NEW YORK: Patriots’ Largest Trump Flag Drop – on Fifth Ave [and more]

NYC. Dion Cini and patriots unfurled the LARGEST Trump flag on Fifth Avenue in front of Trump Tower.  (over head picture captured by Operation Flag Drop) . The flag is 75’x50′.

Spirits were high as they waited to cover the BLM graffiti with this enormous flag before marching to Times Square.

My pictures are street level as they “Took Fifth Ave” and opened the TRUMP LAW AND ORDER Blue Line flag,  so it’s a different perspective.

The blue and red paint used to DEFACE the BLM graffiti previously by our patriots, was STILL THERE! (SEE LINK to article re previous paint assaults)

When the Red paint first went down it was very intense, now it’s spread down the avenue.

Seems Mayor ‘DeBozo” no longer forces the police to clean up the paint, something he did more than once til now. I would label these actions a success!

CLICK HERE For the Flickr slide show Fifth Avenue.


See link for video flag drop 42nd st (Operation Flag Drop)

The patriots marched down Fifth with the ENORMOUS “Trump Law and Order” flag to chants of “Trump 2020” and “Whose Streets Our Streets”, ending in Times Square. I was told our NYPD was very pleased with this show of support.

Great news item on the whole event from UK Daily Mail.

Addendum: This is my third Dion Cino Flag Drop. Previously, I witnessed  Robert De Niro’s Restaurant Reopening and on Sept 18, 2020, the Intrepid Flag Drop.

Our flags hung over the West Side Highway with much honking in support from passing cars. By coincidence, there was a very visible Chinese flag flying in the back ground.

And, go figure, an ad about Russia and VOTING.

And,  an ad about Russia and VOTING. (go figure)

As always, the enthusiasm at these many Operation Flag Drops was enervating. The air ringing with “TRUMP 2020” !

America, is gonna VOTE RED!

[Where indicated, pictures and videos property of Pamela Hall]



A Huge storm threatens Joe Biden’s campaign

Joe Biden Caught Lying About Meeting With Son’s Foreign Business Associate From Kazakhstan

North Minneapolis Residents Sue City For Lack Of Police Protection

Biden Democrats Send Letters Threatening To Burn Down Trump Supporters’ Homes

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

Facebook blocks 120,000 posts under the guise of ‘election misinformation’, rejected 2.2 million ads

Sounds more like election interference.

When is the GOP going to find their balls and deem social media the public square complying with our first amendment rights? They have done nothing for years. If this had been nipped in the bud years ago, when my colleagues and I were banned, suspended, shadowbanned, terminated etc it would never have gotten so far.

Facebook blocks 120,000 posts in fight against election misinformation

The tech giant also rejected 2.2 million ads

By Julia Musto, FOX Business, October 21, 2020:

Twitter, Facebook should change user agreements or lose protections: Congressman

Social media giant Facebook has removed 120,000 posts so far as it fights election misinformation and attempts to prevent a recurrence of 2016, when the platform was exploited by Russian agents seeking to sway the results of the presidential race.

In a Sunday interview with the French weekly newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche, Facebook vice president Nick Clegg said the Menlo Park, California-based company had also rejected 2.2 million ads that were unable to complete the site’s authorization process.


The tech company is relying on both artificial intelligence tools and tens of thousands of employees to vet content related to the Nov. 3 election.

According to The Guardian, the former British deputy prime minister, who was hired by CEO Mark Zuckerberg in late 2018 to head the social media company’s global affairs unit, also noted that advisory warnings were added to 150 million posts containing false information.

Clegg assured Journal du Dimanche the company had improved since the 2016 presidential election.

“At the time, absolutely no one expected foreign and Russian interference. This experience was traumatic for us and for American democracy,” Clegg said, according to an English translation of his comments confirmed by The Washington Times.

Clegg pointed out that Facebook has since joined with 70 different media outlets, including five in France, in its quest to verify information on its platforms.

Facebook’s fact-checking initiative has been met with mixed assessments, according to The Verge. The program has broadened since it was introduced in 2016 and now includes review of Facebook groups.

Clegg’s conversation with Journal du Dimanche follows a series of policy changes the company made over the summer, including the implementation of an independent Oversight Board in response to increased scrutiny.

Not only has Facebook prohibited new political ads the week before the election, it will also reject ads from candidates President Donald Trump or Joe Biden if either tries to prematurely claim victory.
‘The Next Revolution’ anchor Steve Hilton weighs in on Facebook censoring health information and the reopening process in California. Video

Outside influence has already been detected in the months ahead of Election Day, and The New York Times reported in August that members of the U.S. intelligence community say Russia, China and Iran are all attempting to meddle in the race.

In 2016, the same agencies said that Russia had used digital influence operations to sway voters in favor of President Trump, who has been dogged by that assessment for the past four years. It’s a claim he has routinely denied, dismissing it as “fake news.”

At the end of September, CIA analysis determined Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely continuing to approve and direct interference operations.


Watch LIVE: President Trump’s MAGA Rally in North Carolina

Kamala Harris Failed to Prosecute Illegal MS-13 Gang Member Just Months Before He Murdered Family

Police INTERROGATED French Schoolteacher 4 Days Before His Beheading Because of Complaint by a Muslim Father Who Incited The Gruesome Murder

A Huge storm threatens Joe Biden’s campaign

Joe Biden Caught Lying About Meeting With Son’s Foreign Business Associate From Kazakhstan

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

Tippecanoe and Biden Too

President Trump has repeatedly challenged the establishment media to ask Joe Biden to denounce Antifa, and has, of course, found no takers. Meanwhile, the Hunter Biden scandal keeps growing, with credible evidence that Hunter was selling (at exorbitant prices) access to his father while Joe was vice president, but for the most part the Leftist media remains resolutely mum about it. Reporters are too busy asking Joe what kind of milkshake he got at one of his infrequent campaign stops, and pretending as if his near-daily “lids” on campaigning were the most normal thing in the world for a man running for the highest office in the land. All this is unprecedented in recent presidential campaigns, but in many ways we have been here before – 180 years ago.

Rating America’s Presidents discusses at some length the strange and fabled election of 1840, an overlooked source of inspiration for the Biden campaign. The opposition party in those days, the Whigs, were determined to get their candidate William Henry Harrison into the White House not on the strength of his public positions, but rather upon the appeal of the persona they fashioned for him – just as Joe today is supposed to be the affable, kindly, back-to-normal alternative to four more years of what the Democrats characterize as the insane reign of the Cheeto Mussolini.

Like Biden, Harrison had the support of the Deep State. In those days that was the Bank of the United States, an unelected and unaccountable oligarchy that wielded enormous power without ever having to answer to the voters (sound familiar?). Nicholas Biddle, the longtime president of the Bank, directed that in order to avoid being pinned down on the issues and thereby alienating some portion of the electorate, Harrison should speak substantively as infrequently as possible: “Let him say nothing…Let no Committee, no Convention, no town meeting ever extract from him a single word about what he thinks now and will do hereafter. Let the use of pen and ink be wholly forbidden as if he were a mad poet in Bedlam.” Biddle could have been advising Biden’s handlers about how to deal with questions about packing the Supreme Court.

Instead of dealing with the issues, Harrison, who as a Major General in 1811 won the Battle of Tippecanoe against a force of Shawnee Indians, was portrayed as the humble war hero, “Old Tippecanoe.” His handlers trumpeted him as an ordinary man with simple tastes, content with a log cabin and a jug of hard cider. To this the Whigs contrasted a deeply unfair caricature of incumbent President Martin Van Buren as an out-of-touch, champagne-drinking, cosseted aristocrat who had spent public funds on lavish furnishings for the White House. The Whigs held rallies, passed out hard cider, staged marches, and generally made the 1840 election into a party celebrating “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” (John Tyler was Harrison’s running mate).

This was all great fun, but it was also the sum of the Whigs’ appeal to the American people. The Democrats were confounded. One Democrat editorialist vented his frustration: “In what grave and important discussion are the Whig journals engaged?…We speak of the divorce of bank and state; and the Whigs reply with a dissertation on the merits of hard cider. We defend the policy of the Administration; and the Whigs answer ‘log cabin,’ ‘big canoes,’ ‘go it, Tip! Come it, Ty.’ We urge the re-election of Van Buren because of his honesty, sagacity, statesmanship…and the Whigs answer that Harrison is a poor man and lives in a log cabin.”

No one was interested in appeals to reason. Old Tippecanoe ran the table, defeating Van Buren by 234 electoral votes to 60. Van Buren was justifiably appalled by the whole affair, writing in his memoirs fifteen years later: “No one…can now hesitate in believing that the scenes thro’ which the Country passed in that great political whirlwind were discreditable to our Institutions and could not fail, if often repeated, to lead to their subversion.”

Yet here we are now. The Democrats are asking us to vote for good old Joe. Why? Because look how much more polite, how much less mean, he is than Trump! Joe Biden, everybody! The happy man with the easy smile! Barack Obama’s friend! Influence peddling? Antifa riots? Come on, man! Look what kind of milkshake the man got! He’s one of us! Elect him, and then his people will tell you everything you ever wondered about where he stands!

What could possibly go wrong?


‘Islamophobia’ researcher: Because China represses Uighurs, ‘counterterror narrative’ must be ‘dismantled’

Pakistan: 13-year-old Christian girl kidnapped, converted to Islam, forced to marry the man who abducted her

Armenian archbishop: Turkey is perpetrating ‘third genocide’ against Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh

Archbishop of Albania: Conversion of Hagia Sophia to a mosque is a ‘cultural jihad’

Germany: Police statistics show that murder and manslaughter are mostly committed by asylum seekers

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

NYPD Officer Arrested For Spying For China. Naturalization provided him with the ‘keys to the kingdom.’

On February 21, 2020 the Department of Justice issued a press release, New York City Police Department Officer Charged with Acting As an Illegal Agent of the People’s Republic of China.  That press release went on to report, The Defendant Reported to Officials with the PRC Consulate About the Activities of Chinese Citizens in the New York Area and Assessed Potential Intelligence Sources for the PRC Within the Tibetan Community in New York and Elsewhere.

The Justice Department press release also provided the Complaint And Affidavit In Support Of Arrest Warrant pertaining to the defendant in this case, Baimadajie Angwang, a member of the New York City Police Department who is also a member of U.S. Army Reserves.

Not unlike an onion that has numerous layers, we will peel the layers off of this report to help illustrate how alleged and apparent failures of the immigration system go to the foundation of all that which is alleged to have occurred.

The reason that I am referencing failures of the immigration system is because, to begin with, the defendant in this case is a naturalized United States citizen who apparently committed serial immigration fraud.  U.S. citizenship was a prerequisite for his becoming of member of the NYPD.

The New York Times news report, N.Y.P.D. Officer Is Accused of Spying on Tibetans for China was also published on September 21, 2020 and provided additional details about NYPD Officer Angwang and how he entered the United States and ultimately became a United States citizen in this excerpt from that New York Times report:

Mr. Angwang first traveled from China to the United States on a cultural exchange visa, the complaint said. He later sought asylum, claiming that he had been arrested and tortured in mainland China because of his Tibetan ethnicity.

But prosecutors suggested in a court filing that Mr. Angwang secured his American citizenship under false pretenses, noting that he had traveled back to China after being granted asylum.

“These are not the actions of an individual who fears torture or persecution,” prosecutors wrote, arguing against bail. Mr. Angwang’s parents and brother still live in mainland China. His parents are members of the Communist Party, and his father is a retired member of the Chinese military, the complaint said.

The New York Times report also noted:

He also is accused of inviting a Chinese official to N.Y.P.D. events, offering potential access to senior police officials, prosecutors said.

The allegations raised serious questions about how much visibility Chinese government officials had inside the country’s largest police department and about the extent of Chinese efforts to conduct covert surveillance of Tibetan Americans.

It is particularly egregious that Angwang is alleged to have sought to legally enter the United States under the auspices of a cultural exchange program and then reported applied for political asylum supposedly seeking the protection of the United States.

The fact Mr. Angwang he had returned to China after having been granted asylum should have set off alarm bells, but apparently no action was taken.

We saw a similar situation with the Tsarnaev brothers who carried out the deadly terror attack at the Boston Marathon in 2013.  They had previously voluntarily traveled back to their native Russia after they filed for and were granted political asylum.

There is an obvious lack of resources dedicated to the effective enforcement of our immigration laws. to track the movements of such individuals.

There is also an apparent lack of resources available to do effective background investigations for immigration benefits and for the granting of security clearances.

These deficiencies create vulnerabilities that can and have been exploited repeatedly by foreign terrorists and spies alike.

Having succeeded in this strategy Angwang then, allegedly, obtained United States citizenship to acquire security clearances in both the U.S. military and the NYPD to provide him with opportunities to not only betray his adopted country but his former countrymen and women by spying on them all the while appearing in the camouflage of a police officer’s uniform, officially accorded him by the NYPD, the position of ultimate trust within local communities.

Ironically, he was, in fact, assigned as the community affairs officer in the 111th precinct in Queens, New York.

You have to wonder how many Tibetan-Americans, allegedly identified by Angwang, who were pressured in the United States, by the Chinese government who could have threatened harm to their family members back home.

Additionally, Angwang was also given a Secret Clearance by the U.S. Army as the alleged consequence of his having successfully concealed his covert work with the Chinese government in the United States.

Stop and consider what we must consider- if true, Mr. Angwang was able to game a variety of official government vetting processes to obtain a visa to enter the United States, to be able to game the asylum process- and thus to ultimately be eligible to apply for and receive United States citizenship through the naturalization process.

Thus far there is no mention of any effort to prosecute him for committing immigration fraud.  However, if found guilty of the crimes for which he is accused, he could and should be charged with immigration fraud.  This would set the stage for stripping him of his U.S. citizenship and leave him vulnerable to being removed (deported) back to his native China.

He is being charged with lying in his application for security clearances and could, likely, be prosecuted by local prosecutors if he lied in his application to become a member of the NYPD.  However, given the infuriating “Sanctuary” policies of New York City, I am not holding my breath about this possibility.

In this case such local prosecution would be redundant, in any event.

Immigration fraud is a major vulnerability that was identified by the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, as having played a major role in the ability of many international terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves, concealing their deadly preparations.

In point of fact, some time ago I wrote an extensive article on this very issue, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill – 9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as a key embedding tactic of terrorists.

China has, for many years, sought to exploit multiple vulnerabilities in the immigration system in order to infiltrate huge numbers of their spies into the United States to steal a wide array of intelligence and technology- not just where national security is concerned but where industrial secretes are concerned to the great detriment of America, Americans and American companies.

Back in May of this year, in fact, I wrote an article about this very danger, Chinese Espionage Made Possible By Immigration Failures.

President Trump has been the first U.S. President, in many decades to take on the hostile acts of China.

Meanwhile, Democrat Presidential candidates Biden and Harris have joined their Democrat Party colleagues on insisting that they would seek to provide lawful status to millions of illegal aliens who entered the United States surreptitiously.  There is absolutely no ability to interview these illegal aliens.  There is no ability to conduct field investigations of these individuals.

The process by which such a massive amnesty program would be carried out would leave the door wide open to massive fraud and with that fraud, irreparable harm to our national security and public safety.

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

We are living in a dangerous era with threats confronting our nation and our fellow Americans emanating from multiple sources.

While it is not likely that any of the journalists who will participate in the upcoming Presidential Debates will ask about immigration, we must keep that issue firmly in minds as we make our decisions.

Our nation’s borders and our ability to fairly and effectively enforce our immigration laws are our first line of defense and our last line of defense.

Sometime ago when I testified before a Congressional hearing on the issue of national security and immigration I noted that most sensible people live their lives with the principle of “Safety first” guiding their decisions.

With stakes this high, we must demand no less of those who seek elected office- especially the Presidency of the United States.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Why America Is Experiencing Two Very Different Economic Recoveries

Nations across the world are still reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic, which triggered a global recession following economic lockdowns enforced by most developed nations around the world.

New estimates put the economic losses at more than $16 trillion, and the United States saw its GDP shrink 9.5 percent between April and June, its largest drop in modern times.

While macroeconomic data is useful, it doesn’t tell the full story. It’s important to understand these economic losses have resulted in severe pain for people around the world, especially the poor.

A new Columbia University study shows that 8 million Americans have slipped into poverty since May, the New York Times reports. Meanwhile, a recent World Bank study projects as many as 150 million people around the world are projected to slip into extreme poverty by 2021.

As the US seeks to rebound from the global recession, it’s worth noting that some states are having more success than others.

Just the News recently published a breakdown of state unemployment data for August (the latest data available). Based on US Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the figures showed that nationally the unemployment rate was 8.4 percent, but the economic pain was not distributed equally across blue, red and purple states.

“Fueled by broader, faster economic reopenings following the initial coronavirus crash, conservative-leaning red states are by and large far outpacing liberal-leaning blue states in terms of putting people back to work,” writes Carrie Sheffield.

Sheffield continued:

“In red states (those voting Republican for president in all four of the last four elections), the combined unemployment rate stood at 6.6%. Among blue states (those that voted Democrat in all four of the last four presidential elections) the figure was 10.5%. Among purple states (all of the others, either split 2 and 2 or 3 wins for one party and one win for the other), the unemployment figure was 7.8%.”

The data also show that of the 10 states with the lowest rates of unemployment, nine have GOP governors (the lone exception being Montana), while 9 of the 10 states with the highest rates of unemployment are led by Democrats (the lone exception being Massachusetts).

Evidence suggests the disparity stems in large part from the different ways states are approaching the coronavirus. Red states, particularly ones like South Dakota, Utah, Oklahoma, and Idaho, have been much less inclined to restrict economic freedom during the pandemic. Blue states, on the other hand, have been the most proactive in limiting economic activity in an attempt to limit the spread of the virus. This includes states such as California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, and Connecticut.

Join us in preserving the principles of economic freedom and individual liberty for the rising generation

One might argue that these states could have had high unemployment rates before the pandemic, but BLS data from earlier this year show this is not the case.

Government figures from January 2020 show that just two states had unemployment rates higher than 5 percent—Alaska (6.1%) and Mississippi (5.7 %). Meanwhile, the blue states of California (3.9%, New Jersey (3.5%), Rhode Island (3.5%), New York (4%) and Connecticut (3.7%) had rates of unemployment close to the national average.

The data suggest that the economic recovery of many US states is being inhibited by government regulations designed to limit the spread of the virus. A recent Wall Street Journal article also recently pointed out that the strong economic recovery in the South “is at least partially due to less fear of the virus.”

While it’s unclear if these regulations are having a positive effect—New Jersey and New York have the highest COVID-19 death tolls in the country, and Rhode Island and Connecticut are not far behind—the consequences of government imposed lockdowns have been abundantly clear for months.

The most recent unemployment data are one part of a larger economic picture that shows, so far, red states are doing a better job of balancing the need to save both lives and livelihoods,” said Rachel Greszler, an economist for the Heritage Foundation.

“[W]e’ve seen blue states using a pandemic as an opportunity to expand government control, impose excessive lockdowns not rooted in data, favor politically connected groups and allies, and demand federal bailouts for decades of poor budgeting instead of taking responsibility and confronting their problems head-on,” Greszler told the Washington Examiner.

As lawmakers in American and around the world continue the difficult work of trying to limit the spread of the virus without causing further destruction, we should remember that the cost of curtailing economic freedom is high.

Just ask the 8 million newly impoverished Americans.


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

VIDEO: SUMMING THINGS UP — Boiling it all down.


Church Militant (a 501(c)4 corporation) is responsible for the content of this commentary.

A programming note before we begin: Church Militant will be covering the currently scheduled last presidential debate this coming Thursday live as we have done all the previous debates.

Coverage will begin at 8:30 p.m. ET with a pre-debate analysis. That will go for roughly 30 minutes until the debate begins (which we will carry on our site).

Then, immediately following the debate, we will return for a full hour of analysis and commentary.

One thing to keep a very careful eye on will be the conservative reports of the Hunter Biden laptop hard drive and allegedly damning emails proving Joe Biden’s years of corruption involving the Chinese Communist Party.

Again, this Thursday, 8:30 p.m. ET, debate coverage will be live from Church Militant — your go-to Catholic source for news and information.

For today, a brief introduction: One of the things that happens when you’re in media is various interview requests come in looking for deeper insight into current stories of import.

This past Friday, Church Militant did an interview with Rob Gocklin (the “blue-collar Catholic”) who asked some of the best questions we’ve been asked here about the current state of the culture, the Church and the campaign — a sum-up of things as they stand right now.

Rob is a down-to-earth, straight-up, plain-spoken Catholic dedicated every bit as we are to righting this ship.


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

VIDEO: Retiring Police Officer Gives His Badge to honor President Donald J. Trump

The police and their unions across America support President Donald J. Trump. He is the law and order President for all Americans.


©All rights reserved.


Cops In Portland Set Overtime Pay Record In June Amid Riots, 15 Officers Made Over $200,000

Joe Biden Supporter Allegedly Fires Shotgun At Two Republicans Driving By House

Free Speech Rally Organizer Loses Two Teeth After Getting Punched By Counter-Protester

Montgomery County Council Members To Introduce Bill To Remove School Resource Officers

At Least 4 Teens Among The 35 People Shot In Bloody Chicago Weekend That Left 6 Dead

Biden Offers Anyone Who Votes For Him A Seat On The Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Biden is being criticized for buying votes after he unveiled a new plan to give anyone who votes for him a seat on the Supreme Court.

“Anyone who votes for me will be appointed to the highest court in the land,” he said in a speech Monday to seven riveted rally attendees. “One vote = one seat. It’s that simple. That’s how it used to be in my day. We’d gather around in the town square and everyone would vote on whether to allow a new general store or saloon. The person who got outvoted, well, they got run out of town on the back of a goat. It was a real hoot. Gosh, I miss those days.”

Many say this is a clear case of court-packing. Not so fast, says the media. “Actually, this is just court rebalancing,” wrote every single journalist on Twitter simultaneously. “See, conservatives have gotten more picks in recent years, so adding 60-70 million seats to the Supreme Court is just correcting an imbalance.”

Since Biden is up in the polls, the Supreme Court has begun renovating its building to accommodate the new justices, with SCOTUS annexing Newfoundland to house them all.


Heartwarming: Amy Coney Barrett Just Adopted A Local Troubled Youngster Named Hunter

Check Out These Eight Beautiful Travel Posters For America’s Democrat-Controlled Cities

Health Experts Now Recommend Maximizing Social Distance By Attending A Biden Rally

Twitter Censors R2-D2 For Sharing Hacked Death Star Plans

Biden: ‘Parents Should Be Supportive Of An 8-Year-Old’s Choice To Stick A Fork In An Electrical Outlet’

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by The Babylon Bee is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Dems Are In Full Panic Mode

After the 2016 presidential election, Democrats were consumed with anger, indignation, and a burning unquenchable fury. They had basked in smug satisfaction during the previous eight years as Barack Obama began to fulfill his campaign promise of October 28, 2005 of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” from our Democratic Republic into a socialist utopia. And they were blind with rage that Hillary had been denied the next eight years to complete the mission.

Even more infuriating was the fact that everything the 2016 victor stood for was a repudiation of nearly a century of leftist strivings. In fact, candidate and then President Trump promised to overturn the Regressives’ most cherished “values,” including sky-high taxes, open borders, a weakened military, flawed foreign treaties, ongoing wars, the illiteracy roadmap called Common Core, and generations of impoverished, uneducated, imprisoned Blacks, et al.


Rejecting nearly 250 years of the peaceful transition of presidential power, Democrats launched a four-year war against President Trump, manufacturing a Russian-collusion hoax, a Ukraine hoax, a Stormy Daniels hoax, an impeachment hoax, on and on. All came to naught, but their efforts did expose the deep systemic corruption at the highest reaches of the Obama regime––corruption involving crimes as serious as sedition and treason!

“Coincidentally,” on the heels of the impeachment failure came the China virus, not only bringing our economy––and the entire world––to a halt, but giving rise to unrestrained violence by bought-and-paid-for anarchist groups such as Antifa and Black Lives Matter in about 15 Democrat-run cities.

Then, President Trump tested positive for the corona virus and was hospitalized to the everlasting––and unseemly––glee of his opponents. However, that glee was short-lived as the president also triumphed over this assault, left the hospital after three days, and has been out campaigning in full Ironman mode ever since.


It is only a couple of weeks till the presidential election and the anger that once animated Democrats has been replaced by fear––stark, bug-eyed, white-knuckle, deadly fear and dread.
Wherever their marching orders come from––leftist billionaire globalists, or China, as writer Daniel Greenfield spells out––they have now been reduced to holding their collective breaths in the hope that:

  • Joe Biden can stay vertical and passably sentient till November 3rd,
  • His VP choice, Kalamity Harris, can continue to conceal her close ties––familial and political––to Communist China,
  • The escalating Hunter/Joe/Burisma scandal doesn’t get even more explosive and scandalous, as writer Andrea Widburg predicts it will, or, as she wrote: ….the e-mails “also indicate that his father pimped Hunter to foreign governments to act as a bagman for bribes”…not to omit Hunter’s alleged appetite for child pornography.

Journalist Jack Cashill asks: Can Democrats Sell Their Worst Candidate Ever? “For all their talk of empowering women and minorities,” he writes, “leftists have used their vast media, tech, and deep-state power to sell America a corrupt old white guy of diminished mental capacity…by suppressing the fact that––by any standards––Biden is a pedophile, a plagiarist, a liar, a hypocrite, and––by the left’s standards––a racist, sexist, warmonger as well as a credibly accused sexual predator.”

But obviously, character is not what Democrats care about, as demonstrated by eight straight years of watching Bill Clinton spit in Hillary’s face every single day with his serial affairs, or Barack Obama trot around the world bad-mouthing the country that gave him everything.

What they care about, as evidenced brazenly over the past four years, is getting rid of the guy who exposed their deep corruption, the better to avoid their inevitable prison sentences!


In short order, the now-hysterical Democrats have jumped into action.

Classy Democrats like Kristopher Jacks, Chairman of the executive committee of the Colorado Democrat Party, threatened violence and murder if Trump wins, or as he said,  “Guillotines, motherf…r.” Kind of reminds you of Madonna’s equally classy threat about burning down the White House, doesn’t it?

But Jacks and Madonna and their quite numerous ilk are small potatoes. The bigger fish are also in full panic mode:

  • Quick, they demand of their media whores: Report a rise in Covid-19 cases and NOT A WORD about Hunter Biden.
  • Hurry, they call to Twitter: Shut down the president’s multi-million-followers account and that of his press secretary, and also the account of White House physician, Dr. Scott Atlas, for daring to suggest fact-based information that contradicts the leftists’ so-called experts on Covid-19.
  • Attention, they tell their pollsters: Increase those Biden-Kalamity numbers!
  • Head’s Up, they call to tech giant Facebook: Kill the ads and positive messages about Trump.
  • Yoo Hoo debate moderators: With Trump, get out your machetes!
  • Listen Up, they say to their ballot harvesters and voter-fraud experts: quadruple your efforts. Of course, they are thrilled to read reports of their successes, such as reported by Mark Tapscott: New Data Analysis Finds 353 Counties With 1.8 Million More Registered Voters Than Eligible Citizens.


Why this desperation? Because the Democrat poohbahs also read the inside polling numbers and know things are looking grim for their basement-dwelling candidate. They are especially terrified because they know that a Trump victory will bring the two outcomes they fear most:

  • A swift avalanche of overdue indictments and ultimate imprisonments to all the corrupt operatives of the Obama regime––including Obama and Biden, as well as the corrupt functionaries they appointed in the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, State, et al.
  • An absolute death sentence for the Democrat Party as it is currently constituted.

That’s why the Democrats are quaking with fear and dread––and we are all seeing it play out in living color as the few days till the election elapse.

After all the treachery, violence, duplicity and hypocrisy that Democrats have displayed not only since citizen Donald J. Trump and his magnificent wife Melania descended the elevator in Trump Tower to announce his candidacy for POTUS, but for the past four years of the Democrats’ manic, vulgar, obsessed and irrational behavior.

Right now, it is fascinating to see these leftists in their full infantile-dependency mode, calling on their mommies and daddies in the media, big tech and the Big Daddy billionaires to save them.

Given the choice between the systemic corruption and hate-America mentality of the left and the burgeoning peace, prosperity and love-America administration of President Trump, pulling the right lever on November 3rd is a no-brainer!

©Joan Swirsky. All rights reserved.

On the Nature of Complicity

Randall Smith: In the future, will America’s bishops renounce their failure to condemn politicians who support abortion as German bishops have recently done for their former support of Nazism?

In a column last year titled “Politicizing the Eucharist?” I pointed out that no one now claims that when Archbishop Rummel of New Orleans excommunicated three Catholics for publically encouraging people to defy his order to de-segregate the Catholic schools, he was “politicizing the Eucharist.”  Rather, Rummel is now praised highly for his singular courage, especially since his condemnation was so contrary to the more “accommodating” views of many of his fellow southern Catholics.

I also mentioned Cardinal Adolf Bertram, the ex-officio head of the German episcopate in the 1930s, who ordered Church bells rung in celebration of Nazi Germany’s victories over Poland and France and who sent greetings to Hitler on his 50th birthday in the name of all German Catholics, an act that angered his fellow bishops Konrad von Preysing and August von Galen.

The subject of whether the bishops should speak out publically against the treatment of the Jews arose at a 1942 meeting of the German bishops at Fulda. The consensus was “to give up heroic action in favor of small successes.”  In the 1933 Reichskonkordat between the Holy See and the German government, Church leaders pledged to refrain from speaking out on issues not directly related to the Church.  Repeated violations of the Konkordat on the part of the government, including closing churches and church schools, did not change their minds. And it also didn’t keep bishops like Bertram from endorsing government actions they favored, such as opposition to communism and the subjugation of Poland.

If you imagine I am being too tough on these German bishops, then perhaps you should read the twenty-three-page report made public last May by Germany’s Council of Catholic Bishops in which they admitted “complicity” by their predecessors who did not do enough to oppose the rise of Nazi regime and its mistreatment of Jews.

In eighty or ninety years, will future U.S. bishops be submitting a similar document of their own, confessing the “complicity” of their predecessors who did not do enough to oppose the abortion regime?  Will Catholics of that time be as baffled about our present bishops and prominent Catholic politicians as we are about the accommodationist Catholics of Nazi Germany?

How could Catholics of that time have failed to understand the evil staring them in the face? And why did they “accommodate” a regime that had labeled Christianity, and Catholics in particular, as “enemies of the state”?  Was it perhaps because so many leaders of the regime had been raised Catholic and some were still rosary-carrying church-goers?

Who, in retrospect, would not look back in shame at a German bishop who called questioning the Catholic commitments of Catholic Nazi leaders “offensive because they constitute an assault on the meaning of what it is to be Catholic.” Because “being Catholic means loving the Church; being Catholic means participating in the sacramental life of the church; being a Catholic means trying to transform the world by the light of the Gospel”?

And yet those are the words of our own Bishop McElroy of San Diego about those who question Joe Biden’s Catholicism.

And we transform the world in the light of the Gospel how?  Is it not by opposing the killing of innocent human beings?

In retrospect, we would suspect that a bishop who had said about the treatment of Jews, as Bishop McElroy has about abortion, that “To reduce that magnificent, multidimensional gift of God’s love to a single question of public policy is repugnant and should have no place in public discourse” had little or no serious concern for the lives being lost.  “Sure, abortion is bad, but what about global warming!”  “Sure the ill-treatment of Jews is unfortunate, but what about the future of Europe!” Wouldn’t we consider that to be repugnant?

What would anyone say now about a Catholic politician as prominent as Mario Cuomo if, during the 1930s in Germany, he had said:  “I accept the Church’s teaching about Jews, but must I insist others do so?  Our public morality. . .the moral standards we maintain for everyone, not just the ones we insist on in our private lives – depends on a consensus view of right and wrong.  The values derived from religious belief will not and should not be accepted as part of the public morality unless they are shared by the pluralistic community at large by consensus.” That statement would have worked equally well for Catholic segregationists in the American South.

If that Catholic politician in 1930s Germany had available to him the “seamless garment” argument used by Mr. Cuomo, he might have said, “I grant that the treatment of Jews may have a unique significance but not a preemptive significance.”  “The Jewish question is an important issue for Catholics, but so is the question of the injustice of the reparation payments we have been forced to make along with all the resulting hunger and homelessness and joblessness, all the forces diminishing human life and threatening to destroy it.”

All the forces diminishing human life and threatening to destroy it?  Like . . . oh, I don’t know . . . abortion?

Who, in retrospect now, wouldn’t find such a “Catholic” politician either an obvious liar or a delusional hack?

If you find my comparison between the Catholics who enabled the Nazis and modern Catholics who enable abortion troubling, perhaps you should read Anne Applebaum’s article in The Atlantic titled “History Will Judge the Complicit.” Take out all the tendentious stuff about the numbers at Trump’s inauguration and a phone call with the Ukrainian ambassador and replace it with Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden’s support for abortion and for policies that result in the closure of faithful Catholic institutions, and then change the title to “On the Nature of Complicity: Abortion’s Catholic Enablers and the Judgment of History.”

That judgment is unlikely to be any kinder to them than it has been to their German predecessors.


Randall Smith

Randall B. Smith is a tenured Full Professor of Theology. His book Reading the Sermons of Thomas Aquinas: A Guidebook for Beginners is available from Emmaus Press. And his book Aquinas, Bonaventure, and the Scholastic Culture at Paris: Preaching, Prologues, and Biblical Commentary is due out from Cambridge University Press in the fall.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2020 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

PODCAST: Twitter, Facebook Censored Trump 65 Times!



Cheryl Chumley is online opinion editor for The Washington Times, the author of “The Devil in DC: Winning Back the Country From the Beast in Washington” and of “Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming Our Reality,” and a 2008-2009 Robert Novak journalism fellow with The Fund for American Studies. She is also a licensed private investigator and principal of Chumley Investigations.



Dr. Stephen Soloway has dedicated his life to helping patients and colleagues, and patients who visit him from six countries and many U.S. cities. Dr. Soloway’s devotion to patient’s needs have earned him Top Doctor Awards every year since 2003 and he is regarded as one of the leaders in the Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Delaware area for Rheumatologic care. He recently completed his appointed to the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness and Nutrition,

TOPIC: The Horrors of American Healthcare!


Dan Gainor, Vice President for Business and Culture for the Media Research Center, a veteran editor whose work has been published or cited in the following media: Congressional, Investor’s Business Daily, Chicago Sun-Times, New York Post, Washington Times, Orange County Register, San Diego Union-Tribune, Dateline Washington, Janet Parshall’s America, Thom Hartmann Show, American Family Radio, CNBC’s “Power Lunch,” CNN’s “Paula Zahn Now” and Fox’s “Hannity & Colmes” and “Fox Business Live.”

TOPIC: Twitter, Facebook Censored Trump 65 Times!

©All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Media embrace Big Tech censorship instead of pushing back.

Zuckerberg Funds Used To Pay Pennsylvania Judges Overseeing Ballot Counts

HARRISBURG, Pa./PRNewswire/ — Plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit have filed a motion seeking a restraining order to block the use of private funds from billionaire Mark Zuckerberg for use in local election management, a statutory responsibility of state officials including the Pennsylvania Legislature.


The motion, filed on October 19 in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, highlights how a grant for $10 million from the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) explicitly requires the City of Philadelphia to open no fewer than 800 new polling places – and failing to do so may require the City to forfeit the grant money. The funding from Mark Zuckerberg also pays for judges to oversee ballot counts and the outcome of disputes that arise regarding the eligibility of ballots in the election.

“The Center for Technology and Civic Life is using Mark Zuckerberg’s millions to require the City of Philadelphia to open 800 new election offices and hire judges who will oversee ballot counts and rule on ballot disputes based on their own admission in court documents,” said Tom King, the legal counsel representing the plaintiffs in the case. “Municipal leaders have ceded their role as a local authority to CTCL with powers that rightfully belong to the people of Pennsylvania through their representatives in Harrisburg by effectively inviting this partisan billionaire into the ballot counting room,” he concluded.

“We are fighting Mark Zuckerberg around the country where he is using CTCL, a nonprofit founded and managed by Obama-affiliated operatives, to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to leftist strongholds in several battleground states to determine the outcome of the election,” said Phill Kline, Director of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society, which is supporting the litigation. “This is a scheme engineered by partisan activists under the guise of COVID-related support. The privatization of the election undermines the integrity of the election,” he added.


The plaintiffs in the case, the Pennsylvania Voters Alliance and several officeholders and candidates, previously filed a complaint against Centre CountyDelaware County, and the City of Philadelphia, and Secretary of the Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaKathy Boockvar, in Civil Action No.: 4:20−CV−01761−MWB.

The grants to Philadelphia and the counties are part of a $350 million contribution by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, which is being funneled into leftist strongholds selectively in several swing states to turnout voters for liberal politicians. This strategy may tilt the results of the presidential election in the most critical battleground states in the nation, including Pennsylvania.

The Thomas More Society, a not-for-profit public interest law firm, is providing financial support for litigation in numerous federal cases seeking to block Mark Zuckerberg’s blatant attempt to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

For more information on this and related issues, go to

©All rights reserved.

NYC POGROM: De Blasio’s Inspectors Flood Jewish Neighborhoods, Every Jewish School Visited

Dozens of schools were harassed by de Wilhelm Blasio’s jackboots, circa Berlin 1930s.

If inspectors were unable to access the building, the yeshivas were given a summons for a court appearance along with a $15,000 fine.


YWN has been inundated with reports of inspectors flooding the Flatbush and Boro Park “red zones” on Monday.

By: Yeshiva Today, October 19, 2020:

By 11:30AM, inspectors from the NYC Department of Buildings had already visited nearly two dozen Mosdos Hatorah.

Initial reports state that inspectors are asking to enter the buildings, and if denied, they are given a summons for a court appearance in a few months along with a $15,000 fine.

Highly credible sources tell YWN that the inspectors were provided a list from the State that has the names and addresses of every single Yeshiva, and were hoping to visit each one today.

YWN had no information if any Yeshivas were even open.

YWN has been inundated with reports of inspectors flooding the Flatbush and Boro Park “red zones” on Monday.

By 11:30AM, inspectors from the NYC Department of Buildings had already visited nearly two dozen Mosdos Hatorah.

Initial reports state that inspectors are asking to enter the buildings, and if denied, they are given a summons for a court appearance in a few months along with a $15,000 fine.

Highly credible sources tell YWN that the inspectors were provided a list from the State that has the names and addresses of every single Yeshiva, and were hoping to visit each one today.

YWN had no information if any Yeshivas were even open.


Report: Shocking Photos of Underage Girls in Biden’s Laptop, Incl. Relative — and He Was in Some of the Photos WITH HER

WATCH: President Donald Trump holding ‘Make America Great Again!’ rally in Erie, Pa. Tuesday

President Trump, Dozens of House GOPers Seek Special Counsel Probe of Hunter, Joe Biden

French Minister Demands Mosque Be Shut Down After Inciting To Murder

Cop BEAT BLOODY in Brutal Attack Livestreamed on Facebook

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

Federal Appeals Court Reminds Judges Not to Change Rules Before or During Election

The Supreme Court advises that judges should not change state and county election rules right before an election, a Cincinnati-based appeals court has reminded a lower court.

The Ohio case, like others this election season, involves the use of ballot “drop boxes” and restrictions that officials may put on them while attempting to maintain the integrity of state elections.

In a split decision, 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Griffin, writing for himself and Judge Amul Thapar, said: “The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that lower federal courts should ordinarily not alter election rules on the eve of an election.”

Why did District Court Judge Dan Polster, a Clinton appointee, need the Oct. 9 reminder from the 6th Circuit panel?

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

Because, as Griffin put it, “Here, the district court went a step further and altered election rules during an election.”

Here’s what happened.

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose issued a directive that allowed ballot drop boxes to be placed only in a county’s election office in secured, monitored settings.

LaRose reasoned that under Ohio law, an absentee ballot could be returned only by mail or by “personally deliver[ing] it to the [election] director.”

In LaRose’s view, this last requirement meant that any drop box had to be located at a county’s election board office.

Polster disagreed, issuing what some called a “scathing decision” that required LaRose to allow drop boxes at additional locations. In the process, the district court judge summarily rebuffed concerns about election fraud, saying that LaRose “has not advanced any legitimate reason to prohibit a county board of elections from utilizing off-site drop boxes and/or off-site delivery of ballots to staff.”

Polster also refused to stay his decision—put it on hold—to allow Ohio officials to appeal.

That’s when Griffin and Thapar, the 6th Circuit judges, stepped in to stay Polster’s decision themselves, dissolving his preliminary injunction and reminding their fellow judge of his proper role.

“Federal courts are not ‘overseers and micromangers’ of ‘the minutiae of state election processes,’” they wrote, and “The district court in this case altered election rules during an election and in disregard for Ohio’s important state interests.”

The two appeals judges made clear that even though LaRose’s directive allowed a ballot drop box to be placed only at the board of elections office, “Ohio voters are not required to use a ballot drop box to vote.”

Ohio is generous with its absentee voting rules even though “there is no constitutional right to an absentee ballot,” the judges said, adding:

Voters may (1) vote in person on election day, (2) vote in person for more than four weeks before election day, (3) mail in an absentee ballot; or (4) drop off an absentee ballot at a drop box. Thus, a limitation on drop boxes poses at most an inconvenience to a subset of voters (those who choose to vote absentee and physically drop off their absentee ballot).

Griffin and Thapar said that even if subjected to some form of heightened scrutiny, Ohio’s restrictions on drop boxes “easily pass constitutional muster.”

Moreover, contrary to Polster’s claim, the Ohio secretary of state had advanced legitimate concerns that supported his directive, the 6th Circuit judges said.

First, the directive “promotes uniformity,” which has been “consistently” recognized as a legitimate state interest in running “orderly” elections.

Second, the directive “promotes the state’s efficiency interests in administering elections,” given the long list of complex responsibilities of elections officials. That “efficiency interest is particularly important where, as here, voting is already in progress,” the judges wrote.

Third, “limiting drop boxes to one location per county promotes the accuracy of the election” since “voters who return a ballot to the wrong drop box run the risk of having their ballot rejected.”

And finally, the secretary of state’s directive “promotes the security of the election,” the two judges said. Ohio “never before used off-site drop boxes” and requiring them at the last moment would “require on-the-fly implementation of new, untested security measures.”

The danger of allowing unmonitored, unsecured drop boxes for absentee ballots was demonstrated recently in Virginia. There, the state board of elections issued a warning to voters Oct. 5 that six outdoor mail collection boxes had been broken into during the prior weekend, mailboxes that may have contained absentee ballots.

Judge Helene White, the third judge on the 6th Circuit panel, wrote a dissenting opinion disagreeing with Griffith and Thapar.

White said she would have upheld the lower court’s injunction because she believed that the decision on how many ballot drop boxes should be placed, and where, should be left up to county boards of election. White seemed unconcerned that this could lead to inconsistent rules throughout the state.

But as Griffith and Thapar pointed out, “the district judge in this case altered election rules during an election and in disregard for Ohio’s important state interests.”

Griffin and Thapar are right. Federal judges shouldn’t alter the rules at the 12th hour—especially after an election has begun.


Zack Smith is a legal fellow in the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Twitter: .

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


San Francisco Aims to Strip the Names of Founders, Abraham Lincoln, and an Abolitionist From Public Schools

CHOP Zone Businesses Pursue Lawsuit Against Seattle

What to Expect Ahead of Amy Coney Barrett’s Confirmation Vote Next Week

A Note for our Readers:

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

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

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

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

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


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

Yes, a Pro-China Group in America Supports a Black Lives Matter Founder

The Daily Signal last month revealed links between the Black Lives Matter organizations and the Chinese Progressive Association of San Francisco.

My piece went viral—and for good reason. It broke news that the liberal-dominated media would prefer to ignore.

A writer for the online publication Axios now has launched an attack on my work. I will leave aside the condescending tenor of Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian’s blog post and her subsequent unprofessional tweets. Instead, I will refute her main points.

The Daily Signal’s reporting is important because the Chinese Progressive Association of San Francisco is the financial sponsor of two ventures associated with Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza: the Black Futures Lab and the Black to the Future Action Fund.

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

More importantly, the Chinese Progressive Association of San Francisco trains activists and helped mobilize Chinese Americans for the violent protests we saw this year as well as in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. So did like-named organizations in New York and Boston, run independently but set up by the same Maoist Marxists.

Now, to the three points in the Axios “fact check.”

No. 1: The Chinese Progressive Association of San Francisco “has no apparent ties to the CCP,” meaning the Chinese Communist Party.

No. 2: “China no longer supports grassroots leftist movements abroad.”

No. 3: “China doesn’t seem to get Black Lives Matter.”

As for No. 1, the Chinese Progressive Association was founded in San Francisco in 1972 by operatives of the Maoist militant group I Wor Kuen, which supported the Chinese Communist Party.

From the start, CPA-San Francisco was doing pro-China work. As one of its founders, Fay Wong, explained: “China was an inspiration to us, many of us were from China and those us who were not just found what China was able to accomplish, with the revolution, was very inspiring.”

A few years later, I Wor Kuen also set up groups called the Chinese Progressive Association in Boston and New York.

These CPAs are registered separately and apparently run autonomously, but interact with each other in a host of other hard-left outfits such as Seeding ChangeRight to the City, and LeftRoots. The three CPAs also collaborated in publications of the League for Revolutionary Struggle, a Marxist-Leninist organization that I Wor Kuen created by uniting with other communist groups from 1978 to 1990.

This support for the Chinese Communist Party and its causes was not a matter solely of 20th-century politics.

When he was executive director of the CPA-San Francisco in 2012, Alex Tom (a longtime friend of Garza, the Black Lives Matter co-founder) started the China Education and Exposure Program to deepen ties between American leftists and China. “We built relationships with people in the [Communist] Party,” Tom said on the May 26 episode of “The Red Nation” podcast.

The CPA in Boston, meanwhile, has worked officially with the Chinese Consulate in New York.

Tom is not alone. Another senior official at the CPA-San Francisco worked to further the aims of Hanban, the Chinese government entity that runs the insidious Confucius Institutes in the U.S., Australia, and other Western countries.

Confucius Institutes burrow deeply within universities and schools to show American students a sympathetic view of China that is detached from reality. They also try to censor what the host university can discuss regarding China.

Hanban describes itself as “a public institution affiliated with the Chinese Ministry of Education.” In fact, it reports directly to political apparatchiks in China’s Politburo, not to educators in the Education Ministry (who are, as likely as not, members of the Chinese Communist Party in any case).

Three Republican senators—Marco Rubio of Florida, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, and Rob Portman of Ohio—have reintroduced the Foreign Intelligence Transparency Act to “close loopholes in current law that allow the Chinse Communist Party to infiltrate our colleges and universities through Confucius Institutes.”

In 2006, just two years after Hanban created Confucius Institutes and just as it was trying to seed them around the country, Eric Mar, then a board member of CPA-San Francisco and one of its longest-serving leaders, said he had just returned from a trip to China, where he met with Hanban.

Hanban apparently funded the trip. Mar said he worked with the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco to prepare for it. He said such trips made him understand better the aims of China’s leaders through Hanban, which he supported.

Mar wrote in his blog in 2006:

In retrospect, I am understanding better now that I am back how our trip, and others funded by HANBAN, fits into China President Hu [Jintao]’s 6 goals for stronger US/China cooperation laid out in his April 21 speech to Yale University.

Mar sympathetically paraphrases Hu as saying: “China takes human rights seriously. … The country respects and upholds human rights and this has been written into China’s Constitution. China will keep advancing human rights in the course of its social development.”

In fact, China is one of the world’s worst human rights violators, despite the efforts of its communist government, especially through Hanban, to make Americans think otherwise.

Mar’s 2006 trip to China came just four years before Garza teamed up with CPA-San Francisco to work on a report about working conditions in restaurants in the city’s Chinatown. In 2012, Garza was a member of the host committee for the Chinese Progressive Association’s 40th anniversary.

After his election to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Mar was able to elevate these initial contacts with Hanban and its pernicious Confucius Institutes, which he first made while at CPA-San Francisco, to continue to support their work in America, as he did in a Chinese Consulate event in 2014.

The trips to China are in fact an important part of the relationship between the CPAs and the People’s Republic of China, and we have Eric Mar’s own twin brother, Gordon Mar, as the source for that.

A longtime CPA-San Francisco operative, Gordon Mar instructed the writer of a comprehensive Stanford University paper, Kaori Tsukada, to look into the trips to China by association members to better understand the nexus between the Chinese Progressive Association and the People’s Republic of China. Tsukada wrote in the 2009 paper:

Gordon Mar suggested that I look into the history of the relationship between China and CPA; although there were no monetary interactions, CPA members were invited to visit the People’s Republic of China a number of times, as an opportunity to visit their ancestors’ homes and to see socialism in action.

The Chinese Progressive Association of San Francisco went to bat for China again this past May. Along with the Boston group and others, the San Francisco organization signed a letter backing Joe Biden.

In the letter, however, it warned the Biden campaign not to engage in “China-bashing” in the context of COVID-19, adding that “fanning anti-China sentiment will also come at a cost at the ballot box.”

I will leave it to the reader to figure out whether Axios’ fact-checker is right that the Chinese Progressive Association has no ties to the Chinese Communist Party. The Chinese Communist Party runs China. Hanban reports to the CCP’s Politburo.

As for point No. 2: The Axios fact-checker says that “China no longer supports grassroots leftist movements abroad.”

Somebody should tell that to the editors of China’s Global Times, an English-language newspaper run by the CCP’s official organ, People’s Daily.

Until then, Global Times, just like other Chinese Communist Party organs, will continue to run stories supporting Black Lives Matter in this country, such as this one, this one, and this one.

A typical line from these stories: “By now, the waves from the anti-police brutality protests in the U.S. have reached every corner of American society.”

Or this one, from another story: “Under the slogan ‘Black Lives Matter,’ the protests triggered by the killing of George Floyd have swept across many regions worldwide. Globally, people are calling for an end to widespread police brutality against black people.”

And Global Times is not alone.

Indeed, China expert Gordon Chang—who has been analyzing China for decades—reached the opposite conclusion than the Axios writer.

Chang said in a television interview in July: “What is confirmed is that the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the Communist Party’s global ties have been engaged in a malicious disinformation campaign, deliberately stoking racial tensions in the U.S.”

“And, U.S. Customs has seized items coming from China this year that would be very handy for protesters,” Chang said.

In June, Chang wrote  in Newsweek: “Beijing, in short, has been trying to surreptitiously exacerbate social divisions and racial tensions, something that it did in the open in Canada in January of last year when its then-ambassador, Lu Shaye, tried to mobilize those of Chinese origin against ‘white supremacy.’”

The writer Trevor Loudon, a veteran watcher of  I Wor Kuen’s creations in America, also reached the opposite conclusion, and says the links between China and the riots here are in fact direct.

As for the Axios fact-checker’s point No. 3, that the Chinese Communist Party does “not seem to get Black Lives Matter,” that’s a rather subjective view with which it is difficult to engage.

More important is that the Chinese Progressive Associations get Black Lives Matter. Not four days after Floyd’s May 25 death in Minneapolis, the CPAs in San Francisco, Boston, and New York were among the signatories of a call for support for Black Lives Matter, warning Chinese Americans to reject “assimilation into whiteness.”

“In this painful moment, we ask our Asian communities to choose our shared liberation,” the letter said. “Let us also commit to the ongoing work of addressing the anti-Blackness in our own communities and choose to fight for Black lives the way we would our own.”

In December 2014, after a  grand jury declined to indict a Ferguson police officer in the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown (an event that led to daily protests), Black Lives Matter co-founders Garza and Patrisse Cullors participated in a “national call” with Seeding Change, a far-left group created by CPA-San Francisco in which CPA-Boston also is a member.

Afterward, Seeding Change posted messages calling for solidarity with Black Lives Matter, writing: “From San Francisco/Bay Area, Los Angeles to Madison, New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Providence and DC, Asian Americans have been showing up and busting up the ‘model minority,’ which is used to maintain white supremacy, anti-blackness and capitalism.”

Under a banner reading “SHOW UP and TAKE ACTION,” the statement urged Asian Americans to submit to Black Lives Matter’s orders: “It is important for Asian American communities to show up for Black Lives and take the lead from Black communities.”

I already have described the activities of CPA-San Francisco with regard to China and its communist government. It is important to note here, too, as I did in this essay, that CPA-Boston officially teamed up with the Chinese government.

So, to make this clear, organizations that either have done work in support of the People’s Republic of China or officially partnered with that communist nation also participated in mobilizing protests and riots that brought the United States to the brink of deep civil unrest.

The Chinese Progressive Associations also are knitted tightly with the Freedom Road Socialist Organization and other groups that Black Lives Matter founders have led.

Michelle Foy, director of finance at CPA-San Francisco, is also a member of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization and is on the board of the Bay Area social justice organization Just Cause/Justa Causa. Other leaders of CPA-San Francisco and CPA-Boston are “cadre” of the FRSO front group LeftRoots.

The Freedom Road Socialist Organization is one of the four largest communist groups in America, according to those who have studied the matter.

This includes James Simpson, a budget analyst and economist at the White House Office of Management and Budget from 1987 to 1993. In January 2016, Simpson wrote: “FRSO is a hereditary descendant of the New Communist Movement, which was inspired by Mao and the many communist revolutions throughout the world in the 1960s and 1970s.”

The Freedom Road Socialist Organization wasn’t  inspired only by Mao Zedong’s victory in 1949, but by the Cultural Revolution of 1966-67 (a period of great chaos and suffering in China that has eerie parallels to our current moment) and by the crushing of China’s student movement on Tiananmen Square in 1989, which FRSO calls a “counterrevolution.”

To this day, the Freedom Road Socialist Organization continues to support the government of Chinese President Xi Jinping, who also is secretary general of the Chinese Communist Party.

So to say that the Chinese Progressive Associations in the U.S. have abandoned their affinity for Marxism and Maoism is obviously absurd.

Does none of this interest Axios or others in the media?


Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, is a widely experienced international correspondent, commentator, and editor who has reported from Asia, Europe, and Latin America. He served in the George W. Bush administration, first at the Securities and Exchange Commission and then at the State Department, and is the author of the forthcoming book “The Plot to Change America: How Identity Politics is Dividing the Land of the Free.” Read his research. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

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

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

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

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

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


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