Democrats Drowning in Their Own Twisted Rhetoric

/in , , , , , /by

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.” – Ayn Rand

The Democratic Party, and the Deep State, have decided to go all in on impeaching President Donald J. Trump. I get it. They lost the 2016 election, which they should have won, and just can’t seem to get over it. They won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College.

What is most interesting is that the Democrats are drowning in their own twisted rhetoric.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised that she would work with President Trump. That, for the most part, was a lie. What Speaker Pelosi found, after the 2018 midterm election, is that the party had taken a sharp turn toward Communism (i.e. Democratic Socialism). The Democratic Party also found that their Progressive Caucus held sway over its public policy platform.

Since the 2018 midterm election the Democrats in the House, Senate and their political action committees have made it their mission to:

  1. Impeach President Trump.
  2. Eliminate the Electoral College.
  3. Reinstate the Iran Nuclear Deal.
  4. Rejoin the Paris Climate Accord.
  5. Give the United Nations power over every American citizen (much like the EU has power over its member country’s citizens).
  6. Cut military spending.
  7. Keep America in endless wars in the Middle East.
  8. Support anti-Semitism.
  9. End support of the state of Israel.
  10. Forgive all student loan debt.
  11. Give everyone free public housing.
  12. Guarantee everyone a federal job.
  13. Implement the Green New Deal.
  14. Raise the minimum wage.
  15. Pack the Supreme Court.
  16. Give social benefits to illegal aliens.
  17. Give expanded “civil rights” to homosexuals.
  18. Provide medicare for all.
  19. Raise taxes on the rich.
  20. Raise taxes on the working class.
  21. Abort a child after birth.
  22. Weaken the 2nd Amendment.
  23. Silence any and all opposition.
  24. De-funding ICE.
  25. Open our Southern border.
  26. Resist everything the Trump administration does.

I have been warning about each of these issues for over a decade. I have seen them become the political platform of the neo-Marist Democratic Party.

As Ayn Rand warned:

“The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow.”

Hilary Clinton lost in 2016 because Americans were looking for a new way forward. They saw that new way in the Republican candidate for president and voted for Donald J. Trump.

The Democrats and Democratic Party have since 2016 embraced numerous extreme uncontested absurdities.

It they ever gain enough power they will implement them and work tirelessly to codify them into law.

This is why 2020 and beyond are critical to maintaining our Constitutional Republican form of government. This is why me must continue to severely limit the powers of Washington, D.C.

This is why America must do what the people in the United Kingdom did, reject socialism in all of its forms.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump taunts Dems at Michigan rally: ‘Doesn’t really feel like we’re being impeached’

As House votes to impeach Trump, McConnell pushes 13 judge nominations through Senate

Tulsi Gabbard Explains Why She Didn’t Vote for Impeachment

EXTORTION: Nancy Pelosi Threatens to Withhold Impeachment Articles from Senate Republicans

3 Democrats Defect as House Votes to Impeach Trump

/in , , , , , , , /by

The Democrat-controlled House voted Wednesday night to approve two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump after about 10 hours of debate.

In two historic votes largely along party lines, the House charged Trump with abusing his power by a vote of 229 to 197 and obstructing Congress by a vote of 228 to 198.

Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, elected as a Republican but recently turned independent, voted for both articles of impeachment.

Two Democrats, Reps. Collin Peterson of Minnesota and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, voted “no” on both articles of impeachment. Van Drew indicated over the weekend that he plans to become a Republican.

The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>

A third Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, voted “no” on the charge of obstructing Congress.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, voted “present” on both charges.

“Taken together, the two articles charge that President Trump placed his private, political interest above our national security, above our elections, and above our system of checks and balances,” Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said.

The outcome makes Trump the third president in American history to be impeached by the House of Representatives. President Andrew Johnson was the first in 1868 and President Bill Clinton became the second on Dec. 19, 1998, almost exactly 21 years ago.

Trump was speaking at a rally in Battle Creek, Michigan, as the vote on the first article of impeachment occurred, and cable news networks used a split screen to show both the president and the unfolding votes.

The rally was held in Amash’s congressional district.

“It doesn’t really feel like we’re being impeached,” Trump told the cheering crowd. “The country is doing better than ever before, [and] we did nothing wrong.”

The floor debate began after 9 a.m. and, as day turned into evening, House members from each side howled or applauded, depending on who was speaking. The votes concluded around 8:45 p.m.

Democrats based the charge of abuse of power on Trump’s July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in which they allege Trump pressured Ukraine’s new leader to open an investigation into a political rival at a time when Trump was withholding nearly $400 million in congressionally approved military aid. Trump released the aid in September.

According to an official White House transcript, Trump expressed concern that Ukraine, years before Zelenskyy took office, meddled in the 2016 presidential election in the United States.

The two leaders also talked briefly about Trump’s interest in Ukraine’s investigating the activities of former Vice President Joe Biden’s son as a highly paid board member at the Ukrainian energy company Burisma while the senior Biden was President Barack Obama’s point man for Ukraine policy.

“President Trump should have been focused on the interest of the American people in that call,” Nadler said. “Instead, he prioritized his private, political interests.”

Democrats based their charge of obstruction of Congress on Trump’s direction that administration officials not respond to subpoenas for documents and testimony during the House impeachment inquiry.

“Many presidents, including President Trump, have asserted privilege and other objections to specific subpoenas,” Nadler said. “But only President Trump has ordered the categorical defiance of a congressional investigation, the automatic rejection of all subpoenas.”

The two articles of impeachment likely will go nowhere in a Senate trial, noted John Malcolm, director of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

“It is the culmination of an impeachment effort by House Democrats that began within days of Trump’s inauguration nearly three years ago. It all seems so anti-climactic,” Malcolm said in a written statement, adding of the coming Senate trial:

Assuming that all 45 Democrats and both independents vote to convict, they will still need at least 20 Republican senators to join them in order to remove Trump from office. This will not happen. … President Trump will not be unseated by this partisan ploy. While [the] vote in the House will, no doubt, anger the president, the ultimate verdict will be rendered by the people when they vote in November 2020.

It requires 67 senators, an unlikely two-thirds majority, to convict and remove a president after a Senate impeachment trial. Republicans hold 53 seats.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters earlier in the day that the House would consider withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate. This move could stall the trial, providing some leverage to House Democrats on setting the rules.

During the House floor debate, Republican lawmakers argued that the articles of impeachment were vague and did not allege a specific crime.

“I not only serve on the Judiciary Committee, I also serve on the Rules Committee,” Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., said. “I have spent hours and hours and hours reading transcripts, looking at documents, hearing testimony. I can tell you one thing: I believe this is the most unfair, politically biased, rigged process that I have seen in my entire life.”

“There is no proof, none, that the president has committed an impeachable offense,” Lesko added. “Not one of the Democrat witnesses, not one, was able to establish that the president committed bribery, treason, or high crimes and misdemeanors as required [for impeachment] in the U.S. Constitution.”

Lesko noted that 17 of the 24 Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee already had voted to back an impeachment resolution against Trump before the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call.

Five of the nine Democrats on the House Rules Committee also already had voted to impeach Trump, she said.

The Arizona Republican was referring to Reps. Al Green, D-Texas, and Brad Sherman, D-Calif., who used procedures to force three earlier votes on the House floor on whether to table Green’s resolution to impeach Trump. The most recent such resolution was in July.

Van Drew, Peterson, and Golden were the only Democrats to defect among the 31 who won election in 2018 in congressional districts won by Trump in 2016.

Rep. Elaine Luria of Virginia is among the “Trump district” Democrats. She invoked her military background, which helped her win election, in arguing for impeachment.

“I rise today in support of the oath I first took at 17 upon entering the Naval Academy and took five more times in my 20-year Navy career, an oath that comforted me in the years that I spent away from my family deployed around the globe,” Luria said, adding:  “And today, an oath that gives me resolve, resolve to do today what is right and not what is politically expedient, resolve to stand with the president at the White House last week and resolve to stand up to the president today.”

Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., the No. 3 Democrat in the House, appeared to use the words “domestic enemies” to refer to Trump and invoked religion in describing his vote.

“I rise today feeling the full weight of my duty as a member of this august body, reflecting upon our oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Clyburn said.

Clyburn, quoting Founding Father Thomas Paine, said: “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered.”

“Today, we have a president who seems to believe he is a king or above the law,” Clyburn said. “Paine warned us that so unlimited a power can belong only to God Almighty. My faith leads me to take very seriously the final words of our oath, ‘to faithfully discharge the duties of the office, so help me God.’”

Pelosi had resisted impeachment for months, but said Wednesday that she had no choice. As she spoke, Pelosi stood by a prop, a sign that quoted from the Pledge of Allegiance: “And to the Republic for which it stands.”

“If we do not act now, we will be derelict in our duty,” Pelosi said. “It is tragic the president’s reckless actions make impeachment necessary. He gave us no choice.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., gained applause from his caucus when he asserted about 7:45 p.m. that Trump easily would survive impeachment following a Senate trial.

“Donald J. Trump is president of the United States. He is president today. He will be president tomorrow. And he will be president when this impeachment is over,” McCarthy said, prefacing his remarks by saying he knew they would upset Democrats.

Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, noted the previous attempts to impeach Trump and referred to Green’s widely reported comment that Democrats needed to impeach Trump to keep him from getting reelected.

“That is probably the most prescient thing said by the majority in the last year, is, ‘We can’t beat him if we don’t impeach him.’ There is a reason behind this impeachment, and even Speaker Pelosi said it would be dangerous to leave it to voters to determine whether President Trump stays in office. Really?” Collins said, adding:

After we just said the Pledge of Allegiance, we go back to the speaker’s own words, who said it would be dangerous to leave it [Trump’s fate] to the voters. I will tell you right now, Madam Speaker, we on the Republican side have no problem taking our side to the [House] majority and to the people of this country because they elected Donald Trump, and it is a matter for the voters, not this House, not in this way, not in the way this is being done. It has trampled everything this House believes in.

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who started what she called the “Impeach 45” movement in 2017, appeared to boast of a mission accomplished.

“History will remember those who were willing to speak truth to power. Yes, I called for Trump’s impeachment early,” Waters said, adding:

This is our country. Our foremothers and our forefathers shed their blood to build and defend this democracy. I refuse to have it undermined. I wholeheartedly support this resolution. I’m proud that in the final analysis, justice will have been served in America and Donald Trump will have been impeached.

Ken McIntyre contributed to this report.

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s How Much the Formal Impeachment Inquiry Has Cost Taxpayers So Far

What’s Next in the Impeachment Process

Liberal Virginia Prosecutors Spread Soros Project to DC Suburbs

A Note for our Readers:With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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

America spoke. House Democrats never listened.

/in , , , , , , , /by

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats are about to go down in history. Their legacy will be sealed tonight with an unfair, hyper-partisan impeachment vote that is unprecedented for all the wrong reasons.

  • President Donald J. Trump committed no crime. House Democrats agree: Their Articles of Impeachment against him do not claim a single criminal violation. For the first time in history, a President will be impeached for solely political reasons.
  • Also for the first time ever, an American President will be impeached without any votes from the minority party. A couple Democrats may join in opposing it, too.
  • The Pelosi-Schiff blitz will go down as the fastest impeachment in U.S. history. Why the rush? Because public support has dropped steadily throughout the process. Most Americans are against it. Democrats can’t afford to let it continue.

If House Democrats are remembered for anything else, it will be their rank hypocrisy. Obvious political double standards tend to get lost in the moment—especially with a Democrat-friendly media helping the cause—but history judges them harshly.

During the Clinton impeachment, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY)—now chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee—warned that a partisan impeachment would be illegitimate. Such a ploy would “call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions,” he said. He went so far as to lambast an impeachment attempt that didn’t have the “legitimacy of a national consensus” as a “partisan coup d’etat.”

The amazing irony, of course, is that the Clinton impeachment was bipartisan, with five Democrats voting in favor of 3 of the 4 articles introduced. The Pelosi-Schiff impeachment of President Trump, however, is only bipartisan in the opposition to it.

Americans have delivered their verdict. A new poll from Gallup finds that support for impeachment and removal has dropped 6 points. Other polls corroborate it: Recent ones from USA Today and Quinnipiac show that a majority of Americans oppose impeaching and removing President Trump from office.

At town halls across America, constituents are demanding that House Democrats stop with impeachment and focus on the real issues facing our country.

It should be obvious, and it is to everyone outside the Beltway Swamp: Americans are sick of Washington’s never-ending partisan circus. They’re tired of the excuses for obstructionism and inaction. They aren’t buying the phony, sanctimonious lip service to our Constitution and Founding Ideals from career politicians who never bother to defend either when it counts.

Americans know House Democrats will go silent the moment they’re confronted with the Swamp’s own corruption, whether it be from FBI officials who used false information to spy on the Trump campaign or from Democrats’ own family members who got rich off conflicts of interest in Ukraine.

Our citizens simply want their Government to work for them, not against them. Under President Trump, it finally is. The working-class boom is lifting wages for blue-collar workers, dropping the unemployment rate to a 50-year low, and slashing income inequality. On trade, this President renegotiated NAFTA and held China accountable for years of unfair and abusive practices that Washington ignored.

Beyond that, illegal immigration is down, crime rates are down, and American service members are finally coming home while our NATO allies step up and contribute their fair share to the Alliance.

But instead of listening to Americans and helping make Washington better, Democrats ignored them. The left sought impeachment from day one. They chased conspiracy theories to discredit the voices of 63 million Americans. They’ve called President Trump “illegitimate” and “not my President.” They’ve turned the most sacred power of Congress into a political weapon. They’ve made it clear democracy only counts if they win.

The message of the 2016 election was straightforward for anyone who listened: Put the American people first. Tonight, House Democrats will prove they never heard a word of it.

In case you missed it: Read President Trump’s letter to Speaker Pelosi.

Watch: “This has been rigged from the start.”

“Unconstitutional Abuse of Power,” US Senate Candidate Praises President Trump’s Scathing Letter to Speaker Pelosi that Condemned House’s Fraudulent, Illegal Impeachment

/in , , , , , , /by

ARLINGTON, Va., Dec. 18, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — US Senate Candidate Victor Williams today praised Donald Trump’s six-page letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi which condemned the House’s impeachment vote as an “unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power.”

Williams, running to defeat Virginia’s Mark Warner, stated:

“Speaker Pelosi and the House Democrats are not above the law.

Even holding her so-called impeachment inquiry umbrella, Nancy Pelosi may not float above the US Constitution like some desiccated Mary Poppins.”

Williams, who is a Washington, DC law professor, stated:

“President Trump is absolutely right.  He has done nothing wrong. The 116th House of Representatives’ harassments against Donald Trump –  done in concert with swamp  perfidy and deep state treachery – now metastasize into fraudulent, illegal impeachment.

The legal definition of fraud is ‘an intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to surrender a legal right.’ A determination of fraud has constitutional consequences.”

Worse than being a fraud against Trump, however, Professor Williams explains why the partisan vote is a travesty against our Republic’s constitutional history:

“Under English law, officials could be removed from office by either of two ways. The first was by a formal parliamentary impeachment removal process that required proof that the official had committed a high crime.

The second was by a simple majority vote of ‘attainder’ – a direct legislative punishment that included removing the targeted individual from and forever blackening his reputation.

English jurist William Blackstone described how a legislature’s attainder is fundamentally intended to effect an ‘attintus’ to taint and blacken the targeted individual’s reputation.

Such an attainder punishment was accomplished through a simple majority vote.

Removing an ideological or personal opponent from his political office while also permanently damaging his reputation was an effective but reprehensible legislative practice.”

Williams continues,

“Our Constitution’s Framers were intent on eliminating the abusive legislative process of attainder in America.

So they explicitly banned such legislative punishment and defamation.  Article I’s Sections 9 and 10 forbids all legislative harassment, defamation, and punishment: ‘No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be passed.’

The House vote comes with remote prospect of Senate conviction. It is purposed only to punish and damage Donald Trump’s reputation and harm Senate confirmation prospects for his future executive and judicial nominations.”

Williams states: “It is not an impeachment vote – it is a vote of attainder.”

Professor Williams further explained:

“In 1891, Justice Joseph Story damned a legislature’s attainder process as ‘governed solely by what is deems political necessity or expedience, and too often under the influence of unreasonable fears or unfounded suspicions.’

According to Justice Story, legislative attainder is done without “‘proofs conformable to the rules of evidence.’

DC swamp greybeards are wrong.  The House impeachment is not immune from constitutional inspection.  The defamatory ordeal suffered by Trump begs for a de facto (‘by practice’) attainder analysis.

In 1993, I first described the wide dimension of the attainder ban in context of the impeachment removal process challenged in the Walter Nixon v. United States adjudication.

The US Supreme Court just last week agreed to review the D.C. Circuit’s wrongheaded ruling in  Trump v. Mazars in which dissenting Judge Naomi Roa details how the attainder ban protects civil rights and the separation of powers.

Shamefully, a partisan House today votes attainder.”

EDITORS NOTE: Victor Williams is the 2016 founder and present chair of “Law Professors for Trump.”  Just as he predicted he would be in 2016, Williams predicts that Donald John Trump will be elected President in 2020.  And working to help Trump, Williams is an insurgent candidate for the U.S. Senate in Virginia.  www.vw4v.com. 571-309-8249.

House Democrats and Republicans Collude on Dangerous Immigration Bill

/in , , , , , , , /by

Legislation ignores findings of the 9/11 Commission.

Virtually all news organizations, and not just within the dreaded mainstream media, frequently lament that the Republicans and Democrats will never work cooperatively, particularly where the supposedly contentious issue of immigration is concerned.

The ongoing efforts by the radical Left to impeach President Trump has sucked the air out of the (news)rooms so that while there is now a laser-like focus on those impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives, not much else in Washington receives coverage.

However, on December 11, 2019, CNN reported, “House votes to provide a pathway to citizenship for thousands of undocumented farmworkers.”

Here is an excerpt from that article:

While previous legislative efforts seeking to legalize a larger number of undocumented immigrants have failed, Wednesday’s vote is significant both for what it tries to achieve and for the Republican support it received. The bill passed with a bipartisan vote of 260-165, though it faces an uncertain future in the Senate.

Just as magicians distract their audiences with smoke, mirrors, lighting and a scantily-clad attractive assistant or two prancing around the stage, America is being distracted by the impeachment circus that should probably be accompanied by circus calliope music to complete the effect!

An integral element of the disastrous 1986 amnesty program that was part of the Immigration Reform and Control Act enacted by the Reagan administration was the inclusion of amnesty for Seasonal Agricultural Workers (also referred to as Special Agricultural workers or “SAW” for short).

In order to qualify, illegal aliens simply had to claim that they had worked on a farm for a specified period of time.

Fraud permeated that program. As an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent, I participated in investigations of farms that had provided, for a fee, bogus employment records that enabled many illegal aliens to game this element of the amnesty program.

One of the investigations in which I participated focused on a relatively small farm that had provided thousands of illegal aliens with false documentation. In fact, if all of those supposed farm workers had shown up at the time their paperwork claimed they were employed, they all could not have stood on the farm simultaneously. The farm would have been more crowded than a NYC subway car during the rush hour. There would have been no room to grow anything.

Among those aliens who were granted amnesty under the SAW amnesty program were illegal aliens who were criminals and even terrorists.

Consider this excerpt from the official report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel – Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States:

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States.

Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.”

Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

This gaping hole in the immigration system became well-known around the world during the Reagan administration, that any alien who could enter the U.S. by any means, could easily secure bogus documentation to qualify for lawful status as supposed “agricultural workers.”

I will never forget a particularly personally infuriating situation. A television studio had sent a limo to drive me to the studio for an on-air interview. My driver was pleasant and proficient. We chatted during the drive and I could not help but notice his Middle Eastern accent. He told me he had come to the U.S. from his native Lebanon during the administration of, as he put it, “idiot Reagan.” (He did not know I was a retired INS agent.) I asked him why he had so low an opinion of President Reagan and he told me that he came to the U.S. illegally and once here claimed to have worked on a farm and was quickly granted amnesty. He subsequently petitioned for his entire family. Furthermore, he told me that his neighbors from his village in Lebanon had all availed themselves of that opportunity provided by that amnesty even though he had never set foot on a farm.

How dumb, he asked, was our former president and our immigration officials?

How dumb, indeed! What a dangerous message to send to people around the world including the citizens of countries that are associated with terrorism!

If the goal in seeking amnesty is to provide farms with adequate numbers of workers, members of Congress should be happy to hire many more ICE agents to make certain that farm workers actually show up on farms to do the work.

In the late 1970’s we found that many supposed farm workers from the Caribbean had obtained visas to work in the citrus groves of Florida and the apple orchards of New York. They either quit after a couple of short weeks or never showed up at all. They had gone on to sell another agricultural product, however: marijuana and then cocaine. They formed violent gangs that were notorious for their murderous rampages.

Meanwhile, the farmers who had applied for their visas did not get the workers they needed and we wound up with violent criminals we certainly don’t need.

More ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents could imbue this system with badly need integrity — but there is never any effort to hire more desperately-needed ICE agents.

This is not, however, the first time this year that the Democrats and Republicans joined forces to pass dangerous immigration bills that would undermine national security, public safety and/or the jobs and wages of Americans. On  July 22nd, FrontPage Magazine published my article, “Democrats and Republicans Passed An Immigration Bill” that focused on the passage of a previous bill that betrays hardworking, highly-educated, experienced and talented American workers, that went largely unreported.

My article noted, however:

Yet this bill went largely ignored by the mainstream media that even on July 10, 2019 when that legislative disaster was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 365-65, 57 Republicans voting against the bill.

Furthermore, the bill was voted on without a single hearing and without any amendments being added.

However, the Western Free Press certainly took note of this legislative betrayal in an article entitled, GOP Legislators Back Bill to Replace American Workers.  The subtitle completed the infuriating picture, H.R. 1044 would flood the country with Indian tech workers and Chinese investors.

That July 22nd CNN article included a link to a June 4, 2019 CNN article, “House passes bill that would provide a pathway to citizenship for many undocumented immigrants.” This article that focused on legislation to legalize so-called “DREAMERS” began with the following:

(CNN) The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that would provide a pathway to citizenship for more than one million undocumented immigrants, a move that comes amid a fierce debate over illegal immigration.

It passed 237-187. The chamber erupted in cheers of, “Sí se puede,” translated to, “Yes, we can.”

So here we have three concrete examples of Republicans and Democrats, colluding to pass laws that would create massive amnesty programs for illegal aliens and/or permit many more high-tech workers to enter the United States to the detriment of American workers’ jobs and wages.

None of these bills call for the hiring of a single additional ICE agent to conduct investigations into the aliens’ backgrounds or their applications for immigration benefits and/or visas.

The first issue raised in the wake of the shooting at Pensacola as I noted in my earlier article, “Terror Attack At Naval Air Station Highlights Immigration Catastrophe” was the limitations in the vetting process that endanger national security.

Insanity has been defined as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different outcome. The question is, who is crazier, our elected “representatives” or We the People for reelecting them — repeatedly?

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

The Democrats’ One-night Stand with the Founders [+Video]

/in , , , , , /by

“I’ll respect you in the morning” is what I half expect to hear. Of course, the Democrats now invoking the Founding Fathers’ memory in their effort to impeach President Trump won’t respect our colonial progenitors at the next dawn anymore than they did at the last one.

Nonetheless, the Left has interrupted its regularly scheduled programming of trying to tear down the Founders’ reputations and life’s work — the Electoral College, the First and Second Amendments, and the Constitution generally — to claim that those Enlightenment men are on their side.

Nancy Pelosi (D-Fruits and Nuts) has proclaimed that Trump’s actions “are in defiance of the vision of our Founders.” Democrat Jerrold Nadler, from the state (NY) that allows prenatal infanticide up to birth and that’s giving driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, asked a shill college professor of an impeachment “witness,” “[I]f Washington were here today, if he were joined by Madison, Hamilton and other Framers, what do you believe they would say if presented with the evidence before us about President Trump’s conduct?”

My, my, as Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson put it Tuesday evening, “Democrats care deeply and passionately about the Founding Fathers.” For sure. Just watch a selection of them in Carlson’s segment below, if you have a strong stomach and high tolerance for shameless sanctimony.

Now, Nadler’s hypothetical is interesting because I’ve occasionally indulged the thought exercise of what would transpire if a Founder — let’s say, George Washington — could be resurrected from the dead. After he recovered from the shock of our technological advancement and moral debasement, I imagine he’d have lots to say.

How much of it, though, would be in praise of the Democrat program? What would he say about sex as social construct, personal pronoun tyranny, putting boys masquerading as girls in female spaces and the Sexual Devolution generally? Widespread prenatal infanticide? Open-borders cultural genocide? Rule by judicial and bureaucratic fiat? Proposals to eliminate the Electoral College and Senate? Feminism? Multiculturalism? Attacks on Christianity? The exalting of Islam? Hate crime law? High taxation? Federal overreach? The redistribution of wealth?

Speaking of which, how about socialism? Note that Founder Samuel Adams spoke for many of his comrades in warning of the “Utopian schemes of levelling, and a community of goods.” So is there one aspect of the modern Democrat agenda — just one — of which Washington or any other Founder would approve? Help me out here.

The notion is ridiculous, of course. The Founders would have an earful for most of us, don’t get me wrong, but they’d absolutely view today’s leftists as aliens.

That’s how the Left views them, too. Leftists don’t hide their disdain for “old white men,” whom they despise at least partially because that demographic most opposes their agenda. They also loathe the Founder fruit that is the Constitution — which Barack Obama bemoaned was merely “a charter of negative liberties” — basically because it’s a conservative document.

By this I don’t mean just the obvious, which is that it prescribes limited government. It’s also that conservatism is about conserving the status quo — standing “athwart history, yelling Stop,” as William F. Buckley put it — while liberalism is about changing the status quo. Yet since the Constitution’s Amendment Process makes it painfully hard to change, the document does (when adhered to) conserve a status quo.

So it’s no surprise that lawyer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin called the Constitution “broken” in 2013 and stated that outside “Washington, discontent with the founding document is bipartisan and widespread” (among pseudo-elites, yes).

Toobin pointed to a University of Texas law professor, Sanford Levinson, who, when asked if he would have signed the Constitution, reluctantly said yes in 1987 but no in 2003. Toobin was making his case for how a positive evolution of thought takes us beyond constitutional limitations, but he only demonstrated how Levinson managed to get not only older, but dumber in 16 years’ time.

But since the Democrats are now romancing the Founders, here’s another thought exercise: Imagine we could resurrect all those men and let them take the place of our current president, congressmen and senators for some years so that they could restore our government to founding principles. Would you agree? I’d sign on that dotted line.

No matter what the Democrats would say hypothetically, though, this would be their worst nightmare. Their feelings toward the Founders range from indifference to contempt to hostility, which is why they demean them in history books and propose removing monuments to Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

Oh, don’t think it’s really about slavery, either. Islam’s Mohammed was not only a warlord, caravan-raider thief, mass murderer and user of torture, but a slave owner and trader. Yet no leftist would dare besmirch his memory. Nor do our liberals trouble much over Muslims’ enslavement of blacks in Africa today. No, leftists hate the Founders because they hate Americanism.

If the Founders could live again and run for office in 2019, the Left would be vicious in its vitriol, calling them racists, bigots, homophobes, sexists, xenophobes, white supremacists and, well, you know the wash-rinse-repeat pattern.

Worse still, though, is what leftists are doing to the Founders right now: associating them with themselves. Why, if the Founders weren’t in a place beyond the reach of worldly defilement, they’d likely feel in need of a Silkwood-intensity shower.

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

Film ‘Richard Jewell’ highlights FBI Corruption and Media Bias. Sound familiar?

/in , , , , , , , /by

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana

“It’s been my experience, Langford, that the past always has a way of returning. Those who don’t learn, or can’t remember it, are doomed to repeat it.” ― Steve Berry, The Charlemagne Pursuit

I went to see the Warner Brothers film “Richard Jewell” produced and directed by Clint Eastwood. The film is a docudrama about the July 27, 1996 bombing in Centennial Olympic Park during the 1996 Olympics. Here is a video about the film:

Here is the official Warner Brothers trailer:

Warner Brothers issued the following after the Atlanta Journal-Constitution took issue with the portrayal of Kathy Scruggs as a woman journalist who traded sex for stories. It was Scruggs who initially broke the story of the FBI’s targeting Richard Jewell as a terrorist:

The film is based on a wide range of highly credible source material. There is no disputing that Richard Jewell was an innocent man whose reputation and life were shredded by a miscarriage of justice. It is unfortunate and the ultimate irony that the Atlanta Journal Constitution, having been a part of the rush to judgment of Richard Jewell, is now trying to malign our filmmakers and cast. ‘Richard Jewell’ focuses on the real victim, seeks to tell his story, confirm his innocence and restore his name. [Emphasis added]

History has indeed repeated itself but in a much more nefarious way.

The Two Most Powerful Forces in The World – The United States Government and The Media

In the film Richard Jewell’s lawyer Watson Bryant, played by Sam Roswell, says:

His accusers are two of the most powerful forces in the world. The United States Government, and the media.

As I watched the film I could not help but think about how the FBI and media attacked an innocent man named Richard Jewell in 1996. Fast forward to today and we find that the FBI was once again used to attack people involved in the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and even the President of the United States himself.

Oh, the irony of history.

After the release of the Department of Justice report on FISA abuses by the FBI, we see that history has repeated itself, but with a twist.

Richard Jewell was an innocent man who was falsely accused of a crime he did not commit. Today we learn that innocent members of the 2016 Trump presidential campaign were falsely accused by the FBI of colluding with Russia. The twist is that today the FBI has become a weapon to be used against one’s political opponents. This is whole a new, and frightening, level of corruption. Why? Because no American is immune, not one.

In the end Richard Jewell was exonerated when on October 26, 1996 the US Justice Department announced that Richard Jewell was no longer a suspect in the Olympic Park bombing. February 2, 1998 Eric Robert Rudolph was named as a suspect in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing. 

The FBI and Fake News

We have also learned, as was the case with Richard Jewell, that the President of the United States, members of his campaign and members of his administration have been falsely accused of collusion with the Russians. In the case of Roger Stone, who has been convicted and imprisoned, the story is ongoing. The lives of many individuals, like General Mike Flynn, have been ruined.

This is a who new level of corruption. This is a new level of hate. This is something that our Constitutional Republican form of government has never seen.

The FBI and fake news media have been the fuel that has driven the engine of impeachment of President Donald J. Trump.

Conclusion

As I write this on Wednesday, December 18th, 2019 it is expected that the U.S. House of Representatives will vote on the Articles of Impeachment against President Donald J. Trump.

As President Trump wrote in a letter to Speaker Pelosi:

I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives.  This impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat Lawmakers, unequaled in nearly two and a half centuries of American legislative history.

The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence.  They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever.  You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment!

By proceeding with your invalid impeachment, you are violating your oaths of office, you are breaking your allegiance to the Constitution, and you are declaring open war on American Democracy. [Emphasis added]

Every American is under siege. Every American is at risk.

Every American is a Richard Jewell.

© All rights reserved.

White Liberals’ Little Black Box

/in , , , , , /by

I had a surprisingly emotional reaction watching “The Sound of Music” movie recently on TV. It reminded me of the wisdom of my late dad, Dr Rev Lloyd E. Marcus.

Our black family of Mom, Dad, three younger siblings and me lived in the Baltimore projects. The atmosphere of our neighborhood was tough and violent. Our apartment was on the 6th floor. We were only allowed to play in the courtyard on our floor, rather than down on the street level playground infected with drugs and thugs.

When Dad broke the racist color-barrier to become a Baltimore City firefighter, we moved out of the projects.

In 1965, Dad took us four kids to see a movie we had not heard of, “The Sound of Music”. I believe he wanted to broaden our horizons. I don’t remember my sister or two brothers being particularly impressed.

I was blown away. The wonderful music and elegant production impacted me greatly. Mother Abbess singing “Climb Ev’ry Mountain” was one of my favorite scenes. I remembered every song after leaving the theater, probably the only kid from the projects overheard singing, “Edelweiss.” Puzzled kids in our black neighborhood routinely asked, “What are you singing?”

White liberals, while claiming to be advocates for black empowerment, are obsessed with trying to keep blacks in a little black box. White liberals deem certain behaviors impermissible for blacks while whites are free to have varying interests and tastes. God forbid that a black prefer sushi over fried chicken, country music over rap or vote Republican rather than Democrat.

White sports media trashed black NFL quarterbacks Robert Griffin III and Russell Wilson for not behaving black enough. Who died and made arrogant racist white liberals the final authority to dictate authentic acceptable black behavior?

Dad nurtured our gifts, attending every sports or performance event, always encouraging his kids to be all they could be. After my family went to bed, I painted pictures using leftover house paints. Dad carted my paintings to art galleries, seeking their critic. The consensus was, “He has talent. Send him to art school.”

Dad drove me through upscale white neighborhoods, instructing, “If you go to college and develop your talent, you can live like this.” I became an award winning graphic designer at WJZ-TV, ABC affiliate in Baltimore. Dad was awesome! My siblings and I were blessed to have a real man in our lives.

I feel like singing,“The hills are alive with the sound of music…”

© All rights reserved.

Articles Of Impeachment Updated To Read ‘Orange Man Bad’

/in , , /by

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The two articles of impeachment leveled against President Trump were originally announced to be abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

These didn’t poll very well, however, so Democrats went back to the drawing board to come up with something that might play well with their base of radicals. Nancy Pelosi announced Monday that the articles of impeachment will now just read, “ORANGE MAN BAD” in giant letters.

“It’s clear, to the point, and honest,” said Pelosi. “We congresspeople aren’t very used to honesty, so we’ll see how this goes. But hopefully, people will see the crime of Trump being a bad orange man definitely rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Pelosi admitted the first two articles they introduced were drummed-up charges and that this one’s “the real deal.”

Trump fired back, pointing out that being a bad orange man isn’t an impeachable offense. “Show me where in the Constitution it says you can’t be a brave man of color and also do bad stuff. It’s not there. You can’t do it. The do-nothing Democrats are EMPTY-HANDED! SAD!”

“ORANGE MAN GOOD! ORANGE MAN GOOD!” he chanted, trying to get his aides to chant along, but they only did so half-heartedly.

Readers of the Bee,

If you value The Babylon Bee and want to see us prevail against Snopes and anyone else who might seek to discredit or deplatform us, please consider becoming a subscriber. Your support really will make a difference.

Support Us                              Learn More

MORE SATIRE:

Popular Christmas Song ‘Mary, Did You Know?’ Criticized For Mansplaining

Retraction: Those Kids We Accused Of Holding A KKK Rally Were Actually Just Playing Duck, Duck, Goose

Hallmark Channel Caves To LGBT Lobby In Development As Predictable As Plot Of Hallmark Christmas Movie

Obama Under Fire For Suggesting There Are Only Two Genders

Trump Announces America+

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

New Biden Ad ‘One of the Worst Political Slogans’ Ever

/in , , , /by

A panel of political experts on Fox Nation’s Deep Dive slammed a new political ad released by White House hopeful Joe Biden‘s campaign on Tuesday as “one of the worst political slogans ever.”

“If Donald Trump is reelected, he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation,” Biden narrated over video of men marching with torches and Confederate flags. “We can’t. And I will not let this man be reelected president of the United States of America,” said Biden at the end of the ad.

“One of the worst slogans I’ve ever heard in a commercial is ‘I will not let Donald Trump be president,’” said panelist Brad Blakeman, a former member of President George W. Bush’s senior staff. “That’s not the way our country works. We will decide — the people — as to who our president’s going to be.

“Hating somebody? That’s not the way you win the presidency,” he added. “You win the presidency by being hopeful. And there’s always a future and something to aspire to. You can’t hate Donald Trump out of office.”

Joe Biden

44 Known Connections

During a Black History Month event on February 25, 2014, Biden expressed frustration with a recent Supreme Court ruling that had struck down a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain (mostly Southern) jurisdictions with a pre-1965 history of voting suppression to pre-clear any changes in their voting laws (such as the implementation of Voter ID requirements, or changes to early-voting or same-day-voting regulations — with the Justice Department. Biden also claimed that new voter ID laws in North Carolina, Alabama and Texas were evidence of “hatred” and “zealotry.” Said the Vice President:

“At least 11 states have introduced legislation recently requiring voters to show ID at the polls, making existing voting laws more restrictive. Lawslike in North Carolina which imposed a new photo ID requirement, shortening early voting, and eliminating same-day registration and early voting. These guys never go away…. You guys [African Americans] know it, but it’s an important lesson for me. Hatred never, never ultimately goes away…. The zealotry of those who wish to limit the franchise cannot be smothered by reason…. This fight has been too long, this fight has been too hard, to do anything other than win — not on the margins, but flat-out win.”

To learn more, click on the profile link here.

RELATED ARTICLE: President Donald Trump’s Full Letter to Nancy Pelosi on Eve of Impeachment Vote! | Politics

RELATED VIDEO: Devastating 30-Year-Old Video Shows Biden Being Caught Repeatedly Lying for 5 Minutes Straight

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1222850114441633794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1222850114441633794&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fdevastating-30-year-old-video-shows-biden-caught-repeatedly-lying-5-minutes-straight%2F

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: MSM Now Compares Trump Supporters to ISIS Followers

/in , , , , , /by

The latest trope against American people who support President Trump is to say they are like ISIS followers, as pointed out by The Daily Caller.

“True believers” said with a depreciating and knowing chuckle, a catch-phrase of the mainstream media to indicate they are akin to members of a cult – “dead enders.”

Watch MSNBC contributor Malcolm Nance on “Hardball with Chris Matthews” say that Trump supporters and ISIS followers are “very similar”:

“I’ve seen a lot of phenomenon in my life. I’ve seen a lot of operations. You know, the behaviors that I am seeing here, and this is anecdotal, are very similar to the way that ISIS members are,” Nance says. “They are true believers — and this is their reality and they will not surrender it. You know, they’re dead-enders.”

Afterwards, Matthews agrees, saying, “Malcolm, I love your attitude. As we say in Philly … you got it. Thank you for coming on tonight.”

At the same time, other media outlets were pumping out the comparison of Trump supporters to cult members. CNN’s Brian Stelter, among others, pushed a new book written by “mental health counselor” Steven Hassan, the author of “Cult of Trump,” who contends that Trump supporters are (you guessed it) part of a “destructive cult.”

Hassan, whose credentials include being a former member of “The Moonies,” opines that the president is using mind control over his “loyal and dependent and obedient followers.”

MSNBC host Joy Reid also pushed the cult trope, saying “There’s a lot of evidence that is a racial and religious cult of personality, in which his base is solidly among the white evangelicals that almost worship him and say that he’s the chosen one of God.”

This follows other mainstream media favorites like Freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), who distort reality for political purposes. Remember when AOC took to Instagram Live and Twitter last summer to call the detention centers holding migrant children “concentration camps”?

The mainstream media may think that hyperbole attracts viewers, but the truth is that language – which represents the commonality of our culture – is a powerful tool.

Comparing ISIS followers – some of the worst human rights abusers and gruesome murderers ever seen in the history of the human race – to law-abiding members of the American electorate is not only false, but plainly ridiculous.

Not only does it further divide our already hyper-polarized society, it diminishes the horror of ISIS and ultimately inhibits our ability to fight this very real and truly dangerous “cult.”

Similarly, by comparing migrant detention centers to concentration camps, AOC not only committed a gross distortion of history, but diminished the reality of the horror of the Holocaust.

Most tellingly, when Holocaust survivor Edward Mosberg extended an invitation to AOC to visit Auschwitz with him, she declined, saying such a visit would only be used by the Far Right for political gain.

Perhaps Malcolm Nance, Chris Matthews and Brian Stelter would like to take a trip to Syria and visit some real ISIS followers before making such irresponsible pronouncements about half the American public?

RELATED STORIES:

Why AOC Refused Auschwitz Visit with Holocaust Survivor

AOC, Omar Increasingly Giving Nod to Political Violence

Linda Sarsour: Jihad Against Trump Is ‘Patriotism’

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column with videos is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

What If Hillary Jumps Back In?

/in , , , /by

Secretary Hillary Clinton has been flirting with the idea of running for president again. If she does, this will be her third try, having lost to President Obama in 2008 and President Trump in 2016. She drops strong hints everywhere she goes, be it on the speaking circuit or on the radio with Howard Stern.

Mrs. Clinton has good reason to believe she could win the nomination; according to a recent Harvard-Harris Poll, she was rated above all of the current Democrat contenders.

When Democrats were asked who they would vote for if Hillary Clinton or John Kerry got in the race:

21% – Clinton
20% – Biden
12% – Sanders
09% – Warren
05% – Buttigieg & Kerry

Normally, this should be of concern to the other candidates, except for two things: her health is still in question, and; it is quickly becoming too late for her to file the necessary paperwork for the key primary states. If she were to jump in the race now, this could be construed as another admission the Democrats are sporting a weak lineup, which is also the same reason why Mayor Michael Bloomberg threw his hat in the ring. Her only hope is to have an open convention where she would be nominated as a dark horse candidate. This would be unfortunate as all the other Democrats have been trudging through the states working hard for votes. It would also damage the concept of primary voting.

Basically, Mrs. Clinton is a person who believes she should get the nomination by acclimation, that it is below her dignity to campaign for primaries. She is a woman who feels cheated of the prize and blames everyone but herself for her failure.

Some Democrats honestly believe Mrs. Clinton is the savior of the party. The reality though is that her time has passed. President Trump would love to have a re-match as he knows he would handily win. Democrats should consider another candidate. The problem is, the leading candidates are showing their age. Next year, Senator Bernie Sanders will be 79, and former VP Joe Biden will be 78, as well as Mayor Michael Bloomberg at 78, making them the oldest people to serve as president if elected.

President Ronald Reagan was considered the oldest to serve at ages 70 and 74. Interestingly, President Trump is following Reagan’s path, also at ages 70 and 74.

The Democrats are badly in need of younger blood and new ideas. Unfortunately, Secretary Clinton is not it.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also do not forget my new books, “How to Run a Nonprofit” and “Tim’s Senior Moments”, both available in Printed and eBook form. Great holiday gifts!

RELATED ARTICLE: IF This Happens, Trump Should Relish the Opportunity to Beat Hillary Clinton Again

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

Dems Vow To Learn From Labour Party’s Mistake Of Not Going Far Enough Left

/in , , , /by

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Democrats stateside were watching closely as UK election results came in Thursday. They wanted to see how the Labour Party did so they could learn from any mistakes they made.

Well, sure enough, Labour endured a brutal massacre, losing seats they didn’t even know they had. So, Democrats vowed to learn from their obvious mistake of not going far enough to the left.

“It’s clear that Labour lost because they weren’t radical enough,” said Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, who had seemingly endorsed Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. “We’re not going to repeat their mistake. We need to appeal to the common American by pushing policies that would be at home in Soviet Russia.”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib said in a statement, “People didn’t turn up to the polls across the pond because Corbyn and his brave freedom fighters were too conservative. Labour really should have gone off the deep end, like we’re doing with the Democratic Party.”

“Also, they could have used a little more anti-semitism.”

Nancy Pelosi agreed with the far-left wing of her party, though it was unclear if she really saw eye to eye with them or was just frightened for her life.

Readers of the Bee,

If you value The Babylon Bee and want to see us prevail against Snopes and anyone else who might seek to discredit or deplatform us, please consider becoming a subscriber. Your support really will make a difference.

Support Us                                Learn More

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

Is Trump the Only Adult in the Room?

/in , , , , , /by

Donald Trump certainly is mercurial at times. He can be uncouth.

But then again, no president in modern memory has been on the receiving end of such overwhelmingly negative media coverage and a three-year effort to abort his presidency, beginning the day after his election.

Do we remember the effort to subvert the Electoral College to prevent Trump from assuming office?

The first impeachment try during his initial week in office?

The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>

Attempts to remove Trump using the ossified Logan Act or the emoluments clause of the Constitution?

The idea of declaring Trump unhinged, subject to removal by invoking the 25th Amendment?

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s 22-month, $35 million investigation, which failed to find Trump guilty of collusion with Russia in the 2016 election and failed to find actionable obstruction of justice pertaining to the non-crime of collusion?

The constant endeavors to subpoena Trump’s tax returns and to investigate his family, lawyers and friends?

Now, frustrated Democrats plan to impeach Trump, even as they are scrambling to find the exact reasons why and how.

Most presidents might seem angry after three years of that. Yet in paradoxical fashion, Trump suddenly appears more composed than at any other time in his volatile presidency.

Ironically, Trump’s opponents and enemies are the ones who have become publicly unhinged.

Leading Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden recently had a complete meltdown while campaigning in Iowa. Biden called a questioner who asked about his son Hunter’s lucrative job with a Ukrainian energy company “a damn liar.” An animated Biden also challenged the 83-year-old ex-Marine and retired farmer to a push-up contest or footrace.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, fared little better. On the first day of his committee’s impeachment inquiry, Nadler stacked the witness list by bringing in three left-wing law professors, as opposed to one Republican centrist witness—as if partisan academics might sway the nation. None of the three presented any new information or evidence. All three seemed angry, petulant, and condescending. At least one came into the proceedings with paper and video trails of anti-Trump animus.

The nadir came when one of the witnesses, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, was reduced to making fun of the president’s 13-year-old son.

At one point, Nadler appeared to fall asleep while chairing the hearing.

Nadler’s Judiciary Committee was supposed to be empowered by the House Intelligence Committee’s impeachment report. But the contents of that report were overshadowed by the revelation that Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., chair of the Intelligence Committee, had obtained data on the private phone calls of ranking Republican House Intelligence Committee member Devin Nunes, Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Jay Sekulow, journalist John Solomon, former Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, and others. Schiff had obtained the data via congressional subpoena.

If the chairman of a committee overseeing an impeachment inquiry is secretly digging into the phone records of his own colleague, a reporter, and the personal attorney of the president of the United States, how can anything he reports be trusted?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a press conference to announce plans to proceed with articles of impeachment. But she would not say which particular charges would be brought against the president.

Then, Pelosi lost her cool and shook her finger at a reporter who simply asked her, “Do you hate the president?”

At that point, a furious Pelosi shouted back, “Don’t mess with me!”

She then retreated behind the shield of her religion by lecturing the questioner that as a good Catholic, she was simply too moral to be capable of hatred. Pelosi finished her sermon by boasting that she “prayed” for the unfortunate Trump.

At a NATO summit in London, Trump was playing the unaccustomed role of NATO defender by challenging French President Emmanuel Macron’s curt dismissal of the alliance. Macron said NATO is experiencing “brain death.”

Meanwhile, in an unguarded moment, a few heads of NATO nations crowded around Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as he chattered and ridiculed Trump in the fashion of a gossipy teen—unknowingly being recorded on video, much to the delight of Trump’s critics back home.

The common denominator of all this petulance is exasperation over the inability to derail Trump.

Trump’s many enemies fear he will be re-elected in 2020, given a booming economy and peace abroad. They know that they cannot remove him from office. And yet they fear that the more they try to stain him with impeachment, the more frustrated and unpopular they will become.

Yet, like end-stage addicts, they simply cannot stop the behavior that is consuming them.

(C) 2019 TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

COMMENTARY BY

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and author of the book “The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won.” You can reach him by e-mailing authorvdh@gmail.com. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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

Election Irregularities Persist in Palm Beach County 20 Years After Bush-Gore Standoff

/in , , , , , , , /by

You would think that after being one of the centers of the election storm in 2000 when the hotly contested Florida recount determined whether George Bush or Al Gore would be president of the United States, Palm Beach County would have gotten its act together.

But as is evident from a recent report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which shows problems such as the dead rising from their graves to vote, Palm Beach County still is not properly supervising the election process or maintaining accurate voter registration rolls.

This latest revelation comes on top of the decision last January by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to remove Susan Bucher, the county’s election supervisor, for incompetence and neglect of duty in the 2018 election. The news also follows the recent arrest and removal of the information technology manager of the elections office for shoving a police officer who was investigating child pornography.

The report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, titled “Calm Before the Storm,” is based on a three-month review of Palm Beach County’s records, practices, and procedures. Unfortunately, that review found numerous problems, ranging from clerical errors in voter records to evidence of double voting and ballots cast by the deceased.

The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>

The report found 68 voters who were not registered at their home addresses as required by law, but at businesses and even government addresses.

At least 10 used the address of the Boca Raton police station in their registration. Others used addresses of fire stations, city halls, and UPS stores. Using improper addresses on registration forms is another loophole that fraudsters use to erode the safety of elections.

The report found 225 individuals who double-voted across state lines in the 2016 and/or 2018 elections. In other words, 225 voters illegally cast ballots in Palm Beach County and elsewhere in the same election, which is almost half of Bush’s margin of victory in 2000 of 537 votes in the county. More than 400 persons also registered more than once in Palm Beach County.

The names of more than 2,200 deceased voters were still on the rolls, 139 of whom somehow cast ballots after they were dead, a remarkable achievement that obviously is not limited to Chicago. So while dead men may tell no tales, they do cast votes in Palm Beach County.

Perhaps most alarming, the Public Interest Legal Foundation found noncitizens illegally registered to vote, in some cases despite the fact that the county knew these persons were not citizens. Almost 70 noncitizens were still registered to vote after they contacted election officials and asked to be removed from the voter rolls.

The report found that county election officials registered some aliens to vote even when they checked the “No” box regarding U.S. citizenship on the application form, showing a fundamental problem in administrative procedures.

The report illustrates some specific examples, including a Venezuelan who twice admitted on the form to not being a citizen, yet was registered to vote anyway. He voted in the 2012, 2014, and 2016 elections.

Similarly, a Guatemalan citizen was registered to vote in 2015 despite admitting on her registration form that she was not a citizen. She voted in the 2016 presidential preference primary, likely in the Democratic contest, since she identified herself as a Democrat.

Palm Beach County’s failure to prioritize removal of the deceased from voter rolls constitutes a huge flaw in the system and a threat to the integrity of elections.

Absentee ballot fraud also has been such a problem in Florida that in 1998 the state’s Department of Law Enforcement issued a report on the numerous cases that had been prosecuted. In 2012, the “Final Report of the Miami-Dade Grand Jury” found serious problems with the absentee ballot process. Things have not improved much since then.

Unfortunately, Palm Beach County isn’t an isolated problem.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation just filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Detroit for failing to properly maintain its voter registration rolls.

The organization found thousands of deceased voters who remained registered, multiple registrations by the same individuals, and some registered voters who obviously are trying to compete with Methuselah to be the longest living humans in history. That includes the oldest, active registered voter who, according to city records, was born in 1823, before Michigan was admitted to the union.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation also just obtained a decision from a federal judge in Pennsylvania ordering the state to turn over the records of tens of thousands of noncitizens who have registered to vote in the state over the past 20 years. Pennsylvania has been fighting to keep these records secret, to avoid having to disclose the extent of this problem to the public.

The Election Fraud Database maintained by The Heritage Foundation highlights a sampling of cases that demonstrate the flaws in the security of elections across the country. The total number of proven cases stands at 1,241.

Heritage’s database does not yet include other important examples, such as the almost 300 noncitizens who Ohio’s secretary of state recently found were registered illegally to vote in the state, 77 of whom voted in the 2018 election.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation’s report on Palm Beach County calls attention to disturbing vulnerabilities in the election process. State and local officials must do more to prevent these problems.

The citizens of Palm Beach County and other places such as Detroit need to know that local election officials are doing everything they can to ensure that their votes are protected from administrative errors and fraud that could dilute or steal their votes and affect the outcome of future elections.

Democracy deserves no less.

Editor’s note: Hans von Spakovsky is on the board of the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

COMMENTARY BY

Hans von Spakovsky

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: .

Kaitlynn Samalis-Aldrich

Kaitlynn Samalis-Aldrich is a research assistant in the Meese Center for Judicial and Legal Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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