm these nominees?
Graham: Well, Mitch McConnell has done a fantastic job. We’ve done a lot with 51 votes. We got one Democratic vote for Judge Kavanaugh, just a handful for Justice [Neil] Gorsuch. The bottom line is, if this is not the bottom, I’d hate to see it. I hope this blows up in their face politically. These red state Democrats had to choose between the mob and decency. I think they’re in trouble, so I hope we have far more than 51.
These red state Democrats had to choose between the mob and decency.
There may be more vacancies coming up sooner rather than later. Only God knows. Justice [Clarence] Thomas is a great guy. He’s in his 70s. I don’t know what his plans are, but I know this, President Trump has chosen two highly qualified nominees that are going to change the court over time, and we don’t want to run good people off from being judges.
Here’s the question for you and anybody else, after what you saw, would you want to be a judge?
Bluey: Well, you posed that question, I believe, during the committee hearing.
Graham: Yeah.
Bluey: You said if Republicans voted against Justice Kavanaugh—
Graham: You’re legitimizing a complete character assassination.
Bluey: And you wouldn’t have other people who wouldn’t want to serve in public or step up into that situation.
Graham: No. 1, you’re rewarding them. Just put the shoe on the other foot. Let’s say this is a male Democratic nominee, and someone like Dr. Ford came to South Carolina and gave me information about a 36-year-old allegation. I withheld it from the committee, never confronted the nominee with it. I recommended a conservative lawyer who never told the woman that the Democrats would be willing to come to South Carolina to avoid having to come to Washington, and somebody on my staff leaked her information and betrayed her request to be anonymous.
There’s two things I learned here: how in the tank the media really is for the liberal causes, and how far the left will go.
We’d be killed if somebody on our side said, “We’re only doing this to hold open the seat so that we can get back the Senate and maybe a Republican can fill this seat.” If the shoe were on the other foot, the media would be going nuts. There’s two things I learned here: how in the tank the media really is for the liberal causes, and how far the left will go. I hope it backfires.
President Donald Trump looks on as Anthony M. Kennedy, retired Supreme Court justice, swears in Judge Brett Kavanaugh to be the Supreme Court’s 114th justice on Oct. 8. Kavanaugh is joined by his wife Ashley, holding the Bible, and their daughters Liza and Margaret. (Photo: Joyce N. Boghosian/The White House)
Bluey: Now, we’ve also seen quite an enthusiasm among Republicans—
Graham: You’ve got that right.
Bluey: … now and conservatives because I think of exactly what you’re describing. What have you seen back in your home state of South Carolina?
Graham: Unbelievable. I can’t walk 5 feet at home. I mean, I get some criticism, but Republican women are very energized. Dr. Ford, I think something did happen, but you have to corroborate an accusation. The accusation can’t be the proof itself. Really, there was nothing there. Everything that Dr. Ford said nobody could corroborate.
Susan Collins did a fantastic job of explaining why a rational person would vote for Judge Kavanaugh. We’re all united because of what they did to Brett Kavanaugh.
The bottom line is that Judge Kavanaugh has led an exemplary life. Everything goes against these accusations. The Avenatti claim was just the dam breaking, but the bottom line is, the response back home has been incredible.
If you had made a bid that somebody would come up with a plan to get Sean Hannity to raise money for [Sen.] Susan Collins on the radio, nobody could have thought of this. Susan Collins did a fantastic job of explaining why a rational person would vote for Judge Kavanaugh. This has taken libertarians, vegetarians, Trump Republicans, Bush Republicans. We’re all united because of what they did to Brett Kavanaugh, and this is a good time for the Republican Party.
Bluey: At the same time you’re seeing a lot of enthusiasm and support, you also saw [Sen.] Jeff Flake confronted in an elevator, Susan Collins being called a rape apologist, and terrible things happening to your colleagues.
Graham: It’s just awful.
Bluey: How are they taking it personally and handling it?
Graham: Susan Collins is tough as nails. She methodically went through the Democratic reaction to the nomination. They were against Kavanaugh before they even knew who he was. She went through his history of being a judge, how mainstream he is, the allegations. I thought she handled herself beautifully.
What’s on the ballot in 2018 is an attitude. Who are we as a country? Do we really believe in the rule of law, or are we just so angry that mob rule will take over the rule of law?
Jeff Flake wanted to know more, and we worked as a team to have a supplemental, the seventh investigation that confirmed or that helped Kavanaugh.
I appreciate Jeff and I appreciate Susan for taking their jobs seriously. We gave them the space they needed to get to yes, and the bottom line is, I’ve been here for over 20 years and I’ve never seen anything like that.
The choice now is not about an issue. It’s about an attitude. What’s on the ballot in 2018 is an attitude. Who are we as a country? Do we really believe in the rule of law, or are we just so angry that mob rule will take over the rule of law? That’s what’s on the ballot.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has overseen the confirmation of 84 federal judges under President Donald Trump. (Photo: Erin Granzow for The Daily Signal)
Bluey: As a member of the Judiciary Committee, you know the Senate’s role of advice and consent very well. You have confirmed 84 of President Trump’s judicial nominees. 20-some circuit court nominees, including two Supreme Court justices.
Graham: Yeah. Historic.
Bluey: How significant is that for our federal courts?
Graham: Generational change. Senator [Chuck] Grassley has done a marvelous job. He’s not a lawyer, but he’s fair-minded. I think he’s tough but fair, and I think that came through. Mitch McConnell has been strategic in his thinking, and I am really proud of our 51-seat Republican majority. Many times, it was just 50. We’ve done a lot.
Harry Reid made this possible. He’s the one that changed the rules. I was in the Gang of 14 when they filibustered all the Bush nominees to stop filibustering judges unless there’s an extraordinary circumstance.
The Kavanaugh effect is real. There was this election before Kavanaugh, and there’s the election after Kavanaugh.
The Senate used to do this. Most Supreme Court nominees were voted on without a hearing. Things have changed. Bork started it, and it’s just gotten worse. The bottom line, I got a call from Senator [Chuck] Schumer the night before they changed the rules in 2013. I said, “You’ll regret this, because it’s Harry Reid’s desire to pack the circuit court that led to this.”
I just hope we don’t run good people away from serving. I hope we get north of 55 senators. The Kavanaugh effect is real. There was this election before Kavanaugh, and there’s the election after Kavanaugh.
Bluey: I want to ask you about two other issues. The first is Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. You’ve been outspoken on this. Where do we stand right now, and what are you hoping to do in the Senate?
Graham: Well, I’m hoping to make them pay a price. I’ve been the leading advocate for this relationship. I was on the floor making sure we didn’t stop arms sales to fight Iran’s proxies in Yemen. I’ve been on the floor to make sure that the 9/11 lawsuits wouldn’t taint the relationship. I have supported the Saudi partnership. I’ve never felt so betrayed.
MBS [Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman] is 33 years old, and he’s a wrecking ball. They kidnapped the Lebanese prime minister for a while. They imposed an embargo on Qatar overnight without talking to us. He talks about a vision of 2030, then he throws everybody in jail he doesn’t like.
I am convinced that this happened at the direction of the Saudi government, that teams of assassins were sent to the consulate. Every norm that we believe in, which is freedom of expression, journalism, free speech, an independent press, extrajudicial killings, all that was ignored. It shows contempt for us as a partner. President Trump may not see it this way, but it shows a lot of disrespect to him. Name one president that’s been better to Saudi Arabia.
To hatch this plot, and I am a lawyer, I believe in the rule of law, but all the corroboration is there if you want to see it, the way that MBS was behaving before, these people showing up right before the event, luring the guy in for a week. He walks in, and never comes out. They lie about what happened the first time around. Yeah, I’m really convinced that this was an extrajudicial killing of a dissident. We deal with bad people all the time, but when you put it in our face like this, I hope we respond.
Bluey: We’ll be following it closely. Finally, I want to ask you, your colleague from Massachusetts has come out with her DNA results. You have said yourself that you’re willing to take—
Graham: I’m not so sure I would have done that.
Bluey: Are you going to take a DNA test?
Graham: I am taking one. I’ve been told, and I don’t know if it’s true or not, that my grandmother was part Cherokee Indian. I’m going to find out. The bottom line here is that I’ve traveled with Elizabeth Warren. She can be very gracious. I don’t like her political philosophy domestically. She’s visited the troops during the holidays. I appreciate that.
But if the shoe were on the other foot, again, if a conservative had been doing this, saying that, “I’m a member of an Indian tribe,” and academia was selling this, we’d be getting killed. We’ll have a little fun with this. This is politics. I don’t mean to be mean-spirited, but I can tell you this, if you’re less than 1/10th of 1 percent of anything, you need to be careful about what you say.
Bluey: Senator Graham, thanks so much for speaking to The Daily Signal.
Rob Bluey is editor-in-chief of The Daily Signal, the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation. Send an email to Rob. Twitter: @RobertBluey.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
EDITORS NOTE: This column with video and images is republished with permission. The featured image is of police standing by as demonstrators protest against Brett Kavanaugh outside of Sen. Susan Collins’ Capitol Hill office. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/UPI/Newscom)
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/181018_MobRule-1250x650-e1539959601383.jpg362640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2018-10-19 10:34:032018-10-19 10:35:15Mob Rule or the Rule of Law? Lindsey Graham Says America’s Future Is at Stake
Today, the Governor issued Executive Order 18-283 which gives Supervisors of Elections in Bay, Calhoun, Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Jackson, Liberty, and Washington counties the authority to extend and enhance voting options based on needs and challenges they have identified, including:
Locally-elected supervisors of elections in the impacted counties are now able to extend the amount of days of early voting, designate additional early voting locations and expedite the delivery and acceptance of vote-by-mail ballots. Each of these locally-elected supervisors of elections have reported significant obstacles created by Hurricane Michael preventing them from administering an election without these accommodations. These obstacles include, but are not limited to, damage to polling locations, extended telecommunications service disruptions, and large percentages of the counties’ population without power. Supervisors of Elections have not reported any damage to voting machines and all election-related equipment, including ballots, are secure.
The locally-elected Supervisors of Elections in the eight affected counties will be able to determine if additional early voting sites and days are necessary. The early voting period in the affected counties can begin as early as Monday, October 22, 2018, and can extend through election day November 6, 2018.
The Executive Order extends the registration date for poll watchers to noon on October 26, 2018.
Executive Order 18-283 directs Secretary Detzner to coordinate with each supervisor of elections in Florida to ensure that Florida National Guard troops, first responders, law enforcement, volunteers, and utility power restoration workers engaged in the recovery efforts in the Panhandle and anyone who evacuated from the storm can cast a ballot.
The restriction on vote-by-mail ballots being forwarded to a different address has been waived. This will help displaced voters to cast a ballot. The Executive Order also waives provisions so voters in the affected counties can more easily obtain vote-by-mail ballots.
Republican Party of Florida Chairman Blaise Ingoglia issued the following statement today on Governor Rick Scott’s Executive Order to extend and enhance voting options in counties impacted by Hurricane Michael.
“We applaud Governor Scott’s Administration on an Executive Order that embraces a thoughtful, comprehensive and targeted solution. It is of the upmost importance that while we are rebuilding communities in the Panhandle, we are also allowing sufficient access to the polls this election cycle. The RPOF commends Gov. Scott and his Administration for enhancing voting options during this trying time, and for enacting an order that empowers more local input,” said RPOF Chairman Blaise Ingoglia.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/rick-scott-e1524519003369.png375634Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2018-10-18 18:14:182018-10-19 10:25:18Governor Scott Extends & Enhances Midterm Election Ballots in areas affected by Hurricane Michael
Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Reviewlays it out for us. President Trump already has all the power he needs to close our borders.
Presumably inspired by all the news about a now 4,000-strong migrant caravan heading toward Mexico with the apparent aim to assault our southern border (see my post yesterday), Horowitz says this (emphasis is mine):
President Trump has full constitutional power to stop the border invasion – even without Congress
Just as President Reagan is remembered for ending the Cold War, President Trump can be remembered as the one who ended the war on our sovereignty. Will he rise to the occasion?
Here’s the stone-cold truth about our border: We could construct a border wall as high as the stratosphere, and it won’t help much if we continue our self-destructing policies of allowing bogus asylees to come through our front door and legitimizing the opinions of sanctuary judges who “make denizens of aliens.”
President Trump publicly warned the governments of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala that if they don’t take steps to stop the latest caravan of bogus asylum invaders, he will cut off aid to the countries. While this is a good first step, it won’t deter the invasion unless we stop admitting the invaders and implementing catch-and-release under orders from illegitimate court rulings, as we did with the previous caravan and countless tens of thousands of others coming in with less pomp. And that would hold true even with a border wall. They just come to our points of entry, surrender themselves, get released into our communities, and never show up to their hearings until and unless they wind up committing crimes.
Moreover, the caravan is already in Guatemala and headed for Mexico. Thus, the Honduran diplomacy is moot at this point. And this is much bigger than one caravan. We must first dissect what is actually happening at our border.
This is nothing short of an invasion
Earlier this week, KTAR news in Phoenix, Arizona, sat down with ICE’s Phoenix field director, Henry Lucero. What he revealed should disturb all of us:
Thus, it all boils down to bogus asylum and catch-and-release. Either Trump ends those, or everything else is just talk. While Trump is right to ask Congress to step in, we’ve noted before that our statute is already clear that these people do not qualify as asylees and that the unaccompanied teenagers do not qualify as refugees.
With this background in mind, it’s easy to understand why Lindsey Grahmanesty’s idea of trading amnesty for a border wall is so counterintuitive. We only have this border invasion because of the magnet of amnesty, and the magnet of amnesty allows them to come to the entry points, demand asylum, sue for rights, and never get deported. A wall only helps a country that has a strong spirit but a weak frontier; it doesn’t help a weak political system that willingly commits national suicide.
Anyone who tells you that the president doesn’t have the authority to exclude anyone for any reason doesn’t deserve to live in a sovereign nation.
Sovereignty trumps everything.There is nothing in our statutes that forces the president to admit anyone he feels is a problem. In fact, as we’ve noted before, he has inherent executive powers from Article II, as well as delegated authority from Congress under existing law, to stop taking in immigrants at the border or through visas for as much time as he deems necessary.
There is much more hereas Horowitz lays out the case.
Conservative Score Card
If you have never seen it, don’t miss Conservative Review’s Congressional score card and see how your representatives rank on issues you care about. Go here. You might find that an elected official you thought was conservative might not be voting that way once he or she got to Washington!
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Radek Homola on Unsplash.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/radek-homola-773193-unsplash-1-e1539863146840.jpg408640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2018-10-18 07:47:032018-10-18 20:11:19Conservative Review: Trump already has the power to stop anyone at our border
It was the little production that could. After years of battling Hollywood, Facebook, NPR, and even a crowdfunding site, Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer defied all odds on opening weekend. By Sunday, the film had climbed to number 10 on the box office charts — despite a media bent on ignoring the movie and the real-life drama. For the husband-and-wife team who fought to tell the story, the numbers don’t lie. After last weekend, the film was number one on the indie film chart — and despite debuting in just 673 theaters, brought in more than $1.2 million. Although some critics refused to screen the movie, the ones who did were overwhelmingly impressed. On Rotten Tomatoes, which aggregates the scores of almost every review, Gosnellearned a score of 67 percent, beating out crowd-pleasers like last year’s The Greatest Showman by 11 points. And it was an even bigger hit with audiences, who gave the film a 99-percent approval rating.
It’s just too bad, CNS News points out, that so many media outlets seem “as uninterested in the film as they were when the actual Gosnell trial happened five years ago.” In politics, co-producer Phelim McAleer said, “there’s an equivalent term for this: voter suppression. It is a sad attempt to pretend our film isn’t in theaters across America. But they can’t ignore the box office numbers. We humbly thank all of our fans across the country for this great opening. The people have spoken.”
If you’ve seen the movie or read people’s accounts from the theaters — which range from audiences sitting in silence well after the credits or joining hands for impromptu prayer — you know what a difference the story is making. “This is not your typical pro-life movie. There’s no heart-warming storyline about a challenging but ultimately successful adoption. There’s no nervous single mother who sees an ultrasound and decides to leave the abortion clinic and raise her child against all odds. There is just horror, plain and simple.” And yet, National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis goes on, “it’s the most powerful kind of anti-abortion movie that could ever be made, because every minute of it… [is true].”
Do your part to spread the truth: buy a ticket. For a listing of theaters near you, click here. Or, to hear from the stars of Gosnell, like Dean Cain, watch this panel from VVS on the challenges of making a movie about the realities of abortion.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with photos and video is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/101618_gosnell_770x400_1-e1539774194390.jpg354640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2018-10-17 07:03:292018-10-17 10:14:56Gosnell’s Success Has Liberals Reeling [Video]
It’s no wonder Democrats were desperate to get out of Washington and onto the campaign trail. Of the 35 Senate seats on the ballot this year, Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) party is defending 26. So when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) agreed to recess two weeks early, he made sure to exact a price: 15 more judicial confirmations. Now, after tearing through those, McConnell is making it clear — he’s not close to finished.
The Brett Kavanaugh story may have had a happy ending, but the GOP is a long way from forgetting what liberals did to the Supreme Court justice. If anything, the bruising process only made the majority leader more determined. “He’s mad as a mama wasp,” Senator John Kennedy told Roll Call about McConnell. And he’s making Democrats regret it with another full slate of nominations.
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), McConnell’s partner in the race to confirm the most judges in Senate history, interrupted the October recess to announce that he was holding Judiciary Committee hearings tomorrow – with or without his campaigning colleagues. After all, others have pointed out, the Senate was already scheduled to be in session until the end of the month. It was only after McConnell cut a deal on nominations that the Senate left for their home states.
The Majority Leader made Democrats an offer: “The Senate would adjourn until after the midterm elections, provided Democrats don’t force the full 30 hours of debate allowed for each nominee.” Anxious for his party to go home and defend their seats, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) agreed. The result? Fifteen more confirmations to benches from the 2nd, 3rd, and 9th Circuit Courts and 12 federal district judges — bringing the grand total of Senate-approved judicial nominees to a jaw-dropping 84 (including 53 trial judges, 29 appeals judges, and two Supreme Court justices). When Democrats started catching heat for taking such a lopsided deal, Senator Jon Tester (D-Mont.) insisted they had no choice. “If we stayed here for two or three weeks, we’d probably have done the same thing,” he told Politico.
Recess or no recess, Senator Grassley explained, there were important things on the calendar – and he doesn’t intend to move them just because Democrats are worried about the elections. “It’s unfair to the nominees, who have already flown to Washington D.C. and made travel arrangements for their families to further delay this hearing,” Grassley wrote to the committee’s top Democrat, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). “And it’s unfair to the American people.” If liberals hadn’t been using “delay tactics,” he points out, the Senate wouldn’t be in this mess. “There are now 154 current and future judicial vacancies, 63 of which are classified as judicial emergencies,” he wrote to Feinstein. “The judiciary simply cannot afford further obstruction from your side.”
Naturally, the California Democrat (who happens to be in the fight of her campaign life) wrote an indignant letter back. “The Committee has never before held nominations hearings while the Senate is in recess before an election. The handful of nominations hearings that have been held during a recess have been with the minority’s consent, which is not the case here — in fact, we were not even consulted. In addition, three of us on the Democratic side represent the Ninth Circuit, and are unable to return to Washington for a day due to commitments in our states.”
That’s funny, Senator Grassley replied, since “…you consented to hearings scheduled for October 10, 17, and 24. You made this agreement after I accommodated your numerous requests for postponements and with full knowledge that it was possible the Senate would go into recess in October,” Grassley said. If the Left takes its constitutional duty as “seriously” as Feinstein says, they’ll be there. If not, Grassley will move ahead on a handful of stellar constitutionalists, including Allison Jones Rushing for the 4th Circuit Court and another full slate of district judgeships.
Regardless of what happens in November, McConnell has already been quite clear that he plans to start moving at break-neck speed to confirm as many of the president’s picks as possible until the end of the year. If that means keeping the Senate in session until Christmas, so be it. “I don’t think he’s bluffing,” Senator Kennedy said. Neither do Democrats.
The tag-team of McConnell and Grassley have been so successful that, as the majority leader tweeted before the weekend, “Nearly one out of every six circuit court of appeals judges has been appointed by @POTUS and confirmed by this Republican Senate.” If you’re wondering what’s at stake in this election, you’re looking at it.
For more on how this Senate is setting up the courts for generations of success, take some time to listen to Senate McConnell at VVS. It was one of the most compelling speeches of the whole event, and it’ll give you some interesting insight into the thinking of GOP leaders.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with photos and video is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/101618_grassley_770x400_1-e1539773405885.jpg354640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2018-10-17 06:48:572018-10-17 06:52:00Break Specialists: GOP Uses Recess to Move Judges [Video]
I have a friend in Papua New Guinea named Monica Paulus who was accused of casting sorcery spells because a person died in her village. Her neighbors almost murdered her until she fled the region. Now she works to save other women falsely accused of sorcery who are targets of torture and killing. This is a window into the mob violence Western civilization crawled slowly out of through the establishment of principles like the presumption of innocence.
Witch Hunts are Anti-Western
To millions of Americans, Brett Kavanaugh seems just as guilty as Monica seemed to her accusers. They sincerely believe, because of the power groupthink has over the human mind, that Kavanaugh has all the signs of their suspected profile of an abuser of women: rich, white, elite Catholic school attendee, conservative, and nominated by Donald Trump. Millions of people have repeated this so often that it feels deeply true. Plus, there were accusations!
Monica’s accusers believed she fit the profile of a witch. Once the first accusation was levied, it was easy for others to believe it was true. From an outside vantage, charges of deadly sorcery seem absurd to third-party observers. But in Monica’s culture, belief in the power of sorcery to kill children and cause calamity has been universal for millennia. Though recent infections of Christianity have shaken it, sorcery is still a fact of life.
Personhood has been a hard-fought prize of Western civilization. The idea that an individual person has a right to their own life and liberty regardless of the passions of the collective is a relatively new and fragile gain for humanity. For most of history, the individual person accused by a crowd or community had no ability to escape its all-consuming wrath.
Humans without Christ-rooted protection for the individual quickly descend into very dangerous, unthinking crowds.
In the book of Genesis, Potiphar’s wife accused her Hebrew servant Joseph of trying to rape her when, in fact, she tried to seduce him. Joseph was thrown into prison for this false accusation without any need for corroboration except the cloak she had ripped from him.
The Pitfalls of Believing All Women
“Believe Our Women!” could have been the slogan organizers used during Jim Crow against black men falsely accused of sexual violence. The “justice” crowds felt as sure about their scapegoats’ guilt as new partisan crowds do about their conservative targets. To mobs, a person’s wealth or poverty or race is sufficient reason to ignore their humanity and cast shame.
Even popular cinema reflects a healthy suspicion of collective accusations. In the film Edward Scissorhands, a woman falsely accused Edward (Johnny Depp) of sexual assault after he spurned her advances in a barber shop. Her tears led to an angry mob destroying the life of an innocent.
To that mob, Edward’s differentiation from their shared cultural identity madehim a very guilty rapist.
That zeal is what possesses the minds of people who think that dressing out-of-fashion, having opposing political opinions, or bearing a “guilty” skin color makes one eternally suspect for non-corroborated accusations.
Respecting Individuals
In 18 AD, if a woman claimed a high magistrate tried to sexually assault her when they were teens, she would be ignored, arrested, or executed without anything but derision in every society around the world. Two-thousand years of Jesus’s personhood revolution has made it so that such a claim against the highest of officials is rightfully treated with sacred care and gravity.
Victim-garbed political stunts and witch hunts are growing. But those weeds take root in the cultural soil cultivated by the Crucified One. The first shall be last and the last shall be first.
We should take survivors of assault seriously, and we do that by never using them as props for political power and by creating a culture that treats every human as sacred and worthy of supreme dignity.
We have much to learn from a survivor of witch hunts like Monica Paulus. We should protect the voice of the powerless in the face of violence. We should treat human beings as individual persons, not pawns of identity-exploiting optics. We should fight for the presumption of innocence, not just in the court of law but as the cultural norm we grant the accused in discourse. Finally, we should remember that politics is a thin laminate on the passions and fits of human crowds: the mobs we see in recent days are a revelation of the heart of the whole enterprise.
Rejecting State Power and the Mob Mentality
The State, a monopoly on violence against nonviolent persons in a given territory, is not to be trusted with centrally planning our lives. One court of nine sages deciding personal matters and vices for 300 million people just sounds like a really bad cultic idea.
The Founders never intended the court to have such broad, sweeping ex nihilo powers of legal decree. Congress has the power to limit the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. Decentralizing power closer to home will go a long way to easing tensions between neighbors who feel powerless when their rivals win power over our current winner-takes-all DC Leviathan.
Monica Paulus’s example in Papua New Guinea offers a final clue as to how we should fight for justice in America. After facing gruesome near-death, she had opportunities to flee to a safe space. But she stayed.
To this day, she continues to work in villages in which witch burnings are still used to solve social tensions and grief. She actively intervenes in the midst of self-righteous crowds—convinced of their targets’ guilt—to save women from horrible deaths. She does not seek revenge against those who accuse her. She seeks to end collective violence and protect the personhood of all people, no matter who they are.
David Gornoski is your neighbor – as well as an entrepreneur, speaker and writer. He recently launched a project called A Neighbor’s Choice, which seeks to introduce Jesus’ culture of nonviolence to both Christians and the broader public. A Neighbor’s Choice is also the name of his weekly radio show on state violence and alternative solutions to it. Email him here.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with all images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/social_justice-e1539728955815.jpg434640Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2018-10-16 18:29:512018-10-16 18:30:39Presumption of Innocence Is Social Justice
Are you tired of winning yet? Bongino’s not and he’s covering Trump’s list of 289 accomplish. #MAGA. Plus, Don Lemon turns bitter and the media goes cray over YE! Bongino exposes the insanity. And, Senator Bob Cassidy gives a master class in owning the libs.
Dan Bongino on NRATV
Country, service, the Second Amendment, the Truth and every Big R God-given Right. This is what WE STAND for and these are the American foundations Former Secret Service Agent and NYPD Officer Dan Bongino will defend every weekday at 4:30 p.m. CT/5:30 p.m. ET on NRATV.
Dan Bongino joins NRATV’s lineup, rounding out the most experienced and patriotic team of journalists and conservatives on the air today. Together, they are on a mission to Take Back The Truth.
Smart. Tough. Extraordinary background in law enforcement. In other words, enemy number one in the eyes of progressives. And what’s worse for those elitists? Dan welcomes Grant Stinchfield for each episode. So radical socialists—bring your best. We dare you to join that cage fight.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/bongino-trump-winning.jpg338600NRA Institute for Legislative Actionhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngNRA Institute for Legislative Action2018-10-16 08:22:042018-10-16 08:22:04Bongino Breaks Down Trump’s 289 Accomplishments Since Taking Office
Conservative radio host Lars Larson compared campus gun culture to National Lampoon in an exclusive interview with Campus Reform after Portland State University told him he could not carry on campus.
Maryland officials have resorted to desperate measures to avoid giving Judicial Watch voter registration records—as required by federal law—by suggesting Judicial Watch is connected to Russian government agents.
