Twitter Bans Amy Mek for Telling Inconvenient Truths

/in , , , , , , /by

She wasn’t the first, and won’t be the last. My latest in FrontPage:

President Trump on May 28 issued an executive order designed to prevent online censorship of voices that dissent from the hard-Left’s agenda, and since then Twitter’s Jack Dorsey seems determined to defy it and force a showdown. He has more than once flagged Trump’s tweets as supposedly inciting violence or committing some other transgression, and he continues his steady campaign to silence voices of freedom, including foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. His latest victim is the popular counterjihad writer Amy Mek, who had over 266,000 Twitter followers when she was summarily deplatformed.

Amy Mek’s RAIR Foundation reported recently that “on April 16, 2020, the @Amymek Twitter account was suspended (and still remains suspended) as 12 of her tweets were flagged for violating Twitter’s rules against ‘hateful conduct.’” The problem is that in these overheated days, virtually anything that Leftists don’t like is classified as “hateful conduct.” The twelve tweets in question all contained accurate information, as Amy herself documented in trying (to no avail) to get Twitter to reverse its ban. The issue with them was clearly not that they were spreading falsehoods or inaccurate information, but that they were telling truths that the Leftist elites would prefer not be known.

For example, on March 31, Amy tweeted: “INDIA: Coronavirus Jihad! Over 8K Indian Muslims & foreign nationals from Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh etc. attended a Coronavirus infected Islamic event at a Mosque in Delhi. Almost a dozen are dead & many infected – Jihadists have put many countries at risk.”

It was horribly hateful to suggest that an Islamic event was a source of the spread of coronavirus, right? Wrong. The day before Amy published her supposedly hateful tweet, Quartz India published a story entitled: “A religious congregation in Delhi could be the coronavirus hotspot India was trying to escape.” The next day, Al Jazeera published an article called “India tracks attendees after Muslim event linked to virus cases.” On April 2, the BBC published a backgrounder: “Tablighi Jamaat: The group blamed for new Covid-19 outbreak in India.” Even that far-Left propaganda organ known as the Washington Post put up a story on this issue: “India confronts its first coronavirus ‘super-spreader’ — a Muslim missionary group with more than 400 members infected.” Then two weeks later, on April 16, the BBC ran a piece entitled: “India coronavirus: Tablighi Jamaat leader on manslaughter charge over Covid-19.”

Quartz India, Al Jazeera, the BBC and the Washington Post were not banned from Twitter. They no doubt didn’t even receive warnings. Only Amy Mek, a high-profile critic of jihad terror, ran afoul of Twitter’s Left-fascist censors, because only she had a prior reputation for being skeptical of the Left’s open-borders, internationalist, pro-jihad program.

Nor can her own critics argue that Amy got flagged for placing the virus-ridden Islamic event in the context of jihad, when the spread of the coronavirus from that event was clearly accidental. Amy compiled no fewer than 24 news articles about members of Tablighi Jamaat, the host of the event, deliberately attempting to spread the coronavirus among non-Muslims. So in what way was this not, as she put it, “coronavirus jihad”?

Amy provided similar documentation of all the claims that were made in her 11 other supposedly hateful tweets, but to no avail. Clicking on the links for the offensive tweets now takes you only to a note saying “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules” and giving a link to those rules, without bothering to explain exactly what rules were violated and in what manner.

And so it is clear. Amy Mek is not gone from Twitter for lying; Twitter has never flagged CNN or MSNBC, so clearly it has no problem with that. Amy Mek is gone from Twitter because she is the woman who knows too much – too much, that is, about the jihadist allies of the Leftists who are running amok in many of America’s major cities these days, too much about the insidious agenda of all too many of the adherents of the religion we must believe is peaceful on pain of charges of “racism” and “Islamophobia,” too much about the half-truths, distortions, and outright lies that pass for news and that the elites feed the masses today.

She was not the first, and will not be the last. I’ve said it before and will doubtless say it again: if this isn’t stopped and the speech of dissenters protected, America will cease to be a free society and slip rapidly into authoritarian and totalitarianism. And I’ll keep saying it until they silence me as well.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Amazon censors documentary on censorship that showed CAIR official admitting Sharia denies women equality of rights

Islamic Republic of Iran confiscating cars of women who don’t comply with hijab rules

“Turkish & Muslim Hackers” hijack Jerusalem Post website, fill it with Qur’an verses and jihad propaganda

Los Angeles: Muslim businessman arrested, faces murder charges in India in Mumbai jihad attacks

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

ANOTHER Facebook Content Moderator: ‘We Rig the Game for the Left’ ‘[Trump Supporters Are] A Bunch of Sh*tty F*cking Rednecks’

/in , , , , , , , /by

They’re doing it. All. Over. The Country!

In a second #ExposeFacebook video, featuring a new whistleblower discussing rampant political censorship by Facebook content moderators.

This video also exposes the biases held by these Facebook content moderators.

Click HERE to view the video.

  • Facebook Whistleblower: ‘I was seeing them interfering on a global level in elections’
  • Facebook Insider: Facebook Categorizes Trump Supporters With ‘Hate Organizations, Hitler, Nazis, MAGA’
  • Former Google HR Contractor, Now Senior Human Resources Business Partner at Facebook: ‘No One Has the White Man’s Back Anymore’
  • Facebook Content Moderator Israel Amparan: ‘Trump Supporters Are F*cking Crazy *ss *ssh*les’
  • Amparan: ‘[Trump Supporters Are] A Bunch of Sh*tty F*cking Rednecks’
  • Facebook Content Moderator Kassi Cimo: “Americans Should Take Iran’s $80 Million” Bounty on President Donald Trump “If It’s Gonna Save the Country, Why Not Do It?”

Arizona-based Facebook content moderator Ryan Hartwig reached out to Project Veritas to report on the outrageous behavior.

Hartwig is ANOTHER employee of Cognizant, the third-party company Facebook has contracted to conduct content moderation, who is speaking out. Earlier this week, Facebook Whistleblower Zach McElroy detailed a similar work environment across the country in Florida.

Insiders, like Ryan, have every incentive to keep quiet. Yet, instead of just going along to get along, Ryan and the other Insiders decided to be brave and do something about the wrongdoing in their workplace.

Ryan’s footage shows Steve Grimmett, a Team Lead at Facebook-Cognizant’s content review, stating Trump supporters are in the same speech category as Hitler, under the Facebook policy on Dangerous Individuals and Organizations.

Ryan believes he was targeted for being a white male. This cultural bias was documented in a previous Project Veritas undercover investigation, when Leslie Brown, Senior Human Resources Business Partner at Facebook spoke of the ease of firing a white male without repercussions or any due diligence requirements.

Journalist: I mean, they were able to fire him without having to worry about discrimination.

Leslie Brown, Human Resources Executive: Due diligence, right. Because he’s a white man. Yeah, white man. No problem. You can’t do it that easily if there are other issues.

Journalist: Oh, it’s easier when they’re-   

Leslie Brown, Human Resources Executive: White man. 

Journalist: Yeah, no protected class. 

Leslie Brown, Human Resources Executive: No one has the white man’s back anymore.

It is quite clear that social media giants think they can get away with anything. That is precisely why Project Veritas will not stop investigating Facebook and others—and those investigations are propelled by insiders like Ryan and the other Facebook insider Zach McElroy, who was featured in the first investigation into Facebook’s content moderation policies and practices.

Yours in truth,

James

P.S. WE NEED YOU! Insiders who are willing to Be Brave and Do Something.

You might have thought about it yourself.

There are many ways to reach me, but you have to take the first step: veritastips@protonmail.com or calling our tip line: (914) 653-3110 or contact us on Signal, Telegram or Wire using the handle: @veritastips.

Appeals Court Orders Judge To Dismiss Michael Flynn Case

/in , , , , , , /by

A federal appeals court on Wednesday ordered a federal judge to dismiss charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

The three-judge panel voted 2-1 against U.S. District Court Judge Emmet J. Sullivan, who sought to force the Justice Department to defend its decision to drop its case against Flynn.

The Justice Department filed a motion on May 7 seeking to dismiss a false statements charge against Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to the count on Dec. 1, 2017.

Flynn admitted in his plea agreement that he made false statements to the FBI during a White House interview on Jan. 24, 2017 regarding his conversations weeks earlier with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Flynn retracted his admission of guilt on Jan. 29, saying that he did not lie to the FBI and that he struck a plea deal in order to protect his son from criminal charges.

Attorney General William Barr directed Jeffrey Jensen, the U.S. attorney in St. Louis, to review Flynn’s case. Jensen discovered several pieces of evidence that Barr has said are exculpatory for Flynn.

The appellate court’s decision is a major victory for President Donald Trump, who has long decried the prosecution of his former national security adviser.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Gorsuch the Pharisee and Textualist Tomfoolery

/in , , , , , , , /by

The Supreme Court’s recent opinion that the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against “sex” discrimination offers protections for the “LGBT” groups has raised eyebrows and ire. But it’s not surprising: The decision’s author, Justice Neil Gorsuch, long ago made clear that he operates from false premises. One of these is what’s called “textualism,” which is not at all the same as originalism.

Conservatives also err, in my view, in claiming that Gorsuch has “redefined ‘sex.’” In reality, his ruling is instead based on a certain rationalization. Harvard law professor Noah Feldman, while essentially applauding Gorsuch’s lawyer-craft, explained it well.

“As applied to Title VII, the classic 1964 anti-discrimination law, the textualist idea is very simple,” he wrote June 15. “The law prohibits discrimination ‘on the basis of sex.’ To discriminate against somebody because of sexual orientation necessarily entails discriminating on the basis of sex. After all, if you’re discriminating against a man because he is attracted to men, you would not be discriminating against him if he were a woman who is attracted to men.”

“The same is true for transgender status,” he continued. “if [sic] you are discriminating against somebody for identifying with a gender that differs from their biological sex at birth, you are necessarily discriminating on the basis of sex — because you would not be discriminating against the person if they had the opposite biological sex.”

(Note: By this logic, bisexuals wouldn’t be protected because the behavior a person could be fired for — being attracted to both sexes — would be the same for both sexes. Although, some future judge will no doubt spin this, too.)

Now, realize that the above isn’t even necessarily dictated by textualism, the legal theory holding that a law’s application should be based on a plain reading of its text, as opposed to its framers’ original intent or some other guide. After all, there’s a difference between discriminating “on the basis of sex” and on the basis of sexual attraction or “gender identification.”

Consider: If an employer won’t hire anyone with same-sex sexual attraction, there is no “sex discrimination” because he will reject lesbians along with homosexuals (he only might be engaging in sex discrimination if he applied the “no same-sex sexual attraction” prohibition to only one sex).

Not only is the same true of so-called “transgenderism” — an employer could reject all people identifying as the sex they’re not — but there’s another factor: The business owner could simply be rejecting anyone who misrepresents himself.

Some may now respond that a man claiming womanhood really is a woman. But this proposition’s validity is irrelevant. The fact remains that the hypothetical employer is discriminating based on perceived misrepresentation, not sex. This is just as how an employer rejecting someone with “species dysphoria,” who claims to be a ferret, isn’t discriminating based on species, but possibly misrepresentation or concerns about the prospective hire’s mental stability. (Though Gorsuch would no doubt say that such discrimination is okay because the employer wouldn’t hire an actual ferret, either.)

Of course, some will still prefer Gorsuch’s argument. Yet this conflict and confusion merely illustrate how textualism doesn’t live up to its billing. Late Justice Antonin Scalia is known for pushing the theory (one of his great mistakes), which he did because in “his mind, textualism discouraged judges from using interpretation to make the law say something different from what the law actually said,” explained Feldman.

Yet while Scalia would no doubt disapprove of Gorsuch’s textual interpretation, this is yet another example of how there just is no simple formula for preventing judicial activism; a judge lacking intellectual honesty and philosophical soundness can always tendentiously spin a ruling.

This said, Gorsuch’s opinion might not have been rendered if he adhered to the only legitimate legal philosophy: originalism. As Justice Samuel Alito pointed out in his dissent, no one in 1964 even imagined that banning sex discrimination would include prohibitions against “homophobic” or “transphobic” discrimination; in fact, neither of these terms even existed, and “transgender” status hadn’t been conjured up yet.

By the way, Gorsuch essentially admitted as much, writing in his opinion that when “the express terms of a statute give us one answer and extratextual considerations suggest another, it’s no contest. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.”

Moreover, he also rather haughtily insisted that “the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands.”

Now, the contrast between textual tomfoolery and sound judicial theory can be illustrated with a simple analogy: 10-year-old twins Timmy and Oliver and five-year-old Malcolm are siblings. One day mom hears Malcolm crying wretchedly, investigates, and learns that the two older boys had been punching him.

After scolding the twins, the mother warns, “Now, stop hitting Malcolm! If you hit him again and I come in here and find him bawling, you’re gonna’ be in big trouble!”

Yet an hour later Malcolm is crying his eyes out, again. The mother learns that Oliver understood not to hurt his kid brother and that Timmy is the culprit. Instead of being contrite, however, Timmy says, “Mommy, you said not to hit Malcolm; you didn’t say anything about not choking him and twisting his arm…and that’s all I did!”

Then too-clever-by-half Timmy adds, “The limits of your imagination, mommy, are no reason to ignore your rule’s demands. Only what you said matters — and I’m entitled to the rule’s benefits!”

In the above analogy, Oliver is the originalist, understanding and accepting his mother’s command’s spirit. Timmy is the textualist, doing things not expressly forbidden by her rule’s language even while knowing it contravenes her intent.

The problem with this “philosophy” is that insofar as you don’t consider what was intended, you increase the chances of experiencing the unintended. Gorsuch’s approach is every bit as maddening as Timmy’s (because it’s the same), as it places an unrealistic burden on legislators. If their laws are to meet Gorsuch’s textualist standard for being applied as intended, the legislators must have godlike capabilities: They must see into the future so they can craft language covering every social innovation, bizarre fashion or collective insanity that may eventually, one day, manifest itself.

So it’s bad enough we have the “law of unintended consequences.” Now we have textualists turning the law of unintended consequences into a legal philosophy and legislating it from the bench.

I don’t know Gorsuch personally, but he wouldn’t be a very pleasant person to associate with if he were a Timmy the Textualist in everyday life. Would you thus conduct yourself, parsing every friend’s words to seek a loophole and essentially punishing him for not being a seer who speaks like Mr. Spock? You’d have few friends and deserve none.

Interestingly, Gorsuch and his fellow travelers aren’t the first textualists. Two-thousand years ago they were called Pharisees, a group of pseudo-intellectuals whom Jesus excoriated for following the letter of the law, but ignoring its spirit. It’s tragic that we’re back to that, but convenient for today’s Pharisees.

It is ironic, though, that in order to avoid abiding by the intent of laws from a half century ago, some today are resorting to a mistake from two millennia ago.

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

©All rights reserved.

A Farrakhan Supporter Led the LA Black Lives Matter Rally That Became a Pogrom

/in , , , , , /by

“It’s no coincidence that the riots here escalated in Fairfax, the icon of the Jewish community. I saw the Watts and the Rodney King riots. They never touched a synagogue or house of prayer. The graffiti showed blatant antisemitism. It’s Kristallnacht all over again,” Rabbi Shimon Raichik, a Chabad Rabbi in Los Angeles, wrote.

These scenes from what the media has falsely called peaceful protests and the Jewish community in the Fairfax neighborhood of Los Angeles has called the Shavuot Riots, after the biblical holiday during which the worst of the attacks on the community occurred, has fundamentally divided Los Angeles Jews.

Allyson Rowen Taylor, the former Associate Director of the American Jewish Congress in LA, and a co-founder of StandWithUs, passed on an account of hearing chants of, “F___ the police and kill the Jews.”

“The antisemitic chants are not being widely reported.  This is insane and very, very scary,” she noted.

After the conclusion of Shavuot and the Shabbat, members of the Jewish community went to pick up the pieces, battling looters and checking out the damage. Even synagogues that had been untouched began evacuating their Torah scrolls to places of safety, unprecedented outside of a major natural disaster.

Aryeh Rosenfeld, an Orthodox Jewish small business owner in the area, described to the Jerusalem Post hearing screams of, “F___ Jews” during the riots and looting as he tried to protect his store.

The looting not only devastated countless small businesses in the area, but graffiti, some of it explicitly anti-Semitic, was scrawled across at least 5 Orthodox Jewish synagogues and 3 religious schools.

“The attack on our community last night was vicious and criminal. Fairfax is the center of the oldest Jewish community in Los Angeles,” Councilman Paul Koretz said. “As we watched the fires and looting, what didn’t get covered were the anti-Semitic hate crimes and incidents.”

Melina Abdullah, the lead organizer of Black Lives Matter in LA and a professor of Pan-African Studies at Cal State, had been very clear about her motive for bringing her hateful campaign to the area.

“We’ve been very deliberate in saying that the violence and pain and hurt that’s experienced on a daily basis by black folks at the hands of a repressive system should also be visited upon, to a degree, to those who think that they can just retreat to white affluence,” the BLM-LA co-founder ranted.

Melina Abdullah has a hateful record of appearing at Farrakhan and Nation of Islam events and praising the antisemitic hate group and its leader. When Facebook decided to remove Farrakhan over his hateful rhetoric toward Jews, the Black Lives Matter LA co-founder came to his defense.

“Facebook and Instagram’s decision to ban The Honorable Minister Farrakhan along with known white-supremacists represents the ultimate in false equivalencies,” Abdullah complained. “As a Black community, we should be very wary when others attempt to silence our leaders. We should also think about how to organize beyond social media. I continue to appreciate the Minister’s fearless leadership and intense love for our people.”

Farrakhan has praised Hitler, compared Jews to termites, and had declared, “Those who call themselves ‘Jews,’ who are not really Jews, but are in fact Satan”, claimed, “Hitler was trying to destroy the international bankers controlling Europe”, and boasted, “there has not been a black leader in America locked in a struggle with the Jewish community, but Louis Farrakhan.”

And Abdullah has made no secret of sharing Farrakhan’s hostility toward Jews.

When CNN parted ways with Marc Lamont Hill after he once again endorsed the murder of Jews, Abdullah accused CNN of standing “with a Zionist Israel that murders and terrorizes the Palestinian people.” The BLM-LA leader had complained that the Women’s March included “Zionists”.

At the Women’s March, Thandiwe Abdullah, her daughter, now the co-founder of the BLM Youth Vanguard, had said that as a “black Muslim girl, it is very important to me that Black Lives Matter also values the lives of the Muslim women in Palestine” and accused Israel of “genocide”.

Thandiwe also spoke at the Fairfax Black Lives Matter protest, where she ranted, “I know you want to tear some s___ up… if you want to set some corporations on fire, you know what? I don’t care about Target burning. I don’t care that capitalism burns. I don’t care that white people in their f____ office buildings are upset.”

Not just Melina, but Black Lives Matter LA, had partnered with the Nation of Islam, as she had noted in the past, “Minister Farrakhan was calling on folks not to spend their dollars with the White corporations that keep us oppressed, and so we partnered with the Nation and helped to amplify that call.”

The media not only failed to report the scale of vandalism against Jewish synagogues and schools, but treated it as a mysterious aberration while failing to report that BLM LA’s lead organizer had a history of anti-Semitism, and that BLM-LA had allied with one of the most vicious anti-Semitic hate groups around.

It did not note her own statement that “violence and pain and hurt” should also be “visited” on the people living and working in an area which included one of LA’s major Jewish communities.

The media repeatedly described Abdullah as an activist against police violence while ignoring her affinity for a racist black supremacist hate group whose leader has described Jews as satanic and subhuman.

The level of duplicity and malpractice by the media which covered this up is its own hate crime.

Imagine if a rally by a supporter of the KKK had turned into attacks on black churches and stores. The media would not be pretending that the two events were somehow separate and unrelated.

The national media, the local media, and even the local Jewish media failed to cover these facts.

In the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter riots, Los Angeles Jews, like millions of other Americans, found themselves deeply divided between standing with the rioters or their victims. And that unfortunately included some in the Modern Orthodox Jewish community.

After the attacks on synagogues in Fairfax, the major Modern Orthodox synagogues in nearby Beverlywood, the more modern counterpart of the community, conducted Black Lives Matter sessions. Even though these same synagogues had to rush out their Torah scrolls to protect them from a racist mob, they did not voice any pain or outrage, or offer solidarity to their fellow vandalized synagogues.

Unlike the statements by Young Israel and the Agudah, the Orthodox Union failed to even address the attacks on synagogues. Local leaders urged Orthodox Jews, who were the victims of the racist violence, to atone for their imaginary crimes of racism and to take up the hateful slogan of Black Lives Matter.

On a street in Beverlywood, high school kids from one of the more liberal schools in the area chalked slogans denouncing “white silence” and the same police who keep the mansions of their parents safe.

In Fairfax, the more traditional Orthodox Jews, in black pants and white shirts, in dangling tzitzit and black hats, had cheered the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies as they rolled in after the pogrom, and Persian Jews handed out donuts and snacks to the members of the National Guard.

There is an unbridgeable moral gap between the Chabad synagogue that opened its doors to the National Guard and the Modern Orthodox synagogues that opened their doors to black nationalists. And that gap in the Orthodox community can be seen in those teens cheering the LAPD in Fairfax and those chalking slogans against it in Beverlywood. That gap will determine which community has a future.

A community that teaches its children that they are privileged racists and that standing up for Israel and for their own homes and synagogues has to take a back seat to black nationalism, has no future.

As Rabbi Pini Dunner, of the Young Israel of North Beverly Hills, wrote, “If supporting BLM means collective suicide, you can count me out.”

Those Jews who have had the courage to speak up have been told that now is not a Jewish moment. This is a time for empathizing with criminals, not for standing up for the victims of anti-Semitism.

Jay Sanderson, the president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, worried that focusing on the attacks on synagogues would detract from the important cause of the protests.

“This is not about us,” Los Angeles Jews have been told.

And yet the vandalism of synagogues and businesses, the cries of, “F___ Jews”, and the “F___ Israel” graffiti on a synagogue eloquently testify to the inescapable truth of anti-Semitism that it is about Jews.

And if Jews don’t stand up when their synagogues and stores are attacked, who will?

Paint can be cleaned off, glass can be swept away, and family savings and dreams can be put away, but there is a bigger price to be paid for failing to stand up to the rise of someone like Melina Abdullah. Bigoted mobs don’t go away when you fail to stand up to them. They gain power and legitimacy. And the price of standing up to them grows while the toll they take with each attack becomes unbearable.

The true moral cost of the Los Angeles Pogrom can be measured in the fact that racists were able to get away with attacking synagogues while intimidating some Jews into keeping quiet and supporting them.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Toppling of Grant Statue Shows the Vandals’ True Agenda

Palestinian school texts prepare children for “continuous and long-range confrontation against Israel”

US soldier plots “jihadi attack” on his own Army unit, gives info to al-Qaeda and Nazi group that idolizes Osama

“American Muslim Agenda: Muslims Together Building A Cohesive America”: Genuine Reform or Smokescreen?

RELATED VIDEO:

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

Joe Biden Is Either Incapable, Or Unwilling, To Stand Up To The Radical Leftist Mob

/in , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump is back on the road to energize and connect directly with the American people. The president is most at home when he is outside the swamp, sharing his aspirational vision for the future.

As America continues toward a safe and full reopening, it’s more important than ever before to contrast President Trump’s bold leadership throughout the pandemic and recovery, with Joe Biden’s weakness and blatant attempt to politicize the pandemic for political gain.

While President Trump hosted his first rally in months Saturday from Oklahoma, Biden has now gone 82 days without a press conference and the media should be asking — at what point will Biden subject himself to the scrutiny American voters deserve when considering who to elect as the next President of the United States?

Biden’s weakness and inability to lead the country is a threat to us all. He’s unfit to be president.

While President Trump and his administration focus on safely reopening the greatest economy in the world, Joe Biden continues to lob ineffective attacks from his basement while continuing to try and score cheap political points through divisive rhetoric and fear.

Defunding and dismantling the police is now a serious policy proposal being pushed by leading Democrats, such as Sen. Kamala Harris and Rep. Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, and Joe Biden has been slow to push back in any meaningful way.

For example, Biden remains silent on the professional anarchists and radical leftists currently occupying a major section of downtown Seattle.

Despite campaign press releases and incomplete statements, Joe Biden owns the radical left’s mission to defund and eliminate law enforcement as the standard bearer for the Democrat Party. By refusing to denounce the dangerous rhetoric of others within his party, Biden is leaving open the door for a future where law enforcement’s ability to protect and serve is severely diminished.

Contrast Biden’s weakness to President Trump’s strength. The president stands with America’s law enforcement communities while recognizing the need to constantly stay up on policies and procedures to keep communities safe and allow law enforcement to do their jobs.

And while Biden is hesitant to criticize objectively dangerous and destructive policies that will hurt the American people, especially the most vulnerable among us, he has no problem criticizing the men and women of law enforcement if he thinks it’ll serve his political ambitions.

In Seattle, police are unable to respond to emergencies, and had to shut down a precinct, which is tripling response times and leading to unresolved criminal behavior.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden remains silent even as Seattle’s Police Chief reports how conditions have quickly deteriorated in what the radical left is calling the “Autonomous Zone.”

“Rapes, robberies and all sorts of violent acts have been occurring in the area and we’re not able to get to them,” Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best recently said.

Joe Biden’s refusal to acknowledge anti-American behavior by radical-left wing provocateurs and professional anarchists behind the violence is telling — he is incapable of leading from the front, choosing instead to capitulate to the radical left in order to advance his own political ambitions.

While President Trump gears up for a full travel schedule to speak directly to the American people, Joe Biden sticks mostly to the basement of his home.

The contrast between President Trump’s pro-growth policies that protect economic opportunity for all Americans, and Joe Biden’s slow-growth, job-killing policies that decimated once great American cities and hurt working families could not be clearer.

President Trump ushered in a new era of innovation, economic opportunity, and economic growth that supercharged the American economy before it was artificially shut down by a global pandemic.

Biden, who has championed policies that shuttered small businesses and cost millions of Americans their jobs, sees the White House as just the next step in his half-century political career.

COLUMN BY

MERCEDES V. SCHLAPP

Mercedes Schlapp Co-Founder, Cove Strategies and is Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications of Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. On Twitter, @mercedesschlapp.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘These Were Peaceful Shootings’: Jesse Watters Mocks Seattle Mayor For Underplaying Danger Of CHAZ

Seattle To End ‘CHOP,’ Mayor Says It’s Against ‘Justice and Equity’

Trump Claims ‘Anyone Who Vandalizes’ Monuments On Federal Property Will Be Arrested And Face 10 Years In Jail

Twitter Flags Trump For Warning Activists Not To Build An Autonomous Zone In DC

RELATED VIDEO:

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

Seattle, Columbus, and Historical Fictions

/in , , , , /by

Chief Seattle, who gave his name to the currently troubled city in the State of Washington, was pure Native American (father Suquamish, mother Duwamish). A mighty warrior, he essentially eliminated the rival Chimakum tribe in a battle on what is now the Quimper Peninsula. Like other native chiefs, he owned slaves. And he was a convert, probably in his fifties, to Roman Catholicism.

I learned about him more than 30 years ago, when I was researching my very first book, 1492 and All That, as controversy was raging about the 500th anniversary of Columbus’ first voyage to the New World. Seattle’s story shows how complex, to say the least, are our individual lives – and how false and disrespectful of those lives it is to use past historical figures in what are manufactured, simple-minded, ideological morality plays.

Native Americans are not supposed to have been violent, like “white men.” Or at least not against other Native Americans, because all those different peoples must have been One Harmonious Anti-White Thing, no?

And his tribe, as “people of color” (which for the moment seems to include Hispanic descendants of Spanish conquistadores), couldn’t have owned slaves or perpetrated “genocide” against another tribe.

And how could such a man, as a successful and mature adult, choose to become, of all things, a Catholic?

Yet he was hardly unique in these and many other ways. And, properly understood, is still a great and noteworthy figure whose name (and statue) should remain, undisturbed, in Seattle.

We’re all fallen creatures, in need of forgiveness and mercy, not least those who don’t know it. Shakespeare’s Hamlet had the old Christian wisdom and human decency exactly right: “Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping?”

I say this not out of any desire to deny Seattle’s – or anyone’s – sins, but to point out that he was more than those faults, even than the slavery. I said as much during a panel discussion on Columbus in the 1990s and was – still am – a bit shocked that one participant responded, “Well, slavery worked for them,” a black historian – who knew that the Indian cultures were not to be criticized.

Christopher Columbus is getting a bad rap, again, at this moment. And truth be told, he too indulged in a bit of the “noble savage” myth. In his report about his first voyage, he told Queen Isabella of the Tainos he encountered in the Caribbean: “They are very gentle and without knowledge of what is evil; nor do they murder or steal. . . .They love their neighbors as themselves, and they have the sweetest talk in the world, and are gentle and always laughing.”

Later, when the difficulty of two such different cultures meeting and mingling became clear, and his men were clashing with Native Americans, he sang a different tune: “I should be judged as a captain who went from Spain to the Indies to conquer a people numerous and warlike, whose manners and religion are very different from ours, who live in sierras and mountains, without fixed settlements.”

It’s curious that those who want to use such clashes to blame Columbus for every human evil that followed 1492 would never dream of giving him credit for all the marvelous things that have happened in the Americas since he joined two very different worlds previously unknown to one another.

We might even want to extend some credit to the overall legacies of St. Louis, Junipero Serra, Washington, Jefferson, Churchill, and many other fellow human beings currently being threatened with banishment from society.

Decent people do not judge others now living by groups – black, white, female, Jewish, Asian, etc. And it’s only right to try getting individual historical figures, even early Europeans who came to the Americas, in clear focus.

The great Dominican “defender of the Indians,” Bartolomé de las Casas knew Columbus personally and spoke of his “sweetness and benignity.” Cortez could be brutal, but ended in a monastery doing penance for his sins. Pizzaro was a psychopath.

Imagine, white people, even back then, differed from one another.

Columbus was something other than a “white” conqueror; despite the unprecedented difficulties he faced in the new cultures he encountered, there were remarkably few instances of his mistreating anyone and some touching moments of understanding. He was usually unsure of himself, as we ourselves often are. Las Casas said of him, “Truly. I would not dare blame the admiral’s intentions for I knew him well and I knew his intentions were good.”

In a way, this is no great surprise because Columbus was a serious, almost obsessive, Christian. Indeed, there’s considerable evidence that he had some sort of revelation about making his first voyage, even though he probably knew through his scientific studies that “the Indies” were farther than he let on. He finished his days dressed as an Observatine Franciscan.

These and similar facts are well known to historians. But you’d never know it from current public discussions.

I gave dozens of lectures at universities after my book on Columbus appeared  – a memorable one in a packed room at Princeton on October 12, 1992 organized by our friend Fr. John McCloskey, who was chaplain there at the time. I heard, quietly but multiple times, from history professors at whichever institution I happened to be visiting: We’re glad you said all that. We can’t.

My modest 1492 and All That was the only book of mine ever to be reviewed in the prestigious New York Review of Books. Oxford historian J.H. Elliott, who did the review, remarked at the time that it was regrettable that such a book even had to be written. But it did.

And still does. I’ve just agreed with Sophia Institute Press to do an updated and expanded second edition, which will appear on Columbus Day this year.

It’s almost forty years since the first edition, and we’ve not only learned nothing, we’ve forgotten what little we once knew and thrown away much of the human decency we still possessed. And there are many furiously busy today trying to make sure we never tell the whole truth. But when you cut the roots, it’s just a matter of time before the whole thing comes crashing down.

COLUMN BY

Robert Royal

Dr. Robert Royal is editor-in-chief of The Catholic Thing, and president of the Faith & Reason Institute in Washington, D.C. His most recent book is A Deeper Vision: The Catholic Intellectual Tradition in the Twentieth Century, published by Ignatius Press. The God That Did Not Fail: How Religion Built and Sustains the West, is now available in paperback from Encounter Books.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2020 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.

VIDEO: Facebook Employee, ‘If Someone is Wearing a MAGA Hat, I Am Going to Delete Them for Terrorism’

/in , , , , , , /by

Project Veritas today released one of our most critical undercover investigation reports—this time our whistleblowers used hidden cameras to document rampant censorship of Facebook posts.

  • Facebook Whistleblower Zach McElroy: I Will Testify Before Congress About the Facebook Bias I Witnessed Against Trump Supporters, Conservative Causes
  • McElroy: Seventy-five to 80 Percent of Posts selected by Facebook’s Algorithm for Content Moderator Review Support President Donald Trump, Republicans and Conservative Causes
  • Facebook Content Moderator on Targeting Trump Supporters: “If Someone is Wearing a MAGA Hat, I Am Going to Delete Them for Terrorism”
  • Facebook Content Review Lead: “It’s a Very Progressive Company, Who’s Very Anti-MAGA”
  • Project Veritas CEO James O’Keefe: Videos and Screenshots by Facebook Whistleblowers Contradict Mark Zuckerberg’s Capitol Hill testimony
  • Facebook’s Human-Directed Restriction of Free Speech Raises Questions Regarding Company’s Protections under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act

I want you to see for yourself in this video based our Facebook investigation:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before Congress that Facebook is a politically neutral platform and that he is working to root out any of his employees, who are restricting speech on Facebook based on Silicon Valley’s overwhelmingly biased culture.

However, Zach McElroy’s story raises serious doubts about Zuckerberg’s Capitol Hill testimony, that gave lawmakers the impression that his company only takes down content that could cause harm, such as relating to terrorism or hate speech, but never for politics.

Facebook Could Lose Its ‘Section 230’ Immunity

Facebook and other social media platforms are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, because they claim that unlike traditional publishers that do not actively edit content—they say they are like the phone company just stringing wires on poles.

Facebook’s $400 billion market capitalization is tied to this protection and our report shows for the first time anywhere Facebook’s robust and human-directed process for restricting the marketplace of ideas, which calls into question their CDA 230 immunity.

Zuckerberg’s Capitol Hill Testimony at Odds with Project Veritas Insider’s Account

Zuckerberg told lawmakers, who repeatedly asked him to explain how conservatives were singled out for sanction, that each of their specific examples, such as shutting down the Facebook page of vloggers Diamond and Silk, were mistakes.

At a hearing of the combined Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees on April 10, 2018, Sen. Ted Cruz (R.-Texas) brought this up with Zuckerberg:

Cruz: Gizmodo reported that Facebook had purposely and routinely suppressed conservative stories from trending news, including stories about CPAC, including stories about Mitt Romney, including stories about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal, including stories about Glenn Beck.

In addition to that, Facebook has initially shut down the Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day page, has blocked a post of a Fox News reporter, has blocked over two dozen Catholic pages, and most recently blocked Trump supporters Diamond and Silk’s page, with 1.2 million Facebook followers, after determining their content and brand were, quote, “unsafe to the community.” 

To a great many Americans that appears to be a pervasive pattern of political bias. Do you agree with that assessment? 

Zuckerberg: First, I understand where that concern is coming from, because Facebook in the tech industry are located in Silicon Valley, which is an extremely left-leaning place, and I — this is actually a concern that I have and that I try to root out in the company, is making sure that we do not have any bias in the work that we do, and I think it is a fair concern that people would at least wonder about.

The next day, Zuckerberg testified in front of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and Rep. Stephen J. Scalise (R.-La.), the GOP whip, asked the social media mogul if his company’s artificial intelligence program was unfair to conservatives.

Scalise: You can determine whether you want to write an algorithm to sort data, to compartmentalize data, but you can also put a bias in if that’s the directive. Was there a directive to put a bias in? And first, are you aware of this bias that many people have looked at and analyzed and seen?

Zuckerberg: There is absolutely no directive in any of the changes that we make to have a bias in anything that we do. To the contrary, our goal is to be a platform for all ideas.

Later, in the same hearing, Rep. Timothy L. Walberg (R.-Mich.) asked Zuckerberg if he could assure the congressman that Facebook did not restrict ads based on political views. Under oath, Zuckerberg gave that assurance.

Walberg: Can you assure me that ads and content are not being denied based on particular views?

Zuckerberg: Congressman, yes, politically. Although, I think what you — when I hear that, what I hear is, kind of, normal political speech. We certainly are not going to allow ads for terrorist content, for example, so we would be banning those views. But I think that that is something that we would all expect.

Help Project Veritas continue its investigations

There was a time when investigative reporters practiced the craft locally and nationally for print and broadcast outlets exposing corruption and immoral conduct.

Today, Project Veritas stands alone—and some of the very outlets that used to do their own undercover reporting are the ones trying to knock us down.

This investigation was not easy, nor cheap, but it is exactly the journalism we have the capacity to accomplish because of your support. Thank you for your support and I encourage you to share this video and other Project Veritas posts on social media.

Yours in truth,

James

P.S. I need your help finding Insiders who would be willing to Be Brave and Do Something. You might have thought about it yourself. There are many ways to reach me, but you have to take the first step: veritastips@protonmail.com or calling our tip line: (914) 653-3110 or reaching me on Signal, Telegram or Wire using the handle: @veritastips.

PODCAST: Spread Conservative Values . . . Please Share!

/in , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

GEORGE LANDRITH

George Landrith, President and CEO of Frontiers of Freedom – a public policy think tank devoted to promoting a strong national defense, free markets, individual liberty, and constitutionally limited government. In 1994 and 1996, Landrith was the Republican candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia’s Fifth Congressional District. His work has been printed across the nation, including: Washington Times, Chicago Tribune, LA Daily News, National Review, Sacramento Bee, Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, Providence Journal, Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, Townhall, and Human Events. George Landrith is also a co-host here on the Conservative Commandos Radio Show.

DR. NASIR SHAIKH

Dr. Nasir Shaikh is a Reagan Conservative, is a second generation American Muslim. Dr. Shaikh’s passion for politics were shaped by President Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, his silent “Conservative Mentors”. Dr. Shaikh attended Westminster College and graduated from Ross School of Medicine. Dr. Shaikh is a staunch President Trump supporter since the very first day and was one of the very few political pundits who correctly predicted and guaranteed a huge Trump electoral college victory on his Facebook video blog on pre-election night. Dr. Shaikh is in his 3rd year of co-hosting the Conservative Commandos Radio Show. His signature sign-off is “When you’re Right your Right, and when you’re Left your Wrong”!!

Rioters Clash With DC Police, Try To Tear Down Andrew Jackson Monument, Set Up ‘Black House Autonomous Zone’

/in , , , , , , /by

Rioters gathered Monday in Lafayette Square before the White House where they clashed with police as they attempted to tear down a monument to former U.S. President Andrew Jackson and set up a “Black House Autonomous Zone.”

Video footage from on the ground Daily Caller reporters shows rioters attempting to pull down the monument to Jackson early on in the evening. The protesters chanted, “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Andrew Jackson’s got to go,” Fox News reported. The rioters were unsuccessful in tearing down the monument before police arrived on the scene.

WATCH:

As the rioters were forced to move further away from the statue, they began to get more angry and indignant and began to fight the police, reporters on the ground said.

Subsequent footage shows the rioters clashing with police, who used a chemical irritant believed to be pepper spray, their shields, and a bicycle wall to push the rioters back away from the monument, WUSA9 reports.

Several reporters, including Daily Caller video editor Richie McGinniss, were hit by the pepper spray.

WATCH:

The rioters then proceeded to vandalize St. John’s church, which has previously been vandalized in riots earlier during the summer. Rioters spray painted “BHAZ” on the historic church, which stands for “Black House Autonomous Zone.”

Footage shows that some rioters lit a fire on the ground, which others quickly put out, sparking arguments.

“Defund the Police,” a rioter shouts into a megaphone at a group of police officers, many of whom are kneeling. “Fuck all y’all.”

WATCH:

COLUMN BY

MARY MARGARET OLOHAN

Social issues reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Daily Caller Reporters Go Inside Seattle’s CHAZ

‘I Was Just Yelling … Come And Help Me’: Reporter Details Alleged Assault While Filming Inside ‘CHAZ

Historic St. John’s Church Set Ablaze In DC As Another Night Of Riots Engulfs Country

Victim Of Rioting Says She Is Being Threatened For Helping Police Find People Who Destroyed Her Store

Police Arrest 2 St. Louis Women After Protesters Paint ‘Black Lives Matter’ On The Street

Communist Emblem Spray Painted On North Carolina WWII Memorial

RELATED VIDEO: Anni Cyrus Video – The Riots in the Context of My Own Enslavement.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Boston “Man” Nabbed for Stealing Millions from the Paycheck Protection Program

/in , , , , , , /by

Reader Tom sent me a story from Sundance at the Conservative Treehouse about how Elijah Majak Buoi has been busy amassing millions of dollars meant to help small businesses survive the Chinese virus crisis.

The Conservative Treehouse story is here.  And the press release from the US Justice Department is here.

There is lots of coverage of the “man” who I am guessing is a ‘new American’ from Africa (Sudan maybe?), but I was searching for a story that might have a photo and found this one at Universal Hub:

Area man charged with $2 million in coronavirus loan fraud

Federal prosecutors today charged a Winchester man with wire fraud for his four applications for federal loans aimed at helping small businesses continue to make payroll despite losses related to Covid-19, alleging he made up employee numbers and that the few employees he does have are all based in India.

According to a federal complaint unsealed today, Elijah Majak Buoi of Winchester was rejected for three of his applications for Paycheck Protection Program loans – which can be converted to grants – but was granted $2 million on the fourth, despite giving different employee and payroll numbers on the applications.

In addition to having Buoi arrested today, the US Attorney’s office is asking a judge to freeze his bank accounts so he cannot transfer the money he received out of the country. At his arraignment, a federal magistrate judge in Worcester set cash bail of $15,000.

[….]

The affidavit*** states that Buoi first filed a PPP application with Bank of America in April for $7.5 million, based on the 353 employees he said he had, all allegedly in Massachusetts. After the bank rejected his request, he tried again with three other lenders, asking each for $2 million, with his employee count on applications ranging from 18 to 96 employees.

The first two lenders also rejected his requests, but the final one, to which he claimed he had 96 US employees, approved his request and he had $2 million deposited in his Bank of America checking account earlier this month.

According to the affidavit, Buoi’s LinkedIn page says he has just five employees, and all are in India, making them ineligible for PPP coverage.

[….]

According to the affidavit, Buoi transferred some $1.2 million of the PPP payment from one Bank of America account to another and has withdrawn $27,000 of it – $20,000 in a wire transfer to India.

More here.

The US government was able to get most of our money back.

***Affidavit is attached to the article.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nebraska: Chinese Teaching Assistant Arrested in Sexual Assault Case

Trump Victory: CHOP Being Dismantled

Trump Triggers Leftists Again

RELATED VIDEO:

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

PODCAST: Who is Really Dividing the Country?

/in , , , , , /by

Whenever you ask a member of the Left, why they hate President Trump, the Pavlovian response is normally, “Because he is dividing the country,” that he is “polarizing,” even labeling him the “Divider-in-Chief,” thereby painting him as a racist, a threat to the nation, and to the Constitution. This notion has been repeated so many times, it is now nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction. If you challenge these people to explain their rationale, the most likely response is, “He acts unpresidential.” The news media gladly endorses this premise and promotes its usage, but the question remains, is he really dividing the country? I simply do not see it.

I will not deny the president appeals more to the right, than the left, but it takes two to Tango, and it could be argued the division of the country widened more under President Obama, who appealed more to the Left and alienated conservatives. So much so, he refused to work with the Republican-led Congress at the time. We could track it back further to President Nixon’s Watergate investigation, or President Clinton’s impeachment, or the fundamental differences of President Carter vs. President Reagan, or the up-and-down differences between the Clinton/Bush/Obama administrations. No, the division in this country started well before President Trump, yet he is being blamed exclusively for it.

The Left and the news media encourage this notion of presidential divider. Just about every Democrat and media pundit have labeled him a, “Racist, Xenophobe, Homophobe, anti-feminist, Fascist, Nazi, etc.,” in the hopes these labels will somehow stick in the minds of voters. To a certain extent, they have, but mostly to the Left, and not the Right who simply does not buy it. Actually, use of these labels heightens anger issues on the Left, and the chasm between Left and Right grows larger.

President Trump is hardly any of these labels. For example, years ago his favor was frequently courted by black politicians who wanted donations for their political campaigns, which he gave, and his philanthropy for black related charities and projects, and again he gladly helped out. From this, he was awarded commendations from black organizations, such as the Muhammad Ali Entrepreneur Award (2007). However, since declaring his candidacy for President in 2015, the “racist” label somehow surfaced. The President has kidded he would still be popular with Democrat blacks today had he not decided to run for office.

If President Trump is guilty of anything, it is for running as an outsider against the Washington establishment, or as he refers to it as “The Swamp.” This includes politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, the press, et al, who have been grazing peacefully on the taxpayer for many years. Because he challenges the corporate culture of the nation’s capitol, it is no small wonder he faces stiff resistance from everyone, but President Trump is undeterred and continues to push forward to straighten out Washington.

The news media particularly dislikes this president as he resists their control. He is frequently misquoted and maligned by the press. So much so, he found it necessary to do an end-run around the media to get his message to the masses, using social media, such as Twitter. This exacerbated the relationship between the media and the president, but Mr. Trump had no alternative. While some people are offended by the tone of the President’s Tweets, his supporters find it refreshing as they applaud him for standing up to the tyrannical press.

Then we have the matter of far-left groups who are much more divisive than the President. Groups like “Black Lives Matter,” can easily be accused of being racist as they do not embrace all races and chafe at the mention of “All Lives Matter.” Other organizations, such as Antifa, are dedicated to the overthrow of the United States and have adopted destructive tactics. Unlike these organizations, the President does not advocate burning, looting, and attacking people, yet he is the one accused of dividing the nation.

Interestingly, I find these young zealots possess no sense of American history or Civics (not to mention World History). They are uneducated and unsophisticated in such topics. Consequently, their naiveté makes it easy to manipulate them and use their energy for destructive purposes, such as the removal or defacing of historical markers. Because of their limited education, they are also quick to malign Capitalism and embrace Socialism.

Nothing seems to set the Left off better than a “Make America Great Again” hat. People who wear MAGA hats in support of their president are automatically accused of being racist by the Left. What we are witnessing is their attempt to control the dialog and dictate morality through political correctness. They are so boisterous about this, you are dismissed out of hand and not allowed to refute their argument. Clearly these are tactics of harassment and a genuine threat to freedom of speech. From the Left’s perspective, their sense of morality is the only thing that matters, and everyone else’s interpretation is evil and should be snuffed out. This too divides the country further.

Again, if the president is guilty of anything, it is that of being an outsider determined to bring pragmatic solutions to Washington DC, and the people there do not like it, as such, they zealously undermine him every step of the way. If this includes misleading the public, so be it. Make no mistake, we are embroiled in a cultural revolution, and when one person pushes, the whole organization pushes back.

No, President Trump is not a “Divider-in-Chief,” that is a complete misnomer. He is the one person standing up for the American taxpayer and wants to return some sanity to our government after several years of erosion. The Washington establishment wants to see him gone and will go to any lengths to take him down. They have tried to assassinate his character through the Russia investigation, which led to a pseudo impeachment trial; accused him of incompetence during the Coronavirus panic, and now assail his leadership during this time of racial tension and police conduct. However, we are now less than five months away from our presidential elections. If you think it has been a nasty fight thus far, you haven’t seen anything yet, as new charges and allegations will be leveled against the President from the Left. It will get worse before it gets better, but the president will stand his ground and fight back with the help of his supporters.

It’s going to be a long, hot summer and the demonstrators will not go away anytime soon as they hold the spotlight of the press. No, it is not President Trump who is trying to divide the country, it is the Left who is Hell-bent on his destruction, and the USA as we have known it.

One last note, the concept of “acting unpresidential” keeps buzzing through my head. Do we elect people to “act” or to take charge, make the tough decisions and get things done? I’ll take results over facade anytime, but I guess this is simply too divisive.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also, I have a NEW book, “Before You Vote: Know How Your Government Works”, What American youth should know about government, available in Printed, PDF and eBook form. This is the perfect gift for youth!

RELATED VIDEO:

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

VIDEO: Biden’s gaffes suggest former VP ‘is losing his memory and is getting senile’

/in , , , , , /by

In the below September, 2019 video Brit Hume, who has covered Joe Biden’s political career since his first days in the Senate, stated that Biden’s recent gaffes are “of a different character” rather than mere slips of the tongue.

In a June 19, 2020 Zogby Analytics poll stated 55 percent of likely voters think “it was more likely that Vice President Biden is in the early stages of dementia, while 45 percent think it was less likely.”

In this video titled “Fortitude” the Trump campaign compiles gaffes by Joe Biden:

In a March 12, 2020 video Sky News host Rita Panahi says “no matter how hard the Democrats and their allies in the media try, Biden’s cognitive issues can no longer be ignored”.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Biden Campaign Agrees to Three Debates With Trump

Biden says he was VP at time of Parkland Shooting in latest campaign gaffe

The Zogby Poll®: A majority of voters believe Biden is in the early stages of dementia; 60% of younger voters think so; Swing voters less likely to think Biden has dementia

PODCAST: President Trump Responds to Lawmakers’ Negligence in Seattle

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

REAGAN MCCARTHY

Reagan McCarthy is the Web Editor at Townhall.com and an alumna of The Pennsylvania State University where she studied Political Science and Broadcast Journalism. While at Penn State Reagan served as the President of the Penn State College Republicans and the Executive Director for the Pennsylvania Federation of College Republicans.

TOPIC: President Trump Responds to Lawmakers’ Negligence in Seattle

JEROME R. CORSI

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

TOPIC: The Plan to Remove Donald Trump from the Presidency

DARIA NOVAK

Daria Novak is the President of the Institute for American Politics & Center for Great Power Studies. Foreign Policy Advisor to Israelite Samaritans. Weekly columnist on foreign/defense policy for American Analysis of News and Media. Daria is the co-host of the Vernuccio/Novak Report, nationally both on broadcast radio and the web at amfm247.com. Daria also co-hosts of the “The American Political Zone,” Broadcast on AUN-TV and cable in eastern Connecticut.

TOPIC: Responding to China

©All rights reserved.

MISSOURI: Muslim who once threatened to behead a rival with ‘the sword of Islam’ launches petition to rename city of St. Louis

/in , , , , /by

Umar Lee is a convert to Islam from St. Louis, was once enough of an Islamic supremacist to write to a rival: “i could cut your neck with the sword of islam and watch you squeal like a bitch like daniel pearl.” In an email exchange with me, he endorsed the death penalty for apostasy. He is also an unstable personality who briefly returned to Christianity in 2013, only to become a Muslim again abruptly and under circumstances that were never explained. He has also been on record for years as a hater of America, writing back in 2009 that it was not permissible for Muslims to join an infidel army.

Now he is enjoying another moment in the spotlight due to the Leftist/jihadist alliance. Given the aggression and fanaticism of the Leftists who are tearing down statues these days, and the ignorant cowards on the other side who neither know their own history or are inclined to defend it, he may well get his wish. Make no mistake: this call to rename St. Louis is not based on Louis IX’s antisemitism. As far as Umar Lee and his cohorts are concerned, that is likely a mark in his favor. The problem with Louis IX is that he was a Christian, and not any ordinary Christian, but a Crusade leader. That will not do in our woke new world. Watch for the unveiling of Saladin, Missouri.

“Petition calls for St. Louis to be renamed, removal of statue on Art Hill,” by Sam Masterson, KMOX, June 19, 2020:

ST. LOUIS (KMOX) – A petition has been made with hopes of changing the city’s name in St. Louis and taking down a statue of its namesake, Saint Louis IX in Forest Park. The creators say the city’s name is “outright disrespect” to Jewish and Muslim residents and they’re asking for support.

The petition on Change.org was started this week, after the statue of Christopher Columbus in Tower Grove Park was taken away. Local writer Umar Lee is a co-signer of the petition.

“For those unfamiliar with King Louis IX he was a rabid anti-semite who spearheaded many persecutions against the Jewish people. Centuries later Nazi Germany gained inspiration and ideas from Louis IX as they embarked on a campaign of murderous genocide against the Jewish people. Louis IX was also vehemently Islamophobic and led a murderous crusade against Muslims which ultimately cost him his life,” the petition states.

The statue of Louis IX, which now sits on top of Art Hill in front of the St. Louis Art Museum, was unveiled in 1906. It served as the symbol of St. Louis until the Gateway Arch was completed in 1965.

Louis IX is the only King of France to be canonized in the Catholic Church. He became king when he was 12-years-old and is credited with changing the judicial process in France, with trials no longer being settled by combat, but instead by evidence and Roman law.

He was also known as a devoted Catholic, who ordered the burning of some 12,000 manuscript copies of the Talmud and other Jewish books.

“I ask all people of good faith committed to the modern values of equity and coexistence to sign this petition to rename the City of St. Louis to something more suitable and indicative of our values,” the petition states….

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Cousin of migrant from Libya who stabbed three people to death says he converted to Christianity

Germany: Muslim migrants board tram, spit on woman, stab another passenger in neck, arms and shoulder

Austria: “In addition to ‘Black Lives Matter’ we should start a new campaign with the motto ‘Muslim rights matter’”

Canada: Muslim doctor gets no penalty for sex assault of 16-year-old, was ‘struggling to express’ gay identity

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