VIDEO: Paul Weston – Update Re Britain’s Sharia Compliant Police

H/T Coram Deo

45 minute attempt at a London Quds march to get someone to say something about it to a YouTuber.

(Although I haven’t got to the end yet, the description says: “White male threatened with arrested by black female cop in London because he was assaulted by Muslims”. That sounds about like London today.)

The Equality Act

David Carlin: A gender-bending law, passed by the House, allows the weirdest members of society to inflict their delusions on others, especially our kids.


On May 17, the U.S. House of Representatives passed, by vote of 236 to 173, a bill titled the Equality Act – one of the worst bills (in my humble opinion) ever to pass either house of Congress.  All the NO votes came from Republicans.  The YES votes came from 228 Democrats, plus five Republicans.

The Equality Act, if it becomes law, will amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  That famous law, promoted by President Lyndon Johnson and endorsed by Martin Luther King Jr., was mainly aimed at preventing discrimination based on race.  Incidentally, however, it aimed at preventing discrimination based on sex.  (In those far-off days, you may remember, people spoke of something called sex, not something called gender.)

In May of 2016, the Obama administration advised all educational agencies receiving federal funds that the 1964 ban on sex discrimination should be construed to ban discrimination based on gender identity.  According to that construal, LBJ’s 1964 law requires that boys/men who think they are girls/women must be allowed to use facilities hitherto reserved for females and vice versa.

This was, of course, a preposterous interpretation – for did any member of Congress who voted for the 1964 Act, or did LBJ himself when he signed the Act into law, or did Martin Luther King when he encouraged passage of that law, imagine that the act mandated transgender access to restrooms and locker rooms?  This interpretation has subsequently been reversed by the Trump administration.

If the Equality Act becomes law, however, (which it won’t this time around since it will almost certainly not pass the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate), the right to go into the restroom, locker room, etc. that is consistent with one’s “gender identity” will be legally secure.

What particularly irks me is that the principal sponsor of the Equality Act is Rep. David Cicilline, my U.S. Congressman.  He holds a seat that I once ran for and lost (1992).  Later, Patrick Kennedy (Teddy’s son) held that seat.  After Patrick came Cicilline, an openly gay man who, prior to being elected to Congress, was mayor of Providence.  Despite his Italian name, he is not Catholic; he is Jewish, born of a Jewish mother.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops opposes the Equality Act, because the strong protections it would give to the rights (or should I say the “rights”?) of LGBTQ persons would pose a threat to freedom of religion and conscience.

The parts of the Equality Act that I am especially concerned about are those having to do with the rights of transgender persons, and I am concerned for four reasons.

1. If the Act becomes law, it will pretty much destroy sports for girls and women. Males who are stronger or taller or faster or heavier will, after declaring themselves to be female, win all the big prizes. Women will have to go back to pie-making contests.

2. For another, trans girls (that is, boys who imagine themselves to be girls) will be able to use locker-room and showers that had hitherto been reserved for girls. In other words, real girls will be subject to great embarrassment (and who knows what else?) in order to accommodate the irrational delusions, or perhaps pranks, of a small number of boys. Adult women using public restrooms will rarely be able to feel perfectly safe – unless of course they happen to carry a gun with them (a gun which the same people who voted for the Equality Act would like to ban them from acquiring).

3. More important, adolescence, which even in the best of times is a period of psychological and emotional tumult for kids, will now be a period of even greater turbulence. How many of you reading this essay would wish to return to the psychological stresses and strains, many of them related to a developing sexuality, that you experienced when you were 12 or 13 or 14 or 15 years old?

Well, kids who are pre-teens today will in a few years have to worry, not just about the perennial things, but about gender identity.  They will lie awake at night wondering, “Am I a boy or a girl?”  In the old days you could answer this question by glancing at what you had between your legs.  That was easy; it made today’s question a non-question.  Now kids will feel enormous pressure to ask themselves, “What is my true gender identity, hidden deep within my soul?”

How cruel of the Left (an anti-Christianity Left) to inflict this notable increment of mental pain on growing kids who, in any case, will experience a significant amount of mental pain.  Cruelest of all are those parents – those monsters of iniquity I should say – who for the sake of being fashionably avant-garde encourage their 6- and 7- and 8-year-olds to claim a gender identity in conflict with their biological sex.

4. Finally, and worst of all, is the “philosophy” that underlies all this, a philosophy that says that nothing is what it is; rather, is what we say it is. Everything is a “construct” – constructed either by society at large or by a societal subgroup or by the sovereign individual. And so we can say that a fetus is not a human being; and kill it.  And we can say that Jews are subhuman; and kill them.  And we can say that Christianity is a false and dangerous religion; and ban it.

I don’t expect that most of us will ever say that 2 plus 2 equals 5.  But I do expect that our government will soon protect the “right” of public school teachers to say that Abraham Lincoln was gay, that George Washington was a woman, and that Jesus Christ did not exist.  After all, what is freedom if we are not free to “construct” our thought-world as we please? And what good is freedom if the weirdest members of society are not free to inflict their delusions on others.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Franklin Graham Calls on People to Pray for Trump This Sunday

MLK’s Niece Applauds Clarence Thomas for Linking Abortion, Eugenics

Missouri Could Become the First State Without an Abortion Clinic

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Little Laconia, NH has a Murder and the Man Arrested is an Iraqi Refugee

To be more precise, Hassan Ali Sapry is the son of a Special Immigrant Visa holder from Iraq.  The family arrived in New Hampshire in 2008 according to local media reports on the case.

Of course they are all local reports because murders by refugees (or most illegal aliens for that matter) go unreported in the national print or cable news media.

This story is a month old (thanks to Julia for sending it), but it is new to me and likely new to everyone of you (unless you live in NH!).

The news reminds me that I have been planning to tell you where our Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program is under the Trump Administration.  The last time I looked at the numbers being admitted they were huge—largely from Afghanistan at the moment.  Ten years ago they were growing exponentially from Iraq after Ted Kennedy got the SIV program quietly off the ground.

SIVs are treated just like regular refugees and receive all of the usual welfare goodies refugees receive. Paid refugee contractors are responsible for placing them and someone knowledgeable about the program once reported to me that it is the SIV arrivals that are keeping the contractors afloat.

But I digress….

I’ll post the latest numbers soon.

For more on the Laconia, NH murder, there are lots of local stories about the murder and the manhunt that followed. Here are just a couple of those.

From the Union Leader on April 27th.  LOL! Laconia “man.”  Not a refugee, not a new American, not an Iraqi, just a Laconia man.

Laconia man charged with second-degree murder of local man

LACONIA — Hassan Sapry, 21, was arrested and charged Friday with the second-degree murder of local resident Wilfred Guzman Sr., 57, state and local law enforcement officials announced.

Sapry will be arraigned Monday in Belknap County Superior Court, Attorney General Gordon J. MacDonald said in a statement he issued with Laconia Police Chief Matthew Canfield and State Police Col. Christopher J. Wagner.

The arrest ended a three-day search of the city for someone authorities said they wanted to question about Guzman, who was found dead in his apartment at 57 Blueberry Lane on April 19.

State and local police had warned that Sapry should be considered dangerous.

Officials confirmed Sapry was taken into custody in Laconia, but did not offer any further details on precisely when or how that occurred.

Jordan Stacey of Laconia told reporters Sapry was taken into custody from his parents’ house on Pleasant Street.

“He’s off the street. We feel safer tonight,” Stacey said.

More here.

And here from the day before, this time from the Laconia Daily Sun where we learn how this ‘new American’ family came to be living in New Hampshire.

Suspect arrested after manhunt in Guzman homicide

Homicides are rare in Laconia and many people commented on social media that they were nervous after hearing about the killing, a suspect at large, helicopters circlings overhead, and police searching the water in boats.

Canfield said he didn’t know a motive for the killing of Guzman, who worked at a Staples store in Tilton.

Guzman’s body was found Friday, April 19, in his apartment at 57 Blueberry Lane.

An autopsy showed Guzman died from blunt and sharp force trauma to the head.

Sapry, his older brother, and their parents, Ali Hassan and his wife Ferdos Ajeel, arrived in Laconia in 2008. The family is originally from Iraq, where Hassan was a driver and bodyguard for Western and U.N. diplomats.

The Hassan family lived for a time at the complex where Guzman lived and at a nearby complex before buying the home on Pleasant Street.

Neighbors, classmates and refugee volunteers said Sapry was respectful, enjoyed track and soccer and didn’t get into trouble.

Continue reading here.

I would like to get back to my Medicaid/Medicare/Food Stamp fraud stories, but all of these murders and rapes by immigrants are keeping me busy these days!

See my ‘Violent crimes’ category by clicking here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

The Vortex — Lies, Lies and MORE Lies

TRANSCRIPT

Two stories broke earlier this week that were pretty significant on their own, but when you look at them together, the conclusion is especially noteworthy.

The upshot, Pope Francis is lying when he told a reporter he knew nothing about McCarrick because senior Vatican officials knew all about McCarrick including Donald Wuerl who has gotten caught for the second time lying about all this.

This means everything Archbishop Viganò testified to last August about the Pope, McCarrick and Wuerl lying about and covering up the evil of McCarrick is true, as well as the cover-up being orchestrated by a cabal of homosexual men who are senior clergy in the Church such as Cardinal Edwin O’Brien, Blase Cupich, Joseph Tobin and Kevin Farrell.

First the Pope news: He granted a recent interview to a Mexican reporter who asked him point blank what he knew about McCarrick. His answer: “I said that several times, that I didn’t know, no idea, otherwise I wouldn’t have kept quiet.”

Now that’s curious, very curious. Exactly when has the Holy Father ever said once, much less several times, that he had no idea about McCarrick?

When directly confronted by international media on the plane returning from Ireland last summer about Viganò’s charge that he knew all about McCarrick’s homopredation and ignored it and resurrected his career after Pope Benedict had sidelined him, Francis famously said, “I’m not going to say a single word.”

And then he said journalists should do their jobs and get to the bottom of it. Since that time, the Pope has not said anything about what he knew and when he knew it.

To now try and play this off as if he has been saying all along he knew nothing is simply not true.

In the related piece of news, which in itself is also a pretty big story, McCarrick’s former secretary, Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo, has released confidential correspondence to some select media outlets proving — note the word we use there, proving, as in beyond any shadow of a doubt — that top Vatican clergy knew all about McCarrick and the restrictions placed on him and they all ignored them.

Included in the bunch who knew about McCarrick was, drum roll please, the lying, cheating, scheming Donald Wuerl who was instrumental in getting his former seat as archbishop of Washington, D.C. filled by another member of the homosexual current in the Church, Wilton Gregory.

In fact, it’s a given that Wuerl would have been placed in his position as archbishop of D.C. back in 2006 by McCarrick who needed Wuerl to cover for him.

McCarrick was an evil, homosexual predator, communist infiltrator into the Church who sexually assaulted dozens of seminarians during his climb up the episcopal ladder.

He embezzled enormous sums of money which he used to curry favor with the greedy Vatican clergy who helped his career as well as covering up for him.

As his power and influence grew — through blackmail or secret cash payments and relationships with other wicked prelates — McCarrick simply became the living breathing example of someone who senior clergy considered “too big to fail.”

Somewhere along the line, it was decided that if news ever got out about McCarrick, it would be a PR nightmare for Rome.

So he was allowed to continue. He was instrumental in starting up the Papal Foundation, being the bishops face for their response to original homopredator sex abuse crisis in 2002; he was key in crafting the policy where bishops would never be investigated.

All of this was known, a true inside operation. And the laity were lied to repeatedly, ripped off, deceived and any other verb you can think of by an American hierarchy that was too busy jettisoning tradition and covering up their own homopredator priests to care.

And as Bishop Steven Lopes importantly noted last summer, “We all knew.” Yes, they did — which brings us back to Pope Francis, Donald Wuerl and Archbishop Viganò.

So now let’s tie the two stories together. Wuerl knew all about McCarrick, having been caught publicly now not once, but twice lying about it. Pope Francis knew straight from the mouth of Viganò, who admitted that he knew.

We know from the correspondence just released, as well as other sources, that Wuerl knew. So Wuerl and Pope Francis both knew, and more to the point, when questioned, they lied. They both lied.

And pay close attention to this: The Pope lied — yes, the Pope lied. And not only lied as in the past, but continues the lie. Viganò even came out yesterday and charged him with lying.

One on level, that’s not horribly surprising. He has surrounded himself with liars — liars about sex abuse cover-up; liars about Church teaching; liars about homosexuality; lies, lies and more lies. And yet he himself, while a big one, is not the actual problem. He is as much a symptom of a much larger problem.

A problem that allows a homopredator priest to try and seduce young men in the diocese of Saginaw. A problem that allows an archbishop in Detroit to offer the services of a judge to help kill the investigation through intimidation.

A problem that allows a bishop in Buffalo to cover up a local clergy loaded with homosexual men.

A problem that allows a cardinal in Chicago to keep hidden and unreported that one of his predecessors may very well have been a predatory homosexual himself.

A problem that allows a cardinal in New York to keep in service and lie about a priest who stole enormous sums of money to use for sadomasochistic sex with a gay-for-pay prostitute.

These men, from the top down, have constructed one massive lie, brick by brick and have used the souls of those whose care they are charged with to promote their lie. The Pope is lying. Wuerl is lying.

Our Blessed Lord stood in front of the religious leaders of His time and declared to them that their “father is the devil, and that the devil was a liar and a murderer from the beginning.”

He also said, “For this reason I was born into the world to bear witness to the truth. Whoever hears the truth, hears my voice.”

No faithful Catholic on now seeing all of this revealed for the monstrous evil that it is can fail to act according to his own circumstances of life.

This must be resisted with every ounce of strength you have.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission.

Why Mueller, Why Now?

Robert Mueller concluded his “probe” of Trump, the Trump campaign, and of everyone who knows Trump, and even of some who knew people who knew Trump . . . way back in March.  He effectively resigned at that time and became a private person just like you and me.

So, why is Mueller coming back to the limelight here on the 28th of May just to repeat what he said in his final report to Congress back in March?

Could Trump’s rally last week (20 May 2019) at tiny Montoursville have had anything to do with it?

The coincidence of a “cause and effect” process coming in to play is too tempting to dismiss.  But, the question remains as to why?

As I reported previously, Trump’s rally at tiny Montoursville (pop. 5,000) was staged to deliver probably more than one message.  One message was to the Iranians, and to the U.S. Pentagon, that the administration is building a case against Iran to use as a possible reason for war, if needed.

A second message was delivered to the people of Montoursville that President Trump, personally, is aware of their grievances and will do what he can, and what his administration can, to give them closure of some sort.  You see, this small town of 5,000 souls was hit especially hard by the Iranian take down of TWA flight 800.  Sixteen of their high school French Club’s students and five of their chaperons were on that flight TWA 800 on the 17th of July, 1996.  The people of that close-knit town still grieve, and are still looking for answers.  And, for closure.

While everyone in the intelligence business knew that the Iranians were responsible for the shoot down of TWA 800, the Clinton administration, the “Deep State,” and the media all covered it up out of a lack of desire to go to war against Iran, since we had eight years previously shot down one of their civilian airliners over the Arab/Persian gulf and this was obviously just an act of revenge.  So, alternate theories were developed in an attempt to explain the shoot down and explosion of the plane in mid air.

Hence the fear by the “Deep State,” the Democrat Party (top to bottom), and by Robert Mueller himself.

Here is why:

It is well-known that Attorney General Barr has been turned loose to uncover the crimes of the “Deep State” as pertaining to their attempts to railroad Hillary Clinton into the White House in 2016 by manufacturing the Russia collusion hoax.  But, by Trump staging a rally in the politically un-important town of Montoursville, he was delivering his 3rd message.   And this was that the Trump administration plans to uncover and expose all “Deep State” crimes and cover-ups not just with regards to the 2016 elections, but going clear back into the mid-1990s! 

While Mueller had no responsibility for the shoot down of TWA 800, he is responsible for several terrorist operations on U.S. soil during the Obama administration years.  So, Mueller knows that if Trump’s AG Barr is going to be dipping back into the 1990s, there is now way in h%$# that they are not going to look at the Obama years.

And, if the Obama years are investigated, Mueller has plenty to fear.  As FBI director he had a well-earned reputation as being “soft” on terrorism cases.  There is ample evidence that Mueller joined with John Brennan in colluding and collaborating with a declared enemy of the U.S. so as to obey this enemy’s commands to castrate our nation’s counter terrorism efforts.

This enemy was (and is) the Muslim Brotherhood which has clearly stated its hostile intentions towards the United States, its civilization, and its constitution, in the Brotherhood’s memorandum for its members and sympathizers in North America.  This document was published in 1991, seized by Mueller’s own FBI in 2004, and used in the Holy Land Foundation trial in 2008.  And, yet, in spite of that, Robert Mueller proceeded to commit treason by aiding and abetting that enemy (Article III section 3 of the U.S. Constitution) and ordering the deletion of all data bases, the burning or shredding of all documents and training materials, and the removal or firing of Counter Terrorism instructors that this declared enemy of the United States disapproved of.

Because of these treasonous actions by Mueller and Brennan, we suffered the Boston Marathon bombing, the Tennessee military recruiting stations shoot up, the Oregon Jr. College massacre, San Bernadino, and Orlando.  The death toll of all of these terrorist acts: 82 Americans killed on American soil, and 385 wounded.

But for Mueller, it gets even worse.  Because he didn’t wait for the Muslim Brotherhood to order him to destroy CT materials they didn’t like, he began the process of purging the FBI’s and the Military’s CT efforts in 2009, as soon as he received the green light from President Obama.  The result of Mueller’s and the Obama administration’s early efforts?

The Fort Hood massacre in November of 2009.  Sixteen Americans killed and 32 wounded on a U.S. military base in Texas.

Thus, the notches on Mueller’s bedpost is actually 98 Americans killed and 385 wounded because of his pro-terrorist approach to counter terrorism.

Anyone wanna bet that Mueller isn’t quaking in his boots over William Barr, the growling bear?  Anyone wanna bet that Trump’s rally in tiny Monttoursville is what motivated Mueller to step back into the limelight, and resign for the second time?

And, what did Mueller actually accomplish if all he did was to repeat what he said back in March?  If Trump had committed any real crimes, as Mueller seems to imply, then Mueller had a responsibility to spell these out for the American people in March.  He also had the responsibility to recommend that charges be leveled against Trump.  The only reason Mueller did not take those steps is because there was no crime with which to charge Trump.  The best Mueller could do was to throw the Democrats a bone via insinuations.

Mueller hopes, that by throwing the Democrats another bone that they can keep the pressure on Trump with their multiple investigations in hopes that these might deter Trump from going after the “Deep State.”  Or, conversely, any attempt by the Trump administration and/or AG Barr to investigate the “Deep State,” either for their 2016 violations, or any alleged crimes during the Obama years will look to the public like some sort of political revenge.

Thus, I see this most recent (and tiresome) performance by Robert Mueller as one of playing good defense by forcing the Trump administration to continually play defense.  After all, it is now the only card that Mueller, his buddies in the “Deep State,” and the Democrats have left.

RELATED ARTICLE: Mueller wanted to add to ‘impeachment drumbeat,’ says AFA counsel

Revoke Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Marriage Fraud Immunity Card

If you are not a member of the Democrats’ protected class of bitter loudmouths who hate America, you can be investigated and prosecuted for marriage fraud. The headlines have been filled with recent crackdowns.

In Texas last week, 96 people were indicted on federal charges of conspiring to defraud our immigration system by arranging phony unions between American citizens and sham spouses in Vietnam.

In Bridgeport, Connecticut, three men pleaded guilty to participating in fraudulent marriages with noncitizens and sponsoring them for green cards under false pretenses.

At Fort Bragg in North Carolina last month, two soldiers and two African immigrants were indicted by a grand jury related to a scheme involving an entire ring of service members who attempted to match female soldiers with foreigners from Ghana and Nigeria. They each face between 15-35 years in federal prison and $250,000 in fines each.

In Alabama, an Indian national pleaded guilty to arranging 80 fake marriages using U.S. citizen recruits to bail out Indian foreign nationals who had overstayed their visas or Student Exchange Visitor Program requirements.

You wouldn’t know it from the radio silence of Democratic leaders regarding radioactive Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s long-festering and bizarre bigamy scheme (which she still refuses to address), but marriage fraud is a federal felony. As the Department of Homeland Security makes clear, it is a serious crime—not a victimless, harmless infraction—that “weakens our nation’s security and makes us less safe.”

No kidding. I have long documented the national security consequences of marriage fraud by deadly jihadists:

Eight Mideastern men who plotted to bomb New York landmarks in 1993 all obtained green cards and permanent legal residence by marrying U.S. citizens.

El Sayyid A. Nosair put a ring on American Karen Ann Mills Sweeney’s finger to avoid deportation for overstaying his visa. He acquired U.S. citizenship, allowing him to remain in the country, and was later convicted for conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that claimed six lives.

Top Osama bin Laden aide Ali Mohamed became a U.S. citizen after marrying a woman he met on a plane trip from Egypt to New York. He was convicted for his role in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa that killed 12 Americans and more than 200 others.

A year after 9/11, Homeland Security officials cracked a vast Middle Eastern marriage fraud ring for illegal immigrants in “Operation Broken Vows” that stretched from Boston to South Carolina to California.

Faisal Shahzad, the 2010 Times Square bomb plotter, married an American woman, Huma Mian, in 2008 after spending a decade in the country on foreign student and employment visas.

Anyone capable of and willing to lie to federal officials in face-to-face interviews, falsify government forms under penalty of perjury, and conspire to undermine the integrity of our immigration system is a threat to our country.

Terrorism is not the only concern. Other complex criminal organizations are often involved. Even nations governed by open borders loons like Canada’s Justin Trudeau take marriage fraud seriously. Last week, the government moved to strip a Chinese national of his fraudulently acquired Canadian citizenship after paying a woman $5,000 to enter a sham marriage.

We have enough native-born scam artists and fraudsters without having to import more from around the world. But you know what’s even more of an insult than an ordinary foreign marriage faker? An entitled, arrogant, and unrepentant marriage faker hiding behind the “Islamophobia” and “sexism” cards. Yes, I’m looking at you, Omar.

Investigations dating back to 2016 by blogger Scott Johnson of Power Line (which recently celebrated 15 years in the blogosphere), David North of the Center for Immigration Studies, Alpha News reporter Preya Samsundar, and PJMedia.com reporter David Steinberg have determined that the outspoken Somalian Muslim refugee likely married her own brother named Ahmed Elmi in 2009 for some unknown ill-gotten gain while still informally married to the man she calls her husband and father of her three children, Ahmed Hirsi.

After a Somalian website floated questions about the marriage arrangement with Elmi and Johnson’s initial reporting broke into the local news, Omar sought to divorce Elmi. Her use of $6,000 in state campaign funds, some of which went to pay a personal divorce lawyer, is currently under state investigation.

Social media posts, photographic evidence, and publicly available biographical data strongly suggest that Elmi (now living in London) and Omar are siblings with the same father.

Many of the pair’s Instagram and Facebook comments to each other have been deleted.

Omar’s staff and lawyer have rebuked questions about the arrangement as “categorically ridiculous and false” and suggested that truth-seekers in the matter are “people who do not want an East African, Muslim woman elected to office.”

For good measure, Omar has decried “Trump-style misogyny, racism, anti-immigration rhetoric and Islamophobic division.”

Hey, I’m not the one who bragged last week that Omar, a naturalized American citizen, brought “the perspective of a foreigner” to her role on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. That was Omar.

Perhaps she’ll share her “foreign perspective” on how any other sane nation would handle an elected official who won’t answer questions about possible felony immigration fraud while sitting on a sensitive legislative panel. I’m all ears.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Michelle Malkin is a columnist for The Daily Signal, senior editor at Conservative Review, a best-selling author, and Fox News contributor. Twitter: .


A Note for our Readers:

America’s trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so, given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C. and across the country.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it’s been painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Why? Because they are determined more than ever to give the government more control over your lives. Restoring your liberty and embracing freedom is the best thing for you and the country.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely only upon the support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

We do this because you deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal today.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

Judge Orders Antifa Activist Yvette Felarca to Pay Judicial Watch Legal Fees for Her ‘Entirely Frivolous’ Lawsuit

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced that a U.S. District Judge in California awarded Judicial Watch $22,000 in legal fees in a case filed by an Antifa organizer in an effort to block Judicial Watch from obtaining information about her activities.

Yvette Felarca, a middle school teacher in the Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD), and two co-plaintiffs were ordered to pay Judicial Watch $22,000 in attorney’s fees and $4,000 in litigation costs. Felarca had sued the BUSD in federal court to keep the school district from fulfilling its legal obligation to provide Judicial Watch with records of their communications mentioning: Felarca, Antifa, and/or BAMN. Judicial Watch also asked for Felarca’s personnel file.

Felarca is a prominent figure in By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), a group founded by the Marxist Revolutionary Workers League that protests conservative speaking engagements. In 2016, Felarca and two of her allies were arrested and charged with several crimes, including felony assault, for inciting a riot in Sacramento. Earlier this year, Felarca was ordered to stand trial for assault.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, Northern District of California, who had previously ruled that Felarca’s lawsuit was “entirely frivolous,” wrote in his ruling awarding legal fees to Judicial Watch that Felarca and her co-plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims were “premised on the obviously baseless assumption” that the First Amendment condemns the speech of some while condoning the ideological missions of others.

Judge Chhabria added that “The plaintiffs also mischaracterized the documents under review” and that the plaintiffs “failed to grapple with the role Ms. Felarca played in making herself a topic of public discourse through her physical conduct at public rallies and her voluntary appearance on Fox News.”

Judge Chhabria’s order also states that “a significant portion of the documents the plaintiffs initially sued to protect from disclosure had been publicly disclosed months earlier in another suit brought by Ms. Felarca against BUSD, where she was represented by the same counsel. (See generally Felarca v. Berkeley Unified School District, No. 3:16-cv-06184-RS). The plaintiffs, therefore, had no reasonable argument to protect those documents from disclosure.”

Along with Felarca’s $20,000 payment, co-plaintiffs Lori Nixon and Larry Stefl were ordered by Judge Chhabria to pay Judicial Watch $1,000 each (Yvette Felarca, et al., v. Berekely Unified School District, et al. (No. 3:17-cv-06282-VC)).

“Judicial Watch is entitled to attorney’s fees because the plaintiffs’ lawsuit was frivolous, and their litigation conduct was unreasonable,” Judge Chhabria wrote in his order.

Additionally, Judge Chhabria’s order holds the plaintiffs “jointly and severally liable” to pay Judicial Watch $4,000 in litigation expenses.

In 2017, Judicial Watch filed a California Public Records Act (CPRA) request seeking public records information about Felarca’s Antifa activism and its effect within the Berkeley Unified School District. In her lawsuit aimed at keeping the Berkeley school district from furnishing the records, Felarca alleged that Judicial Watch was misusing the law for political means and the district should refuse to provide the information.

In January 2018, a separate judge ordered Felarca to pay more than $11,000 in attorney and court fees for her frivolous attempt to get a restraining order against Troy Worden, the former head of the University of California (UC) Berkeley College Republicans.

“This is a huge victory for Judicial Watch against Antifa and the violent left,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Ms. Felarca attacked Judicial Watch without basis and the court was right to reject her ploy to deny our ‘right to know’ because we don’t share her violent left views.”

HEZBOLLAH SLEEPER AGENT CONVICTED OF PLOTTING U.S. TERROR ATTACKS: Lebanese-born terrorist was a naturalized U.S. citizen.

Tensions and hostilities between the United States and Iran have been ramping up and while the news media focuses on how Iran has been operating throughout the Middle East threatening our allies including Israel, the media has ignored that operatives of Hezbollah have, for many years, been operating widely throughout Latin America in conjunction with drug cartels that engage in the smuggling of huge quantities of narcotics into the United States as well as huge numbers of aliens.

This not only provides a major source of revenue for Iran to fund its wide-ranging terrorist operations but to provide Iran with opportunities to move sleeper agents into the United States.

Of course “Sleeper Agents” not unlike aliens in general don’t just enter the United States illegally by running our borders but also enter the U.S. by various other methods, including by being admitted legally at ports of entry.

The issue of “Sleeper Agents” is not a new threat but one that has been of great concern for many years.

On March 21, 2012 the House Committee on Homeland Security that was then chaired by New York Congressman Peter King, conducted a hearing on the topic, Iran, Hezbollah, and the Threat to the Homeland.  The Huffington Post published a report on the hearing, Peter King: Iran May Have ‘Hundreds’ Of Hezbollah Agents In U.S.

I have written a number of previous articles about this clear and immediate threat that Iran poses to U.S. national security and public safety.  One of my recent articles was entitled, Iran Threatens U.S. And Its Allies With “Drugs, Refugees, Bombs And Assassination.”

My commentary today, however, is predicated on a May 17, 2019 Justice Department press release that announced:

Ali Kourani Convicted in Manhattan Federal Court for Covert Terrorist Activities on Behalf of Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization

Ali Kourani Was Trained by Hizballah’s External Terrorist Operations Component and Gathered Intelligence in New York City in Support of Attack-Planning Efforts

That press release began with this statement that noted he also committed immigration law violations:

Yesterday, a jury returned a guilty verdict against Ali Kourani, a.k.a. “Ali Mohamad Kourani,” a.k.a. “Jacob Lewis,” a.k.a. “Daniel,” on all eight counts in the Indictment, which charged him with terrorism, sanctions and immigration offenses for his illicit work as an operative for Hizballah’s external attack-planning component.  Kourani is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 27, 2019…

It further stated:

“While living in the United States, Kourani served as an operative of Hizballah in order to help the foreign terrorist organization prepare for potential future attacks against the United States,” said Assistant Attorney General Demers.  “The evidence at trial showed that Kourani searched for suppliers who could provide weapons for such attacks, identified people who could be recruited or targeted for violence, and gathered information about and conducted surveillance of potential targets within our country.  Such covert activities conducted on U.S. soil are a clear threat to our national security and I applaud the agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this investigation and prosecution.”

“Ali Kourani was recruited, trained and deployed by Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization to plan and execute acts of terrorism in the United States,” said U.S. Attorney Berman.  “Kourani’s chilling mission was to help procure weapons and gather intelligence about potential targets in the U.S. for future Hizballah terrorist attacks.  Some of the targets Kourani surveilled included JFK Airport and law enforcement facilities in New York City, including the federal building at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan.  Today, Kourani has fittingly been convicted for his crimes in a courthouse that stands in the shadow of one of his potential targets.”

I originally wrote about the arrest of Ali Kourani and his alleged cohort, Samer el Debek in my article, Two Alleged Hezbollah Jihadists Arrested In U.S.

I noted in that article that immigration (naturalization) was the key to their terrorist activities.  In point of fact, both men had become naturalized United States citizens before they were tasked by their Hezbollah handlers.

The New York Times reported on this case in the article, Bronx Man Accused of Casing J.F.K. Airport for Potential Hezbollah Attack that included this paragraph:

The man, Ali Kourani, a 32-year-old naturalized citizen from Lebanon, told the F.B.I. in a series of interviews that he believed he had been recruited to join Hezbollah’s Islamic Jihad Organization as part of an effort to develop “sleepers” who lived ostensibly normal lives but could be “activated and tasked” with conducting operations, the complaint said.

The article went on to note:

Mr. Kourani said he had been recruited to join the organization in 2008, in light of his education and because he lived in the United States, the authorities said in the complaint. They said that he had told the authorities that one of his first instructions from his “handler” in Lebanon, a man called Fadi, was to obtain American citizenship as soon as possible, which he did in 2009.

On May 16, 2019 U.S. News and World Report published an article, New Yorker Convicted of Giving Material Support to Hezbollah that included this excerpt:

U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said Kourani surveilled terrorism targets in New York City, including Kennedy International Airport and law enforcement facilities including the building housing the FBI.

“Ali Kourani was recruited, trained, and deployed by Hezbollah’s Islamic Jihad Organization to plan and execute acts of terrorism in the United States. Kourani’s chilling mission was to help procure weapons and gather intelligence about potential targets in the U.S. for future Hezbollah terrorist attacks,” Berman said in a release.

Authorities said the Lebanon-born Kourani received sophisticated military training overseas at least twice, including in 2000 at age 16. They said he was trained in the use of a rocket propelled grenade.

Authorities said he came to the U.S. legally in 2003, eventually earning a bachelor’s degree in biomedical engineering in 2009 and a master’s degree in business administration in 2013.

Kourani received the sort of high-tech education, in the U.S., that could certainly assist him in launching terror attacks on American soil.

What has not been reported is an alien who becomes a naturalized citizen my change his/her name at the time that they acquire U.S. citizenship and their U.S. passport will only reflect their new name.  In essence we are permitting aliens to create their own “witness protection program” that provides them with the opportunity to use their new identities to potentially enter countries around the world that may not have admitted them under their original identities.  Furthermore, by having two different passports under two different nationalities and names, they can alternate the passports that they use to acquire airline tickets and gain entry into different countries while successfully covering their tracks not unlike the way that a smuggler may drag a branch behind him in the desert to cover his tracks in the sand.

I have addressed this major vulnerability when I have testified before Congress but it has never been addressed.

Indeed, politicians from both parties are eager to provide pathways to U.S. citizenship to unknown millions of illegal aliens to “solve” the immigration crisis.

As I noted some time ago, Terrorists Value U.S. Citizenshp More Than Our Politicians Do.

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission.

In Fact, Neither France Nor The U.S. Belong To Illegal Aliens

It appears that illegal aliens in France (known as “les sans-papiers,” which translates to “the ones without papers”) have begun imitating the tactics used by illegal aliens in the United States.

A few days ago, roughly 500 sans-papiers invaded Paris’ Charles de Gaulle Airport to protest France’s immigration policies. According to the New York Post, “The migrants reportedly refused to let passengers board [outgoing flights]until their demands were met….” They also insisted that Air France immediately cease, “any financial, material, logistical or political participation in deportations.”

That’s become pretty standard stuff in immigration protests. However, it was the demonstrators’ slogans that should give pause to the citizens of the developed West, whose countries are being overrun. As they were surrounded by riot police, the sans-papierschanted, “France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!”

That’s a shocking claim. At present, the world is organized around a system of independent nations described as “sovereign.” Sovereignty, is the notion that people may form political bonds and govern themselves any way they choose. It acknowledges that there is a philosophical wall around nations. Within that border, the nation-state is the highest political and legal authority. And no single nation has the authority to dictate how another conducts its internal affairs.  As such, France does, in fact, belong to the French, just as the United States belongs to Americans.

As an element of sovereignty, nations have the unfettered right to determine who may enter their territory. The Supreme Court of the United States summarized this very neatly in Ekiu v. United States saying, “It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.”

In plain English, that means any time outside forces are permitted to dictate who a particular nation must allow within its borders, that nation is no longer in control of its own political destiny. And it must always be wary of its sovereignty being slowly eroded by uncontrolled mass migration – and the political shifts that inevitably accompany rapid demographic change.

Europe’s “Syrian Refugee” crisis and America’s southern border crisis continue to drag on. Therefore both France and the U.S. should be asking themselves just how long they are willing to tolerate foreign trespassers who feel entitled to make unreasonable demands and dictate how immigration laws should be enforced. A failure to answer that question may very well lead to a loss of meaningful sovereignty and the dissolution of both France and the United States as we currently know them.

RELATED ARTICLES:

France: 13 injured in a nail bomb blast, police launch investigation into “terror conspiracy”

No Place Like A (Federally-Subsidized) Home for Illegal Aliens?

New York Politicians Ignore Public’s Opposition To Driver’s Licenses For Illegal Aliens

The $150 Billion Drain On The U.S. Economy

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission.

Texas again: Illegal Alien Admits to Brutal Murder as Grandmother Begged for her Life

When I launched this blog—Frauds and Crooks—I expected to be primarily writing about the vast amounts of fraud being perpetrated (mostly by new Americans) in our various welfare programs along with some odds and ends of other crime stories.

How many times in recent days have we heard about a handful of vulnerable children dying after being brought across our southern border illegally by parents or human traffickers over the last year or so?  I think the number is six, but reports are non-stop on CNN.However, I was not prepared for the number of stories I’m seeing involving violent crimes against vulnerable women.

Yet, I have still seen not one mention on CNN of the Kenyan Killer—Billy Chemirmir—an illegal alien who allegedly murdered 12 (more?) elderly Texas women for their jewelry.

Here is another dreadful story from, yes, Texas, about an illegal alien killing a 75-year-old woman in her home by stabbing her with several kitchen knives over a 40 minute period. Etta Nugent spent 40 minutes pleading for her life.

Do not open your doors to strangers!

From the Houston Chronicle (hat tip: Julia),

The man accused of stabbing an elderly woman to death in her Sharpstown home detailed the gruesome killing to police investigators, saying that he spent at least 40 minutes with her as she begged for her life, according to prosecutors.

Marco Cobos, 19, allegedly used multiple knives to stab Etta Nugent to death for about 40 minutes to an hour, according to the charging documents which prosecutors read aloud during his first appearance in court Wednesday morning.

The medical examiner reported finding more than 13 stab wounds on the 75-year-old woman’s body.

He has been charged with capital murder in Nugent’s death.

The Mexican national is being held at the Harris County Jail without bond and federal authorities have placed an immigration detainer on him.

Cobos, who also is homeless, had sought help from Nugent to fix his broken down Ford F-150, but she was unable to “because of her age,” police said.

The truck Cobos had been sleeping in had been reported stolen in Phoenix, Arizona, authorities said. Before the attack, neighbors said they saw Cobos and his vehicle parked outside Nugent’s home in the 8100 block of Neff Street.

Prosecutors said Cobos confessed to stabbing the woman around 10 p.m. Sunday.

“The family of Etta Nugent is heartbroken and in absolute shock at the senseless tragedy that unfolded before them this week,” relatives to the slain woman said in a statement. “Etta was a kind, gentle and generous woman who lived her life with unwavering dedication to her faith, family and friends.”

“To see her life end in such a tragic, evil matter is simply unexplainable,” the statement continued.

Nugent, a mother of three and grandmother to six, was a retired parish secretary at Holy Ghost Catholic Church and attended St. Francis de Sales Catholic Church.

A son’s worst nightmare….

Nugent’s son found her dead in the living room after she failed to answer her phone or visit her husband Monday morning at a convalescent care facility.

[….]

During an interview, police said he confessed to forcing his way into the home. He forced his way into the home as Nugent spoke to him through a crack in the door. He stabbed her in the chest and went to the kitchen to find more knives, according to prosecutors.

He heard the doorbell ring and saw Nugent on the front porch trying to escape. Cobos said he went outside and grabbed her in a “bear hug.” He got more knives from the kitchen and continued stabbing her until she died.

More details here.

This story is from Wednesday, I’ll be watching to see how long it takes to make national news!  CNNMSNBCWashington PostNew York Times?

But I won’t hold my breath! The mainstream media is too busy reporting on the vulnerable ‘children’ coming across our southern border (‘children’ like Cobos himself!).

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

UPDATE: Trump Signs Memo To Curb Welfare Use By Non-Citizens

UPDATE: President Signs Memo Enforcing the Legal Responsibilities of Immigrant Sponsors

President Donald Trump is expected to sign a memorandum Thursday enforcing restrictions on welfare benefits for non-citizens, The Daily Caller has learned.

The memo directs government agencies to enforce legislation signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 that requires sponsors of immigrants to the U.S. to reimburse the government for any welfare benefits received by the person they are sponsoring.

Immigrant sponsors will be informed by agencies that they are required to pay back the money, and that they will be sent to collections if they fail to do so. Agencies will have 90 days to update their guidance and will report back to the president on their progress in 180 days.

Sponsor repayment of welfare benefits was enacted under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, but has remained largely unenforced. The bill was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Patrick Leahy and Patty Murray.

“This executive action will dramatically curb ‘welfare tourism’ and protect U.S. benefits for U.S. families,” a senior administration official told The Daily Caller. “It will also ensure that immigrant sponsors cannot continue the practice of bringing in large numbers of welfare-dependent immigrants: because they will be financially liable.”

The memo also requires enforcement of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which asks government agencies to consider the sponsor’s income when determining whether or not a non-citizen is eligible for welfare benefits. Because the agency would be bundling the sponsor’s and immigrant’s income, some immigrants may no longer meet the eligibility criteria.

That act was cosponsored by then-Sen. Joe  Biden and Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.

The administration says enforcing these two laws will help protect welfare benefits for American citizens. According to a poll conducted by America First Policies, 73 percent of Americans support the idea that immigrants to the U.S. should be able to support themselves financially.

“This is shifting the burden away from the taxpayer and asking people to be self-sufficient,” a senior administration official told the Caller. “We have our own citizens who are struggling.”

The White House says, citing a 2015 study from the Center for Immigration Studies, that 58 percent of households headed by a non-citizen use at least one welfare program.

President Donald Trump’s proposed immigration plan, presented to the American people last week, follows a similar theme. The plan, which revamps the legal immigration system, would give priority to immigrants who earn higher wages and are financially independent.

While the new immigration plan is unlikely to succeed in the Democrat-controlled Congress, the administration has been taking other executive actions to claim smaller victories on immigration reform.

“This is part of a larger effort to do what it can on it’s own,” the official said of the administration’s actions.

Attorney General Bill Barr decided in April that asylum seekers who reach the “credible fear” threshold are no longer eligible to be released on bond, meaning they could be held indefinitely while awaiting court proceedings. The move sought to curb a method that some illegal immigrants use to gain entry to the U.S. despite not having legitimate asylum claims.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is also supporting measures to make sure that illegal immigrants are not able to take advantage of public housing benefits. Current law prevents illegal immigrants from using public housing benefits, but they have been able to skirt the rules by living with American citizens who receive housing subsidies.

HUD will begin evicting families who allow illegal immigrants to live with them in government-subsidized housing.

Shortly after those two actions were revealed, the president signed a memorandum recommending sanctions on countries that have a high rate of visa overstays. The administration will place travel restrictions on countries whose residents overstay their visas in the U.S. by a rate of 10 percent or higher.

“This is part of the Trump Administration’s comprehensive approach to combating illegal immigration,” a senior administration official said at the time.

COLUMN BY

Amber Athey

Follow Amber on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: Attorney General Bill Barr Cracks Down On Catch-And-Release For Asylum Seekers

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission.

Taming the Bench: MAGA Means Ending the Precedent of Judicial Precedent

“It is a maxim among these lawyers, that whatever hath been done before may legally be done again: and therefore they take special care to record all the decisions formerly made against common justice and the general reason of mankind. These, under the name of precedents, they produce as authorities, to justify the most iniquitous opinions; and the judges never fail of decreeing accordingly.” So said Anglo-Irish essayist Jonathan Swift in Gulliver’s Travels in 1726. Unfortunately, something has changed almost three centuries later:

The decisions have perhaps become even more iniquitous.

Swift was rightly mocking the notion of “judicial precedent.” Yet it’s even more preposterous in our time and place, for at least 18th-century British judges didn’t have a constitution to violate. How is the principle even remotely defensible, however, in a nation with our Constitution, the “supreme law of the land”?

One justice who apparently understands this is Clarence Thomas, who just wrote the majority opinion in a recent decision (Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt) overturning a 1979 precedent. He was the ideal candidate for the task, as it has been noted that he’s not a “Court conservative” as much as an originalist. A conservative, after all, would hew to the status quo, which here means honoring precedent. In contrast, as SCOTUSblog pointed out in 2007, Thomas “believes that precedent qua precedent concerning constitutional law has no value at all; he does not give stare decisis [the notion that judicial decisions should not be undone] any weight.”

This is why I’ve long said that Thomas is by far the best SCOTUS justice of recent decades (yes, that includes Scalia). Moreover, it’s certainly right to distinguish between Thomas’ originalism and being merely a “Court conservative,” which more and more is seeming akin to a court jester.

Why this is so was encapsulated well by British philosopher G.K. Chesterton when he wrote, “The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition.”

Stare decisis’ folly should be obvious. In what other field would anyone assert that once a decision is made, it stays made? Since it’s a statistical certainty that not all decisions will be good ones, this standard only ensures the permanency of error.

Yet to fully grasp stare decisis’ outrageousness, an analogy is useful. Chief Justice John Roberts once correctly said that a judge’s role is only to call “balls and strikes” (this was before he decided that a ball could be a strike when striking a blow for statism). Expanding on this, judges are in fact like baseball umpires, whereas the players are akin to the people, the sport’s ruling body is a sort of legislature and the rulebook is essentially its constitution.

Now, it goes without saying that if an umpire “ruled” contrary to the rulebook — let’s say, refusing to call a player out after three strikes because he believed they were too few — we wouldn’t flatter his falsity and legitimize his legerdemain by calling him a “pragmatist” with a “living document” philosophy. We’d recognize him as a bad umpire derelict in his duty, and he’d be fired.

To the point, however, what would you say about someone who not only accepted his judgment, but viewed it as unchangeable “precedent”?

This notion is just as ridiculous when applied to judges — only far more dangerous. It should in fact disqualify someone from the bench, for justices take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

They do not take an oath to uphold other judges.

Imagine the reaction if we applied this stare decisis philosophy to President Trump’s determinations. Imagine we said that not only can he “change” the law on the basis that it’s “living,” but that his decisions should then be binding on all future presidents. How would that go over?

No, the analogy isn’t invalid because he’s not a black-robed lawyer. All these office-holders take an oath to uphold the Constitution — and none of them are supposed to be above that supreme law of the land.

Many want to be, though. Power is an aphrodisiac, and this brings us to why judges’ love affair with precedent reflects nothing noble. As Thomas Jefferson explained in an 1820 letter in which he warned about judicial supremacy, “Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privileges of their corps.”

This was perhaps reflected in liberal Justice Stephen Breyer’s reaction to the recently overturned precedent. “Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the court will overrule next,” he complained. A good justice would be concerned only with what unconstitutional precedent would not be overturned next.

But why is Breyer upset? Is it because he wants to maintain the power of his corps and its privilege of being above the law?

Stare decisis is just a euphemistic way of saying that judges’ decisions — “precedent” — should take precedence over the Constitution. This perverts our system. It undermines the republic. We’re supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The Constitution reflects the people’s will in that it was ratified by the states and because Americans tacitly approve it to this day it by allowing it to stand; after all, they can amend it through their representatives.

Yet when judges place their own opinions above the Constitution, such as when elevating precedent, they establish themselves as an oligarchy. We then don’t have the rule of law but the rule of lawyers, a government of, by and for those who’ve arrogated to themselves the power and privilege to manipulate the law according to their own will.

Note, too, that hard and fast respect for precedent actually has no precedent, as our history’s more than 100 overturned SCOTUS decisions attest. So why do leftists now act as if it’s sacrosanct?

Because after more than a century of moving the courts “left,” there’s now a large body of unconstitutional, leftist precedents that serve their agenda. Stare decisis is not for these people principle but ploy, a convenient value of the moment.

Thus, when going through the Senate confirmation process, the norm now is for more “conservative” judges to be asked if they’ll abide by certain precedents (i.e., Roe v. Wade). Translated, this is a demand to conserve yesterday’s progressives’ mistakes.

In reality, judicial nominees should be asked if they’ll respect precedent — and then be roundly rejected upon answering yes. For we can’t MAGA unless we MAJJA: Make American Judges Judges Again. For tolerating oligarchs in black robes ensures a dark future.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab (preferably) or Twitter, or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Maryland School Denigrates Christianity, Promotes Islam — Case gone to Supreme Court

A taxpayer funded public school in Maryland instructed its students:

“Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”

“Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”

Jihad is a “personal struggle in devotion to Islam, especially involving spiritual discipline.”

“To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”

“Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are therefore obedient.”

Imagine the shock when 11th-grader at La Plata High School, Caleigh Wood, revealed this to her parents. More students and more parents need to actively need to get involved as Caleigh Wood did. She bravely stood up for her rights as a Christian. She stated that, as part of an assignment, she “was also required to profess in writing, the Islamic conversion creed, ‘There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.’” For refusing to concede to the sharia and standing “firm in her Christian beliefs”, Wood was punished for it and given a failing grade for non-compliance.

Her case has now gone to the supreme court. “The Thomas More Law Center has submitted a petition asking the high court to take up the case of student Caleigh Wood.” Its president, Richard Thompson warned:

Under the guise of teaching history or social studies, public schools across America are promoting the religion of Islam in ways that would never be tolerated for Christianity or any other religion.

Jihad Watch reported on May 19th that a Washington school district was caught promoting Islam for Ramadan through a CAIR initiative. Now lawyers have sent a cease and desist letter. Islamization happens rapidly if unnoticed and unchallenged. Parents need to be paying attention to what their children are being indoctrinated with and taught in schools.

“U.S. SCHOOL FAILS CHRISTIAN STUDENT FOR REFUSING ISLAMIC PRAYER”, World Net Daily, May 19, 2019:

The declarations could have been made by an imam in a mosque sermon.

“Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”

“Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”

Jihad is a “personal struggle in devotion to Islam, especially involving spiritual discipline.”

“To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”

“Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are therefore obedient.”

The problem is that those statements were part of the instruction in a public school in Maryland, and one of the students in the classroom now is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to condemn such religious lessons funded by taxpayers.

The Thomas More Law Center has submitted a petition asking the high court to take up the case of student Caleigh Wood.

“As a Christian and 11th-grader at La Plata High School in Maryland, Caleigh Wood was taught that ‘Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.’ She was also required to profess in writing, the Islamic conversion creed, ‘There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.’ Ms. Wood believed that it is a sin to profess by word or in writing, that there is any other god except the Christian God. She stood firm in her Christian beliefs and was punished for it. The school refused her request to opt-out or give her an alternative assignment. She refused to complete her anti-Christian assignment and consequently received a failing grade,” the legal team explained Wednesday.

Lower courts have given a free pass to the school district to teach Islam, and so TMLC filed the request with the Supreme Court to decide “whether any legal basis exists to allow public schools to discriminate against Christianity while at the same time promote Islam.”

“Under the guise of teaching history or social studies, public schools across America are promoting the religion of Islam in ways that would never be tolerated for Christianity or any other religion,” said Richard Thompson, TMLC’s president.

“I’m not aware of any school which has forced a Muslim student to write the Lord’s Prayer or John 3:16: ‘For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,’” he said.

“Many public schools have become a hot bed of Islamic propaganda. Teaching Islam in schools has gone far beyond a basic history lesson. Prompted by zealous Islamic activism and emboldened by confusing court decisions, schools are now bending over backwards to promote Islam while at the same time denigrate Christianity. We are asking the Supreme Court to provide the necessary legal guidance to resolve the insidious discrimination against Christians in our public schools,” he said.

Unresolved include whether or not schools can make preferential statements about one religion over another, and whether students may be required to assert religious beliefs with which they disagree.

And how do those concepts align with “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”?

The Charles County public schools and officials are defendants.

The filing explains the lower courts, despite the First Amendment’s requirements, “upheld the ability for [the school] to denigrate Petitioner Caleigh Wood’s faith and require her to write out statements and prayers contradictory to her own religious beliefs.”….

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission.

New Investigators Examine the Origins of the Mueller Investigation

There must be “consequences” for those claiming Russian collusion if Mueller report shows none.  – Tucker Carlson

Democrats continue to show day in and day out, they’re nothing but sore losers. At some point, they have to realize that they have been beat by President Trump in the 2016 election. They’re getting beat … on issues that actually matter, and I think they’re a sad excuse for a political party right now. At some point, they have to decide if they want to govern.  – Sarah Sanders

This is not a game! This is the president of the United States. This nation deserves full-time leadership and no further effort to subvert, to overthrow the presidency of Donald J. Trump.  – Lou Dobbs


When during their exhaustive 22-month investigation did Mueller and his team of Hillary supporting Democratic prosecutors realize they had no case?  Probably no later than at the end of 2017, but I’d guess from the beginning.  By the time Mueller was appointed on May 17, 2017, the FBI had been trying unsuccessfully for nearly a year to corroborate the bogus Steele dossier’s allegations.

Democrats and their complicit media are far worse than sore losers.  They have done everything in their power to destroy President Trump from the day he declared his candidacy.  They hate him, they hate his supporters and they hate anyone who righteously campaigned for him.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein

It is clear that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI participated in a fraud on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in order to surveil U.S. citizen Carter Page.  Signing on behalf of the DOJ were Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and then current DAG Rod Rosenstein who each signed one or more FISA applications.

Rod Rosenstein approved the application to extend surveillance of former Trump campaign associate Carter Page. The NYTs claimed the FBI and DOJ’s application was based partially on research by investigator Christopher Steele, who compiled the spurious dossier.

When Rosenstein testified in a House hearing about FBI and DOJ abuses, he was asked by former judge Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) about the FISA warrant he signed and Rosenstein looked to FBI Director Wray for the answer – a move that disturbed Gohmert.  Rosenstein said he signed Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) documents to spy on Carter Page and told Congressman Gohmert that he didn’t need to read every document he signed, that he merely needed to understand what’s in it.

Now that Rosenstein has stepped down, he is doing everything he can to cover his backside. But he was the one who gave an open letter of appointment to Robert Mueller to conduct an investigation confirmed by then FBI Director James Comey before the House Permanent Select Committee on March 20, 2017.  And it was Rosenstein who wrote the letter to President Trump stating Comey needed to be fired.

That started this entire nightmare-from-hell for not only the President, but his administration, supporters and the entire country.  The people who ran the DOJ were vicious dogs, and yes, our bloated government uses “national security” to cover up their crimes.

There is far too much on Rod Rosenstein that doesn’t make sense.  He is far too chummy with Mueller, Comey and Wray to really want true justice.  And few believe he didn’t want to wear a wire and record our President.

The Sordid Mueller Investigation

The Mueller investigation is finally over and $35 million American tax dollars have been spent on researching and investigating the cooked up lies of Hillary Clinton and the DNC “paid for” Steele dossier which led to this fictitious probe.  And all those tax dollars were paid to attorneys who hate Donald Trump.  Andrew Weissmann was the man given authority to hire the rest of the investigators for Robert Mueller, and Weissmann should have been disbarred long ago after the Enron case where he bent or broke rules to get false guilty pleas.

The resulting investigation prosecuted Americans for everything except the “collusion” it was supposed to uncover, many of whom will suffer lasting affects.

Weissmann was Mueller’s legal Pit Bull and the two of them worked hand in glove using the same rotten modus operandi they’ve effectively employed for over thirty years.  Those in their crosshairs even plead guilty to charges that weren’t crimes.  They also plead guilty to save family members, and they pleaded guilty when they’d previously been investigated by the government and found innocent. They pleaded guilty when those on the left did far worse and were never charged…i.e., Podesta’s and Biden’s.  Financial destruction was imminent for all targeted by Mueller.

Sidney Powell wrote the tell-all book, Licensed to Lie, and it exposed the corruption of justice especially in the Enron case.  Powell served in the Department of Justice for ten years in Texas and Virginia and has devoted her private practice to federal appeals for the past twenty years.  “All of the cases Weissmann pushed to trial were reversed in whole or in part due to some form of his overreaching and abuses,” Sidney Powell told The Washington Times. “The most polite thing the Houston bar said about Weissmann was that he was a madman.”  In early 2018, Sara Carter reported that Weissmann and Mueller were connected to two of the largest scandals in FBI history, and they got away with it.

Bill Barr’s Investigators

What are the odds that the Durham investigation will bring the corrupt players to justice?  Certainly, there is hope with the new Attorney General William Barr.  However, knowing government machinations, I am not holding my breath.  Yet…justice is so longed for, and John Durham looks to be the man who could give it to us!

John Durham, the prosecutor appointed by AG Barr to investigate how Trump-Russia allegations emerged and spread within federal law enforcement, has already been looking into whether the FBI’s former top lawyer, James Baker, illegally leaked to reporters.

The U.S. attorney from Connecticut appears to have begun that work more than seven months ago, to judge from an underreported transcript of an October congressional interview with Baker.  Could it be that Acting U.S. AG, Matthew Whitaker, who succeeded Jeff Sessions and held the post from early November 2018 to February 14, 2019, tapped John Durham?

Mr. Durham has a long history of serving as a special prosecutor investigating potential wrongdoing among law enforcement and national security officials. He was appointed to the federal bench in 2017 by President Trump. Attorney Durham has even investigated the use or misuse of FBI informants.

In fact, one of his best-known investigations was of the FBI’s handling of the mass murderer and Boston mobster Whitey Bulger.   It was Robert Mueller, Mr. Integrity, who kept four innocent people in prison for decades in order to keep Whitey Bulger from being exposed as an FBI informant. Four people who were innocent were kept in jail for years in order to protect the status of murdering Whitey Bulger as an FBI informant.

In 1999, AG Janet Reno appointed Durham to investigate if FBI informants Bulger and his buddy, Stephen Flemmi had corrupted their FBI handlers.  In December 2000, Durham revealed secret FBI documents that convinced a judge to vacate the 1968 murder convictions of the four other FBI informants because they’d been framed by Robert Mueller’s FBI.  Two of those four men died in prison.  Mueller kept four innocent people in jail for years to protect the informant status of Whitey Bulger, a mass-murdering Boston mobster who ended up dying in California, and it ended up costing American taxpayers $100 million plus in civil judgments.  For the full story, purchase John Milkovich’s book, Robert Mueller: Errand Boy for the New World Order.

Former federal prosecutor, Nora Dannehy agreed to join Durham two months ago.  Dannehy prosecuted complex political corruption, including cases resulting in the convictions of former Connecticut Gov. John G. Rowland and former state Treasurer Paul Silvester. In 2008, she was assigned to Washington to investigate whether prosecutors in the President George W. Bush justice department had been fired for political reasons.

William Barr has enlisted the help of the CIA to investigate whether the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign was motivated by partisan bias.

CIA director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and FBI director Chris Wray are all participating in the investigation, which Barr first announced publicly during a congressional hearing last month.

Is this a danger sign or an indication that someone highly knowledgeable is on the case?  Christopher Wray is part of the Deep State; he’s covered for many of the corrupt in the FBI and made derogatory remarks regarding our President.  He should never be involved.  As for Gina Haspell, we don’t know where she stands.

John Huber

For eighteen months we’ve not heard a peep out of John Huber, he’s MIA and as a U.S. attorney who oversees federal prosecutions in the District of Utah, we should have heard something.  Even Jim Jordan has commented that Huber is like “Where’s Waldo?”  Where’s Huber?

There has been nary a public peep from U.S. Attorney John Huber, the man Jeff Sessions assigned to get to the bottom of things.  Likely witnesses say Mr. Huber has never contacted them, and members of Congress say they are still in the dark despite regular pleas to see progress.

Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department prosecutor and now a private lawyer, with her husband, Joe diGenova, said of the Huber investigation, “It is a head fake, a farce.  It was an attempt by Sessions to get Republicans off his back. I’m embarrassed for them because they fell for it, and I hope something happens now.”  Link

Allegedly Huber is working collaboratively in the internal investigation with Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, but we have no idea when that report will be made public.

Conclusion

Barr told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, “I am going to be reviewing both the genesis and the conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign during 2016. I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal, I think spying did occur, yes.”  The mainstream media hates that he used the word “spying,” but Barr has openly said it’s a perfect word to use.

And now, Barack Obama’s corrupt officials, including former Attorney General Eric Holder are all lashing out at AG Bill Barr because he has launched a massive investigation into the origins of Spygate.

They’re even harping at each other because of their fear of what John Durham’s investigation might lead to… perhaps grand jury indictments for many of them.

We can only hope!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Empowers Barr to Declassify Russia-Probe Secrets, RealClearPolitics

Barr’s Investigation Could Prompt Clash Between DoJ, CIA, New York Times

Female Russian-Brit Academic Sues FBI Source for Honeypot Slur, Daily Caller

UK Spies Briefed Before Trump on Dossier, Telegraph

Emails Show State Department, DoJ, Steele Connections, Powerline

Special Counsel Team Reluctant to Have Mueller Testify Publicly, CNN

Carter Page FISA Application Approved in ‘Unusual’ Way, Examiner

William Barr: More Nationwide Injunctions in Trump Era Than in Entire 20th Century

The Leaky Vessel of Trump-Russia Collusion Is Sinking


NewsWithViews needs your help. 

Tirelessly, our CEO works to bring up-to-date news to our readers.  We’ve lost both advertising and twitter because of censorship by the enemies of freedom.  It’s up to those who love freedom and the truth to help us survive.  Tell your friends to sign up for daily emails, and please consider monthly donations to keep us alive.  The writers at NWVs are not paid, we do this to save our beloved country for our children, grandchildren and descendants.  Please help.

Donations can be sent here.

A Forgotten Voice in the Alabama Abortion Debate

The goal of the new, strict Alabama abortion law is to potentially overturn Roe v. Wade. The law would penalize abortion doctors, and it contains no exception clauses, except for the life and health of the mother.

In all of the brouhaha about the new Alabama law, there is a long-stilled voice that has been forgotten. That of the repentant Roe of Roe v. Wade.

Of course, Norma McCorvey was the Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade. After converting to Christ and the pro-life position (about 15 years after the Supreme Court decision), she proclaimed to the world that the whole case had been based on a lie (a few lies, really). Chief among the lies was that she was raped (gang-raped at that), and that was why she needed an abortion.

By the time, Roe v. Wade was decided on January 22, 1973, Norma had already had her baby (a girl), whom she gave up for adoption. Justice William Rehnquist, one of two dissenters in the decision, voted against it because it was a moot point. Roe’s baby had already been born.

The opinion of Roe of Roe v. Wade is significant for the abortion debate, including the Alabama law, because abortion was accepted on a wide scale throughout the country, only by judicial fiat. It was not something “we the people” voted on.

Look at how divided the country continues to be on the subject of abortion. Well, why not? We the people did not decide that case on that fateful Monday. Dissenting Justice Byron White, the only Justice appointed by JFK, said that Roe was an “act of raw judicial power.”

Those who live by court decisions should die by court decisions. And Roe herself, after her pro-life and Christian conversion, tried to legally overturn Roe v. Wade since it was all based on lies. Therefore, if the new Alabama law helps overturn Roe, so be it.

Yet one person called the Alabama law “a major step towards the death of democracy.” Oh brother. The Constitution shows that the courts, including the Supreme Court, were never designed to legislate or execute our laws.

There obviously was a time when Roe favored abortion. She was in opposition to Henry Wade—the pro-life attorney general of Texas, where Norma was living at the time of the lawsuit that worked its way up to the high Court.

In an interview with D. James Kennedy Ministries television, she said, “My story began many, many years ago in 1969 when I found myself pregnant, on the streets. I was into drugs, and I really didn’t have any other alternatives in line. I did not believe in God, and I’d fallen away from the church at a very early age.”

Jumping ahead, change came about because of new neighbors moving in. Unwelcome neighbors at first. What transformed her in particular was meeting a little girl who truly loved God.

Norma continued, “In retrospect, when I look back on those days, and I see what a sad person I was, I have to really kind of smile and think about little Emily: a little seven year old girl who came up to me at my office one day and told me that if I knew God that I wouldn’t be going to the place downstairs. She befriended me when Operation Rescue moved in next door to the abortion clinic where I worked. And at first I didn’t like them there because they reminded me of what we were doing. I worked in an abortion clinic. We killed children for a living.”

She added, “I was a child-killer. I was an executioner.…There’s a fellow in the Bible; his name was Baal. He was into child sacrificing, and that’s basically what you’re doing out there today—you are sacrificing your child for a career, or high school or college.”

Norma found forgiveness through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, who died for sinners, paying the penalty for our sins, for those who believe: “And I think once you’re forgiven by God, you should forgive yourself. But then you really should not put yourself in that kind of situation either.”

Norma warns against what happens in an abortion: “You are totally different after you’ve had an abortion. Abortion kind of sucks your soul dry; it makes you a very angry person inside, from what I’ve seen.”

This is why for the last several years of her life until her death in 2017, Norma McCorvey fought against abortion on demand. She would have welcomed Alabama’s new law as a way to try to undo the damage of Roe.

She said: “We want the child-killing to stop….There are other alternatives, other than abortion; there’s adoption….We don’t want to see Roe v. Wade to be the law of the land anymore. We want our children back.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Alabama and Georgia Abortion Laws on Right Track