Gun Ownership Up, Accidental Shootings Fall

Gun ownership has risen to an all-time high. Accidental shooting deaths have fallen 48% since 1999.

Baffled. That’s the best way to describe the reaction by the liberal media outlets when they discover that statistics for accidental gun deaths are down, even as the number of Americans owning guns is at an all-time high. But somehow these media outlets, and their compatriots in groups like Michael Bloomberg’s so-called Everytown for Gun Safety, always have the answer: Despite the fact that many attempts by anti-gun politicians to enact more restrictions on Second Amendment-protected rights have failed, according to them, we can ultimately thank gun control for the decrease in accidents.

When you dig into the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) statistics, the number of accidental shooting deaths since 1999 hasn’t merely declined—it has dropped off significantly. Taking into account population growth, the number of deaths is down by a whopping 48 percent! It certainly is a statistic to celebrate, and one would imagine we’d know exactly how and why this plummet has occurred.

According to Los Angeles Times contact reporter Kurtis Lee, “Experts attribute the decline to a mix of gun-safety education programs, state laws regulating gun storage in homes and a drop in the number of households that have guns.”

Who are those “experts”? Everytown for Gun Safety is of course at the top of Lee’s list. We know it as the organization that makes a mockery of real gun safety. Responsible gun owners know that safely storing firearms when they are not in use is key in preventing unauthorized access and accidental deaths. We know this because of true firearm safety education programs, not laws in some anti-gun states that take firearm storage mandates to the extreme.

What about the population of responsible gun owners in America? These “experts” also cite victory in the reduction in the number of households with guns. Yet fbi statistics from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (nics) indicate otherwise. When looking at the same period, 1999-2015, the number of background checks more than doubled, from 9,138,123 checks in 1999 to 23,141,970 in 2015. The numbers for 2016 and 2017 are also up from 2015, with nics stats reporting more than 25 million checks for each year.

Of the three reasons listed, Dr. Robert B. Young, of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, says that gun-safety education programs are most likely the real reason for the decrease.

“Thanks to the NRA, NSSF, SAF and countless state and local organizations and gun clubs, millions of people each year learn real gun control and safe shooting, and enjoy it,” Young said. “Reaching children through schools, Scouting and places of worship with programs teaching safety at relevant developmental levels is the optimal intervention.”

We know that despite its name, Everytown isn’t about gun safety. The group has stolen the term to cloak gun control initiatives. Real gun-safety programs go beyond social media shares and advertisements. Real programs educate. Teaching gun owners about safe storage practices and providing resources for parents and educators to talk about firearms and firearm safety with children through programs like the Eddie Eagle GunSafe program is having a positive effect.

How long might it be before the words “gun,” “firearm,” or “ammunition” become so monitored that we are no longer able to use them to connect with each other?

The Washington Examiner recently reported another reason for the decline in accidental gun deaths—one that has gun control advocates especially worried. A recent article highlights the “2017 gun sales surprise: Second best ever!” citing the increased social acceptance of firearms for a rise in sales.

Despite what the anti-gunners tell you, with 25 million background checks in 2017 and the increasingly powerful influence of social media over the past few years, American gun ownership is not declining. Concealed-carry permits and programs are on the rise, and training opportunities for ccw holders, such as the new NRA Carry Guard program, have increased as well.

Perhaps even more disconcerting to groups like Moms Demand Action is the fact that firearm ownership is not exclusively male. The number of women using guns is also growing, and shooting groups like The Well Armed Woman and A Girl and A Gun are thriving. Resources like NRA Women and Women’s Outdoor News are connecting with women from all walks of life, answering their questions and providing valuable information to help educate those interested in learning more about guns, personal protection and the shooting sports.

There is strength in numbers, and many gun owners no longer feel the need to be secretive. Where it can be taboo to talk about firearms at work or face-to-face, the rise of social media has provided an outlet. More and more, we’re seeing gun owners proudly share targets from range time sessions as well as their personal firearm interests by posting on their Facebook pages and sharing photos and videos on their Twitter and Instagram accounts.

Social media influencers aren’t just limited to actors, singers or beauty gurus. Gun influencers are also sharing their experiences on the range along with the importance of shooting sports, firearm safety programs and training opportunities. Even at the individual level, a simple “like” on a firearm manufacturer’s post or page is making it easier for lawful gun owners to identify one another and connect in ways never before possible.

Because of the virtual communities being built and growing on YouTube channels, blogs, Facebook groups and Instagram feeds, gun owners can now go beyond a Google search to find answers to their questions from real people they can interact with. As a result, they are discovering a thriving and knowledgeable firearm community that once existed solely at ranges or in gun clubs. 

This community is also dedicated to the preservation of rights and the knowledge that firearm safety is deeply connected with those rights. Its members are quick to share the importance of real gun safety. In many ways, it polices those who don’t use firearms safely through exposure. Social sharing trumps anti-gun media efforts in a real and personal way. This is terrifying for organizations that wish to control the narrative and, ultimately, control you.

Of course, media and gun control groups also use social media—and it’s often backed by anti-gun advertising dollars. Unlike those who use their influence and leadership to educate others about firearm safety rules and practices, a critical look exposes how these sites are centered solely around gun control activism. You won’t find basic firearm safety rules listed on any of their sites or accounts. They are anything but resources for education about firearm safety practices.

Social media is still a thriving forum for free expression. Slowly but surely, however, we are seeing more controls placed on how we can use it. Pro-gun voices are being silenced on YouTube, with channels locked down or deleted. How long might it be before the words “gun,” “firearm,” or “ammunition” become so monitored that we are no longer able to use them to connect with each other?

The increasingly common idea that the truth can vary from person to person is equally dangerous to our rights. The media and Hollywood thrive on creating and storytelling such falsehoods, and these “personal” or media truths are in some cases becoming more important than the real truth. Case in point, the L.A. Times cited reasons for the decline in both accidental gun deaths and the number of gun owners in the United States. Can we now expect to see a whole new level of activism through entertainment—one that dictates how we should feel and what we should believe through the “personal” truths of those who fight for gun control?  Despite box office failures like “Miss Sloane,” Hollywood is tenacious.

The success our gun community has with connecting one gun owner to another might be ignored, but it cannot be denied. We don’t rely on “personal” truths, but the real truth based on facts and statistics. As social media begins to regulate the gun owner, we need to find ways to keep connecting. We must be willing to keep the conversation going by sharing facts and experiences—not for mere social acceptance but to maintain our way of life.

At the same time, we must encourage and welcome those who want to learn more. Unlike gun control groups, the NRA is more than just a Second Amendment activist or lobbying group. Real resources, training programs, support for the shooting sports community and media outreach efforts such as NRATV prove how dedicated we are to safety and personal freedom.

In the end, it’s not at all “baffling” to see how true gun safety programs and initiatives—combined with our thriving, connected firearm community—are to be credited with the decline in accidental gun deaths. It is not “our” truth, but the truth. Please share it.

ABOUT JULIE GOLOB

Julie Golob is one of the most accomplished professional shooters in the world with more than 130 championship titles in international, national and regional marksmanship competitions in seven different shooting disciplines. A veteran of the elite U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit, she is regularly featured on outdoor television programming offering introduction and insight into the shooting sports and actively shares the importance of safety and training as lead instructor of NRA Women’s “Love at First Shot” and content contributor for NRA media outlets.

VIDEO: How to Stop the Media From Inspiring Killers — #NoMSM

TRANSCRIPT

Can anyone tell me the last time a mass school shooter left a manifesto, a comment on social media, or a video where they said they were inspired to commit their atrocity … by a firearm. Name one. I’m sure you can’t and neither can I.

Because as much as the media love to pivot the conversation after a mass school shooting to gun control, the pen is still mightier than the sword. These kids aren’t being inspired by an innate hunk of plastic and metal laying on a table, they’re inspired by the infamous glory of past shooters who they relate to … and no entity on the planet does a better job whether directly or indirectly, of glorifying these killers, and thereby providing the inspiration for the next one … than our mainstream media.

You may hate guns and want to ban every single one of them, but even you know what I just said is true.

Attention seeking in this country is at an all time high and if social media has proven one thing, it’s that there are people out there willing to do anything for attention, even if it means slaughtering classmates they hate but letting the ones they like live so that they can tell their story to every mainstream media news outlet who are itching like fiends to be the FIRST to do a deep sea dive into the killers’ background.

As they see it, they get to leave a legacy of carnage, and the higher the body count the better—and we all know Wolf-Blitzer will be right there with the death toll counter keeping score.

While they’re doing all of that, the next mass shooter is quietly watching in envy as the guy who was just like him gets his name etched into the history books as he’s showered with attention and even love letters from women who would otherwise never acknowledge his existence. And this kid will be inspired to not only do the same thing, but to outdo the last kid and get as one high school student once said to me, “a higher score.”

It’s time to put an end to this glorification of carnage in pursuit of ratings, because it is killing our kids. It’s time for Congress to step up and pass legislation putting common sense limitations on our mainstream media’s ability to report on these school shootings.

There’s no need to cover these shootings for two weeks straight plastering the kids’ face over and over and over again. Pass a law stopping the media from reporting the killer’s name or showing his face.

You can still report on the shootings … we just need reasonable laws that place limitations on the glory and fame you give to these killers and their twisted motivations…

You know that feeling of anxiety that shot through your body when I said the government should pass laws to limit the media’s ability to exercise their First Amendment right.

That’s the same feeling gun owners get when they hear people say the same thing about the Second Amendment. Hearing me advocate for the government’s ability to limit anyone’s First Amendment rights, including the media, should anger all of you watching this video, the same way it should anger you when anyone tries to use the same limitations on the Second Amendment.

Here’s the thing. I do believe our mainstream media news outlets should hold themselves accountable in the way they cover school shootings. They should take into account how over reporting on school shootings inspires other shooters.

I honestly believe ignoring shooters and not giving them any attention will do more to stop school shootings than any gun control measure ever will.

However, I vehemently disagree with the government infringing on the media’s First Amendment rights the same way I don’t believe the government should infringe on anyone’s Second Amendment rights.

The solution to the problem we all want to solve will only come with a firm commitment to all of our rights—not just the ones you think are important.

Colion Noir
Host

The enigmatic Internet sensation never holds back or stays between the narrow lines of political correctness. As a NRA Commentator and the host of NOIR, his mission is to spread the facts about guns and hopefully change some minds. The practicing attorney, urban enthusiast and new face of gun culture didn’t pick up a firearm until later in life, and wasn’t pro-gun until the day he went to a range. “It was an eye-opener,” he said. The reality behind a firearm is, “It doesn’t have a soul, it isn’t evil, it’s just an inanimate object.”

Keep an eye out for new episodes of Colion’s show NOIR dropping year round here on NRATV.

Democrats and Hollywood Mainstreaming Pedophilia

The Official Democratic Store sent out an email on May 23, 2018 introducing it’s “Democratic collection” of Gay pride shirts, lapel pins and campaign buttons.

On the same day the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) reported:

The producer of the children’s film, “Show Dogs,” has pulled the film from theaters around the world and will recut it, removing two scenes that seemed to groom children for sexual abuse. This film is about a dog that goes undercover at a dog show competition – harmless enough except for the story arc where the only way for him to win and save the day was to allow unwanted touching of his genitals, while his coach practiced it with him and encouraged him to just go to his “zen” place. Yes…I know…it is hard to believe this was in a children’s film, to begin with. [Emphasis added]

You may read more about the film “Show Dogs” on the NCOSE website by clicking here.

What does homosexuality have to do with child abuse?

PubMed.gov is a resource on research done on homosexuals and child abuse. PubMed.gov lists a 2001 study by the California School of Professional Psychology titled “Comparative data of childhood and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons.” The abstract reads:

In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls. Suggestions for future research were offered. [Emphasis added]

The following is a graphic from a CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) online slide presentation, “HIV Surveillance in Adolescents and Young Adults”  breaks down the incidence of HIV among young men ages 13-24. In 2011, an astonishing 94.9 percent of HIV diagnoses among teenage boys (13-19-years-old) were linked to homosexual (“male-to-male”) sex. And 94.1 percent of the cases among young men ages 20-24 were from “gay” sex:

HIV-Young-Adult-Males-2011-CDC

How pedophilia is becoming mainstream

We have reported on efforts by groups such as B4U-ACT and the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to indoctrinate children into believing that sex with men by children is not only normal but encouraged (watch the two videos below for a history of these groups).

Dr. Judith Reisman in her 2016 column “They’re mainstreaming pedophilia!” wrote:

Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.

Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17 [2015]. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”

Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.

Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”

However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.

The Guardian’s Catherine Shoard reports:

On Tuesday [May 22, 2018] a new report from advocacy group GLAAD found only 12.8% of mainstream films featured LGBTQ characters. They have called for the number to rise to 50% by 2024.

Democrats and Hollywood are focused on fundamentally transforming our children into gender confused targets for pedophiles.

Time to stop the sexual exploitation of our most vulnerable, our underage children.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Learning the Lessons of Chile

CDC: 94 to 95 Percent of HIV Cases among Boys and Young Men Linked to Homosexual Sex

Goal of “gay” programs in schools: Persuade kids to “come out” early as homosexuals. Here’s how they do it —

Perverts, pedophiles and pederasts in high offices

RELATED VIDEOS: 

Controversy Over Push to Redefine Pedophilia.

Homosexuality

Phoenix Mayor Gives La Raza Ally $2.4 Mil Before Leaving to Run for Congress

Before resigning to run for Congress, the mayor of America’s fifth-largest city gave a political open-borders ally millions of taxpayer dollars to complete a job in an area it suspiciously has zero experience in. Under the shady deal, the radical La Raza group Promise Arizona (PAZ) will receive $2.4 million from the city of Phoenix to conduct “Business Assistance” during construction of a light rail extension.

Some Phoenix City Hall insiders believe it’s a payoff by the outgoing mayor, Greg Stanton, to support his upcoming congressional run. Stanton, who will resign on May 29, and PAZ Director Petra Falcon are close political allies fiercely opposed to immigration enforcement and border security.

“PAZ has zero experience in business anything,” said a veteran Phoenix official. Another Phoenix government staffer called it a prime example of race-based political payback. “PAZ is no more qualified to provide economic development input than a fox is fit to provide chicken and egg care for a henhouse.” Judicial Watch reached out to Stanton’s office for comment, but messages went unanswered.

PAZ’s mission and accomplishments indicate that it is not qualified for the Phoenix job. The $2.4 million are supposed to go to an organization or firm that assists businesses along the new rail line with building and marketing strategies.

“The grant will fund comprehensive, proactive business assistance that will include business owner workshops, detailed inventories and needs assessments of the businesses in the corridor, and development and implementation of individual business assistance plans,” according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch.

“In addition, the grant provides the resources to engage and work with the community to gather extensive input and understand perspectives on the current and desired conditions of the station areas to generate a long-term vision for the corridor. The visioning work will be captured through interactive design workshops that will yield conceptual urban design plans for the areas surrounding each station.

The community engagement, visioning, urban design work, and an action plan will be documented in a TOD policy plan specific to the South Central corridor, which will serve to attract, guide, and prioritize strategic investments in infrastructure, housing, economic development, and other areas to achieve the shared vision for the future.”

PAZ’s specialty is “building immigrant and Latino political power” that it claims brings hope, dignity and progress. In fact, the “who are we?” question on is website is answered like this: “Promise Arizona has been at the forefront of the fight for immigrant rights for 5 years.”

The organization strives to promote and harness the power of the Latino community in Arizona, according to its website. “Promise Arizona aims to unite the millions of Arizonans who reject the divisive politics of immigrant-baiting, millions who believe in treating their neighbors with fairness and dignity,” the group proclaims. Among its goals is “training businesses and individuals about the values of open borders, sanctuary cities and divisive race-based politics.”

PAZ recently sued the federal government to keep an Obama amnesty program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Its website openly recruits young Latino and immigrant leaders who are ready for action, grounded in a history of social movements. When Arizona’s Supreme Court ruled recently that DACA illegal aliens could no longer receive discounted in-state tuition at public universities and colleges, Falcon said “this ongoing assault on immigrants is destroying our communities, especially our vulnerable immigrant families, and it has to stop.”

There’s no other sensible explanation for PAZ receiving the “Business Assistance” grant other than its director’s close political ties to Stanton, who steered the public funds her way. There is a stark difference between PAZ and the other company, Callison RTKL, that submitted a bid for the grant money to help businesses through the rail construction.

Callison’s expertise includes architecture, brand building, change management, workplace strategy and environmental graphic design. The reputable firm’s projects include revitalizing a neglected area in Shanghai, overcoming challenges in a Washington D.C. office building, the transformation of a northern California medical center and a multitude of national and international projects.

There is no comparison between Callison and PAZ. Nevertheless, led by Mayor Stanton the Phoenix City Council passed a measure last week to give PAZ $2.4 million to perform a job it clearly isn’t qualified to do.

Last year Judicial Watch exposed another outrageous allocation of taxpayer dollars by the city of Phoenix. In that case public funds helped pay for a controversial billboard depicting President Donald Trump as a Nazi. The massive billboard caused a ruckus when it was unveiled in downtown Phoenix Arizona last year because it features a menacing portrait of Trump surrounded by mushroom clouds—in the shape of laughing clowns—and swastikas modified as dollar signs.

A pin of a Russian flag appears on the president’s lapel. Judicial Watch uncovered records that show the billboard was commissioned by an “arts advocate” who gets thousands of dollars in grants from the city, in part to organize an annual art event where the offensive billboard made its debut. The publicly funded annual art celebration is touted as having “a diverse slate of activities created by local artists and art venues to celebrate the growing, vibrant Phoenix arts scene” and is described as “…one of the most important events in Phoenix’s calendar” by Mayor Stanton.

Stay ‘Off Target’ for Summer Shopping

After a long, cold winter in many states, Americans are ready for summer, anxious to start the season. With picnics, cookouts and pool parties on many calendars, shoppers will be headed to stores to pick up last-minute items, barbecue fare and summer supplies.

AFA is reminding shoppers this Memorial Day week to steer clear from Target, which remains committed to its dangerous and misguided bathroom and fitting room policy.

Last month, AFA marked two years of the highly successful and effective #BoycottTarget initiative, which has garnered the signatures of more than 1.5 million Americans who say they won’t shop at the retailer until it makes restrooms and changing areas safe for everyone, including women and children. After a dismal downturn in revenue, stock prices and foot trafficover the past 24 months – and, more importantly, many traumatic and criminal incidents in Target restrooms – the retailer refuses to change the policy.

Target executives still won’t acknowledge that the powerful #BoycottTarget movement has anything to do with waning business. But we know better. Millions of shoppers and thousands of families no longer spend their hard-earned money at Target. There is strength in numbers and this significant community is making a difference. The refusal of shoppers to patronize Target sends a message to shareholders and Target executives that morals mean more than convenience and safety outweighs personal preference when it comes to shopping at what once may have been their favorite store.

Just as important, besides not shopping at Target for Memorial Day or anytime this summer, we remind shoppers to steer clear from shopping online at Target as well. Clicking through purchases may seem ‘safer’ than entering stores with dangerous bathroom policies, but shopping online still drives revenue to Target. It’s clear that families who have chosen to shop elsewhere – both in-store and online – are making a huge difference.

Help us push the numbers to 2 million! You can take action in several ways:

  • SIGN—If you haven’t already, sign the #BoycottTarget pledge. If you have signed, keep the commitment not to shop at Target stores or online.
  • SHARE—Ask family, friends and church members to sign the pledge. One effective strategy is to voice concerns politely but firmly on Target’s Facebook page and other social media sites using #BoycottTarget.
  • VISIT—Go to afa.net/Target to keep up with news and to read some of the frightening incidents that have occurred at Target.

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

What You Need To Know About The Violent Animals Of MS-13

WHAT: The violent animals of MS-13 have committed heinous, violent attacks in communities across America.

Too many innocent Americans have fallen victim to the unthinkable violence of MS-13’s animals.

At the State of the Union in January 2018, President Trump brought as his guests Elizabeth Alvarado, Robert Mickens, Evelyn Rodriguez, and Freddy Cuevas, the parents of Nisa Mickens and Kayla Cuevas.  Police believe these young girls were chased down and brutally murdered by MS-13 gang members on Long Island, New York, in 2016. Suffolk County Police Commissioner stated that the “murders show a level of brutality that is close to unmatched.”

In Maryland, MS-13’s animals are accused of stabbing a man more than 100 times and then decapitating him, dismembering him, and ripping his heart out of his body. Police believe MS-13 members in Maryland also savagely beat a 15-year-old human trafficking victim. The MS-13 animals used a bat and took turns beating her nearly 30 times in total.

In Houston, Texas, two MS-13 members were charged after kidnapping and sexually assaulting one girl and murdering another. The two MS-13 animals laughed, smiled, and waved for cameras in court as they faced the charges.

New York communities have suffered tremendously from the abhorrent violence of MS-13. Nearly 40 percent of all murders in Suffolk County, New York between January 2016 and June 2017 were tied to MS-13.

In January 2017, MS-13 members were charged with killing and hacking up a teenager in Nassau County. MS-13’s animals reportedly saw the murder as a way to boost their standing in the gang. In April 2017, police believe four young men were brutally murdered by MS-13 animals on Long Island. One victim was a young man in town visiting family during an Easter week vacation. Just last month, in April 2018, MS-13 reportedly called for its members on Long Island to kill a cop for the sake of making a statement.

WHY: MS-13 is a transnational gang which follows the motto of “kill, rape, control” by committing shocking acts of violence in an attempt to instill fear and gain control.

MS-13 is a transnational gang that has brought violence, fear, and suffering to American communities. MS-13, short for Mara Salvatrucha, commits shocking acts of violence to instill fear, including machete attacks, executions, gang rape, human trafficking, and more. In their motto, the animals of MS-13 make clear their goal is to “kill, rape, control.” The gang has more than 10,000 members in the United States spreading violence and suffering.

Recent investigations have revealed MS-13 gang leaders based in El Salvador have been sending representatives into the United States illegally to connect the leaders with local gang members. These foreign-based gang leaders direct local members to become even more violent in an effort to control more territory.

President Trump’s entire Administration is working tirelessly to bring these violent animals to justice.

Illegal Immigration: A Tale of Two Countries [Canada vs. U.S.] Hypocrisy thrives in the immigration debate.

A sign has been posted on the border that separates the United States from one of its two geographical neighbors.  Its message is clear and unmistakeable.  It reads simply:

Stop

It is illegal to cross the border here or any place other than a Port of Entry.

You will be arrested and detained if your cross here.

That sign was not posted on the border that is supposed to separate the United States from Mexico on the southern U.S. border.

You may also be surprised to know that the sign was not erected by President Trump or Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

It was not erected by any official of the DHS such as the Director of the U.S. Border Patrol, nor was the sign posted by any official of any government agency in the United States on the federal, state or local level.

That sign was not posted by any civilian group in the United States angered and frustrated by the decades old failures of the United States to secure its borders against the entry of international terrorists, transnational criminals, and foreign workers who routinely displace American and lawful immigrant workers and suppress the wages of those Americans and lawful immigrants who are fortunate enough to not lose their jobs to the foreign interlopers.

That sign was, however, posted by Canadian authorities on Canada’s southern border to deter aspiring illegal aliens in the United States from entering Canada illegally.

Illegal immigration from the United States to Canada has increased, as the Canadian newspaper, The Star, reported on May 14, 2018: Number of asylum seekers jumped 30 per cent in April.

The Star report noted that while in a typical month an estimated 1,500 illegal aliens enter Canada from the United States (without inspection) in April 2,479 had arrived in Quebec.

The Canadian response, according to that news report, was provided in this excerpt from the article:

Last month, Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen said he intended to travel to Nigeria in an attempt to spread the message that people who arrive in Canada and to not meet the threshold required for obtaining political asylum will be returned to their countries.

Nigeria is currently one of the largest source countries for refugee claimants entering Canada. Ottawa has previously dispatched ministers to spread similar messages in the Haitian and Central American diaspora communities in the United States.

It is important to note that Canadian officials were admitted into the United States to warn members of ethnic immigrant communities in the United States that if members of those communities were to enter Canada illegally they would face deportation.

Could you imagine how Mexico would react if the Trump administration sought permission to have U.S. government officials enter Mexico to warn Mexicans and members of Mexico’s ethnic immigrant communities that they should not seek to enter the United States without inspection because they would face arrest and deportation if they made that attempt?

Could you imagine the riots that would likely be orchestrated by the Mexican government to protest the notion of America not welcoming in anyone and everyone no matter who they are or what their backgrounds are?

In fact, let’s not forget what Nancy Pelosi had to say in numerous speeches in which she castigated immigration law enforcement officers and those who support efforts to secure America’s borders and enforce U.S. immigration law.

Consider Pelosi’s record-setting 8 hour speech on immigration on February 7, 2018 from the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives as reported by ABC News.

On March 13, 2018 Fox News reported on Acting ICE Director Tom Homan’s response to Pelosi’s outrageous slander against ICE agents, accusing them of carrying out “cowardly attacks against immigrants” for doing their job.

Going back to that sign warning about illegal entry into Canada, not one member of the mainstream media has accused the Canadian government of posting that sign out of hatred for America or Americans for discouraging illegal immigration from the United States.

President Trump has not accused the Canadian government of demonstrating hatred or bigotry the way that a succession of Mexican presidents have accused the U.S. government for enforcing U.S. immigration laws or making any effort to secure America’s southern border.

However, any time anyone in the United States suggests that America should seal its borders by whatever strategy is deemed effective is unhesitatingly castigated and charged with being racists, nativists or xenophobes by all too many politicians, pundits and supposed “journalists.”

Here is a particularly disgusting case in point.

New York Magazine’s April 11, 2017 edition contained an articleSessions Calls for Prosecution of Those Who ‘Harbor’ Undocumented ‘Aliens,’ which included the following infuriating excerpt:

On Tuesday, Sessions issued a memo calling on federal attorneys to ramp up the prosecution of undocumented immigrants (or “aliens,” as he calls them in the memo) for identity fraud, document theft, and fraudulent marriages. He also implored federal prosecutors to crack down on those who “harbor” undocumented immigrants, and instructed the Justice Department to pursue felony charges against immigrants who enter the U.S. illegally on more than one occasion.

To celebrate the DOJ’s draconian new guidance, Sessions took a trip to the border town of Nogales, Arizona. There, he broke the bad news to your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.

The title of the New York Magazine article placed quotation marks around the terms “harbor” and “aliens” as though they were slang terms.  In point of fact, the term harbor is a legal term.  In fact, a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) includes (8 U.S. Code § 1324) a section of law that specifically addresses the felony known as harboring:

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.

As for the term “Alien,”

Section 101 of the INA contains legal definitions.  This section of law defines “Alien” as follows:

(3) The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.

There is no insult in the term alien, only clarity, the clarity that the open borders/immigration anarchists seek to avoid at all costs.

Finally, the additional crimes of identity fraud, document theft, and fraudulent marriages are felonies no matter who commits those crimes and, as I have written in numerous articles and in my testimony before a number of Congressional hearings, those crimes were frequently committed by international terrorists, including the 9/11 hijackers, to enter the United States and embed themselves in communities around the U.S. as they went about their deadly preparations.

The deceptive use of language employed by Eric Levitz, the “journalist” who wrote that article for New York Magazine to paint a false and very misleading picture, should properly earn that malfeasant “journalist” the title of “propagandist.”

Actual journalists are supposed to be as objective and dispassionate as possible, particularly in reporting on issues that may engender emotions.  Propagandists, on the other hand, take sides on controversial issues.

It is clear that, at least on the immigration issue, that Mr. Levitz is incapable of being objective and even-handed.  He has betrayed his professional responsibility.

Unfortunately, Levitz is hardly unique.  There is no shortage of other supposed “journalists” who frequently resort to Orwellian use of language substituting “Newspeak” for English.

However, if these supposed “journalists” are all about open borders, why have they not attacked Canada’s Prime Minister Trudeau for Canada’s current opposition to illegal immigration?

Since Nancy Pelosi has made clear her disdain for valiant American law enforcement officers who enforce our nation’s immigration laws, the obvious question is why has she not spoken out against Canada’s policies aimed at securing its borders against illegal immigration?

New York’s Governor Cuomo has promised to protect “immigrants” from immigration law enforcement authorities and at a raucous news conference recent beat his chest declaring “I am undocumented- arrest me!”  This outrageous incident was ably discussed in a recent NY Post editorial, Andrew Cuomo’s ‘undocumented’ imagination.

If Governor Cuomo is so outraged with the notion of enforcing immigration laws and securing international borders against unlawful entry, why didn’t he chastise Canada’s Prime Minister for being unfair for literally and figuratively drawing a line against illegal immigration?

After all, New York State lies along the U.S./Canadian border.

Consider the indignant statements made by globalist U.S. politicians who have attacked President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions when Sessions declared that he would send prosecutors to the U.S. Mexican border to prosecute aliens who enter the United States without inspection.

Consider the mayors of “Sanctuary Cities” who harbor and shield illegal aliens from detection by ICE and, in so doing, undermine national security and public safety.

Sanctuary Cities Betray America, Americans And Immigrants

Consider the demonstrations staged by hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who somehow routinely emerge from the mythical shadows in which they are supposedly hiding, to denounce the government of the United States for insisting on creating secure borders to insure U.S. sovereignty.

National borders are far more than mere “lines in the sand.”  All too many national borders were drawn, not in ink or crayon, but blood.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

California’s ‘Sanctuary’ Laws Aren’t Pro-Immigrant—and Local Leaders Are Pushing Back

Illegal immigration along America’s Southwest border surged 230 percent in April compared to last year, according to a report issued by the Department of Homeland Security earlier this month. That statistic accompanied news that a caravan of about 2,000 migrants from Central America started arriving at a U.S. port of entry in southern California.

Together, these reports reveal the lack of an orderly and fair process to manage the escalating flow of both illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers to the United States. That flawed system creates both a humanitarian and a national security crisis at our border.

Yet America’s immigration challenge does not end at our doorstep. Because of “sanctuary city” jurisdictions—many recently emboldened by new State laws in California—law enforcement officers face dangerous obstacles to protecting our communities from the effects of a broken immigration system.

Under the guise of being pro-immigrant, these jurisdictions privilege a small group of criminals at the expense of the safety and well-being of American citizens, law enforcement, and law-abiding immigrants.

Here’s how it works. Sanctuary cities are State or local jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement, often by rejecting “detainer” requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or refusing to tell ICE when criminal aliens are scheduled for release. If a suspected illegal alien commits a crime, ICE will issue a detainer to request that the jurisdiction notify ICE prior to releasing the criminal, that the criminal be held for up to 48 hours after their planned release to allow for questioning and possible removal, and that the jurisdiction safely transfer custody to ICE.

State and local law enforcement agencies routinely detain suspects for violating Federal laws at the request of Federal authorities. When sanctuary cities refuse to comply with these requests, law enforcement officers must carry out immigration enforcement duties in workplaces, residences, and in the streets—far more dangerous environments to engage a criminal suspect.

In effect, these jurisdictions assert a special exemption from Federal law. The consequences of their decisions, of course, do not remain in their own backyards. They spill over into other communities across the country.

President Donald J. Trump and other Administration officials have recently highlighted a number of troubling examples:

  • Nery Estrada-Margos was arrested last year in California on charges of inflicting corporal injury to a spouse/cohabitant, only to be released just days later in defiance of Federal immigration authorities. He was arrested a couple of weeks later as a suspect in the murder of his girlfriend, Veronica Cabrera Ramirez.
  • In November 2016, San Francisco Police arrested Santos Lopez-Avila for possession of cocaine for sale and other charges. Lopez had been deported three times and had previous convictions relating to drug dealing. Last year, he was arrested again in San Francisco, whose authorities did not honor ICE’s request for a detainer. He remains at-large.
  • New York City Police arrested Kendel Felix, a citizen of St. Lucia and a national of the United Kingdom, on various criminal charges in 2012 and 2013. Despite an immigration detainer lodged by ICE, he was released in April 2013. He was convicted in September 2016 of a kidnapping/abduction resulting in death.
  • San Francisco Police arrested an illegal alien and alleged gang member more than 10 times between 2013 and 2017 for charges including rape, assault, and robbery. ICE requested to have the individual transferred to its custody multiple times. On each occasion, that request was denied.

“The State of California is sheltering dangerous criminals in a brazen and lawless attack on our Constitutional system of government,” President Trump said. “Every state in our Union is subject to the laws and Constitution of the United States.”

To that end, the Department of Justice has filed legal action against three California laws. These policies intentionally obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration law, regulate private entities that seek to cooperate with Federal authorities, and impede consultation and communication between Federal and State officials. The laws both endanger State residents and introduce confusion for local law enforcement.

“We constantly have to second-guess ourselves,” Capt. Derrick Hesselein, commander of the Santa Rita Jail in California, told The Washington Post.

On May 16, President Trump met with local California officials at the White House to discuss their recent efforts to push back against California’s “sanctuary state” status. Many of these community leaders underscored that they are bound first and foremost to the U.S. Constitution, not California State law. Their goal is simple: protect their constituents.

“They’re releasing these criminals, not by their houses. They’re not releasing them by their houses. They’re releasing them by our houses,” San Jacinto Mayor Crystal Ruiz said. “Every day we’re getting more and more reports from the police department about how they can’t arrest these people.”

While the Administration is taking every step in its power to confront the danger of sanctuary cities, Attorney General Jeff Sessions once again called on Congress to pass real, lasting immigration reform.

“This is the year that we have to move Congress,” the Attorney General said, citing efforts to clear the hurdles that prevent law enforcement officers from doing their job. “This time, let’s not come up short.”

RELATED STUDY: MS-13 Resurgence: Immigration Enforcement Needed to Take Back Our Streets

RELATED ARTICLE: Donald Trump: We Need Merit-Based Immigration to Fill Jobs in Growing Economy

The Reason Liberals View Melania Trump as a Threat

Need more evidence that there are two Americas? Here: Left-wing hatred of Melania Trump is inversely proportional to flyover admiration for the first lady.

In just the last month, late-night clown Jimmy Kimmel mocked Trump’s Slovenian accent, CNN contributor April Ryan attacked her as “not culturally American,” former Hillary Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines derided her genteel presence at former [first lady Barbara Bush’s] funeral, and horror writer Stephen King snickered at her hospitalization this week for kidney surgery.

Yet, while partisans in the political press and entertainment media work hard to stoke division against and resentment of the Trump administration, “Melania” is now among the fastest-growing baby names in the nation, according to recently released Social Security data. And a new poll by anti-Trump CNN released on Monday reported a 10 percent jump in the first lady’s favorability ratings—from 47 percent in January to 57 percent last week.

That’s nearly 6 in 10 Americans with a positive view of FLOTUS. Uh-oh!

Imagine how much higher those impressive numbers would be if the same celeb tabloid reporters and TV hosts who slavered over the Obamas in Us magazine and on “The View” afforded Melania Trump the same courtesies. Imagine if the same couture divas who organized “Runway to Win” Obama campaign fundraisers and published breathless weekly reports on “Michelle Obama’s Best Looks Ever” harnessed their influence to promote Trump’s style and fashion sense.

Despite Trump’s successful career as an internationally photographed model featured in Harper’s Bazaar, GQ, Vanity Fair, and Vogue, lib-dominated fashion and celebrity magazines have shunned her. Pop culture editors and producers—who turned Barack and Michelle Obama into the Beltway Brangelina, promoting their election campaign, re-election campaign, books, and every last pet project—have ghosted her.

Why? Fear.

The first lady is not just strikingly beautiful. She is worldly, well-traveled, and well-read. She speaks English, French, German, Italian, and Serbian, in addition to her native Slovenian—more languages than any other woman who has served as America’s first lady. Her devotion to son Barron is exemplary. Her aversion to limelight and lack of political ambition are refreshing. So is her ability to refrain from public grievance-mongering over “sacrifices” and trade-offs made between work and home life (looking at you, Hill and ‘Chelle O).

The hostile White House press corps blames Trump’s own reticence for the publicity vacuum around her. But I believe there’s something deeper at work:

More exposure to this interesting and remarkable woman would mean more familiarity with her. More familiarity with her might mean more popularity. And God forbid there be more Republican women in the public eye who can compete with—and win against—the usual parade of militant kvetchers and moaners who pass themselves off as feminist role models.

Doubling down, both Clinton and Michelle Obama have assailed all women who didn’t vote for their political agendas as brainwashed by their husbands or selfishly unenlightened. “In light of this last election, I’m concerned about us, as women, and what we think about ourselves and about each other,” Obama complained at the United State of Women summit in California last week. “What is going on in our heads where we let that happen?”

It’s called choice. It’s called rejecting the tired old ideas that some women are more equal than others or that one party has a gender-based monopoly over the other. Smug Democratic divas who unleash their contempt for independent-minded women instead of working to win them over have learned nothing from the 2016 election.

So Trump, like so many prominent GOP women before her, will continue to be snubbed, humiliated, and demonized by narrative control freaks because women on the right threaten the cultural hegemony of the left. Black or white, rich or poor, centrist or “far right,” native-born or naturalized, Republican mothers, wives, and daughters must be otherized and forced to stay in media-manufactured lanes.

When leftists can’t win on their ideas, they resort to marginalizing the messengers of ideology they abhor—and their mates. It’s not an attractive look.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Michelle Malkin

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

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of First Lady Melania Trump is by Ron Sachs/CNP/AdMedia/Newscom

Why Did Eric Schneiderman Assault Several Women? The Question No One Asks

Something struck me reading that New York’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has been accused of violent physical and verbal assaults against several women.  He choked and slapped them and made racist comments during sex. (He claimed that is was all sexual play but the women tell a much different story.)

It wasn’t just the hypocrisy of Schneiderman that struck me – he had been a vocal advocate of the #MeToo movement and was using his office to sue Harvey Weinstein for conduct in which he himself was engaged.

No, it was something more that moved me.  As I was reading the article about Schneiderman I felt I was reading the porn film offerings from the cable TV companies.  Those offerings by mainstream cable companies like Verizon feature hardcore sex with humiliation, violence, and racial stereotypes.   In fact, these are some of the MOST popular themes of porn movies and porn websites today.

Eric Schneiderman didn’t become a serial abuser of women because of what he studied in his constitutional law class at Harvard.  No, there can be no doubt that he was schooled by the porn industry and its promoters, like Verizon and like Game of Thrones and The Deuce on HBO, and by Twitter and Facebook porn so easily accessible to all, and by Instagram and Snapchat photo collections, hotel/motel porn, 50 Shades of Gray books and movies,  etc. etc. – all the targets of the Dirty Dozen List here at the National Center on Sexual Exploitation year after year.

How do I know this?  Because his is a story we hear every day from the wives and girlfriends of the Eric Schneidermans all across the U.S. and beyond.  The potent power of porn destroys countless men, women, and children every day.  It’s no secret.

The #MeToo cultural phenomenon will likely soon fade but will the results be measured merely by the number of boorish and criminal-minded men who have been removed from office or will we see an authentic, positive change in culture?  That change can only come about when we as a society face the fact that there is a seamless connection between all forms of sexual exploitation and that connection is PORNOGRAPHY.  You can see this in the attached research summary on the public health harms of pornography.

I am thankful to report that because of your support we are making a difference.

Patrick A. Trueman, Esq.

CEO & PRESIDENT

As president, Patrick Trueman spearheads efforts to change corporate policies that facilitate sexual exploitation through the Dirty Dozen List. This aggressive project, educates executives, galvanizes public attention, and spurs popular actions to defend human dignity. Under his leadership, NCOSE has produced policy improvements at a wide range of notable institutions, including Google, Wal-Mart, the Department of Justice, Verizon, the Federal Communications Commission, and more.

In 2015, Mr. Trueman established the NCOSE Law Center, which serves as a resource for legal efforts to combat illegal pornography, sexually oriented businesses, and to bring innovative lawsuits against public institutions facilitating sexual exploitation. In 2010, he founded PornHarmsResearch.com to provide peer-reviewed research and talking points on the harms of pornography.

On a global level, Mr. Trueman leads NCOSE’s Coalition to End Sexual Exploitation, an international coalition, which boasts nearly 300 organizations and academic experts who are committed to sharing strategies and resources for combating public & private harms caused by pornography.

Patrick Trueman is a former Chief of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Criminal Division at the U. S. Department of Justice from 1988 to 1993. While there, he supervised the prosecution of child sex crimes, child pornography, and obscenity. He managed an office of twenty of prosecutors and support staff, and worked with the nation’s ninety-three United States Attorneys to initiate and coordinate federal prosecutions.

During his 41 years as a lawyer, he litigated cases at all levels of the federal system, including in the United States Supreme Court. He has been an advisor to many municipalities on First Amendment law and has helped draft ordinances to end or curb the impact of sexually oriented businesses such as pornography shops, strip clubs, and related establishments. A recognized international expert, Mr. Trueman has traveled to Europe, South American, the Middle East, and other areas to speak about human trafficking or the effects of television sex and violence on the family.

Mr. Trueman served as chief of staff to a Member of the United States Congress. From 1976 to 1982, he was Executive Director and General Counsel to Americans United for Life, a national public interest law firm in Chicago. He lives just outside Washington, D.C., and is married to Laura Clay Trueman. Laura and Pat Trueman have three children, Patrick, Claire, and Elizabeth.

Blame Hamas, Not Ivanka Trump

Perhaps because they never were on board with President Donald Trump’s promise to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, some have unfairly targeted Ivanka Trump in the aftermath of the embassy opening.

There has been an outrageous effort to both implicitly and explicitly connect Ivanka’s presence in Jerusalem at the embassy opening to the violent Hamas protests and riots along the border.

The most egregious example is the cover of the New York Daily News, featuring a picture of a smiling Ivanka Trump by the headline “Daddy’s Little Ghoul.”

But the New York Daily News was far from the only critic. “The juxtaposition of images of dead and wounded Palestinians and Ivanka Trump smiling in Jerusalem like a Zionist Marie Antoinette tell us a lot about America’s relationship to Israel right now,” wrote New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg.

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said, “For the rest of the world you actually saw an administration, a White House, and—we’ll say it since Ivanka Trump was there—a family completely out of touch with the realities of the region that they’re dealing with.”

Even comedian Stephen Colbert joined in, referring to Ivanka as “Peace Treaty Barbie.”

Let’s be real: targeting Ivanka is lazy.

Her presence at the opening was extremely appropriate considering she represents the Trump administration and is Jewish. And the appearance of her husband, Jared Kushner, was also appropriate: He’s been tasked with working on Middle Eastern affairs and is the grandson of Holocaust survivors.

Nor was Ivanka wrong to show excitement over the opening of the embassy. Let’s remember: An eventual embassy move to Jerusalem was already ingrained in U.S. foreign policy before Donald Trump’s election. Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 with a bipartisan majority under President Bill Clinton.

That legislation required the U.S. Embassy to move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by 1999, unless a president delayed it on grounds of national security.

At the end of the day, Trump followed through on a long-held promise—and there was nothing wrong with Ivanka Trump revealing her appreciation of the day finally arriving.

And it’s frankly outrageous to hold Ivanka responsible for Hamas’ actions. As The Heritage Foundation’s Jim Phillips, an expert in Middle Eastern affairs, noted on The Daily Signal podcast Monday when discussing the Palestinian protests, Israel “has to defend its borders, and I would blame all of this on Hamas, which is organizing these demonstrations. Hamas is considered a terrorist organization not only by the U.S. and Israel but by the [European Union].”

Or as United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley pointed out Tuesday: “The Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States to move our embassy.”

But the media’s behavior shouldn’t be surprising. It has been common practice during this administration’s tenure to avoid inconvenient truths.

The media resists acknowledging any of the president’s successes—and he has had a “winning” past few weeks, especially in the foreign policy sphere.

From ending the Iran deal to getting back hostages from North Korea, and capturing top ISIS leaders, the president racked up some major victories the past two weeks.

Hamas is an opportunistic aggravator and terrorist organization.

Our media should be careful to not play into its propaganda, and this includes unfairly targeting Ivanka Trump.

Such behavior doesn’t hurt the right, and it doesn’t just hurt Ivanka—it hurts all Americans, because it gives Hamas the media attention it wants and further divides our country.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Ginny Montalbano

Ginny Montalbano is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Ginny. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

How Hamas Sabotages Gaza’s Economy to Advance Terror Aims

In Context: The Recent Violence in Gaza

Moving Embassy to Jerusalem Shows the US Is Unique. Just Like Israel.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Ivanka Trump in Jerusalem, Israel, on May 13 for the new embassy opening is by Amir Cohen/Reuters/Newscom)

Moving Day! U.S. Celebrates New Jerusalem Embassy

It’s been a whirlwind few weeks for Israel — first with a jubilant 70th anniversary of independence party and now, with the official opening of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. For our allies, today has been a long time coming. American presidents have been promising to take this step for more than 20 years. Now, after decades of waiting, we finally have a White House that means it.

While crowds of dignitaries looked on, a delegation from the United States that included the president’s daughter, Ivanka, and son-in-law, Jared, helped make history for two nations that have believed in this cause from the beginning. “My friends,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began, “this is a great day for Israel. It’s a great day for America. It’s a great day for our fantastic partnership… but I believe it’s also a great day for peace.” Truth and peace, he explained, “are interconnected. A peace that is based on lies will only crash on the rocks of Middle Eastern realities. And the truth will always be that Jerusalem has always been, will always be, the capital of the Jewish state.”

For Donald Trump, today’s ceremony marks another major milestone on the growing list of White House accomplishments. As Jared Kushner reminded everyone, “Presidents before him have backed down from their pledge to move the American Embassy once they were in office. This president delivered. Because when President Trump makes a promise, he keeps it.” As far back as the campaign, this president vowed to bring America’s physical presence in Israel in line with our stated policy: that Jerusalem is the eternal undivided capital of the Jewish people.

The decision is a bold one, since it signals that America won’t be held hostage to a fractious peace process that’s frightened other administrations away from doing what this White House is. While other presidents let the threat of violence dictate American policy, Donald Trump refuses to make decisions based on what other groups think. As he’s done from the beginning, this president is sending a strong message that America is not going to be bullied or pushed around. The United States will stand with Israel in hopes that there can someday be managed peace.

From a biblical standpoint, the magnitude of this day isn’t lost on evangelicals. This moment further solidifies Israel as a sovereign nation — the only country to return and occupy their land, speaking their native tongue after a diasporic 1900 years. But as important as this day is to Christians, it’s also important to Israelis, who’ve waited patiently for their greatest ally to acknowledge in action what it did in spirit.

To the world, it signals a new chapter in America’s foreign policy. Under Barack Obama, our country was babysitting the status quo, terrified that a show of strength like this would heighten tensions. And yes, it is a volatile area — but there are new dynamics in the region with Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia that are positive. As Gregg Roman, the director of the Middle East Forum, pointed out back when the move was announced, this policy of timidity has gotten us nowhere. “Years of concessions, of work to build the Palestinian Authority into something capable of handling the levers of power that a state must wield, have brought us no closer to peace. Shaming Israel politically for defending its own people hasn’t worked either.”

President Trump is re-establishing a constitutional order that the world hasn’t witnessed in years. He won’t be cowed by the media or intimidated by other leaders. And his approval ratings continue to climb with his most important base because he’s willing to fight on these things. Trump’s strategy in Israel, on North Korea, and Iran, are all perfect examples of Ronald Reagan’s motto, “Peace through strength.” Together with millions of Americans and Israelis, we thank him — not only for having the will to act, but the necessary courage.

As the president told all of those on hand by satellite, “The U.S. will always be a great friend of Israel and a partner in the cause of freedom and peace,” President Trump told the crowd. “We extend a hand in friendship to Israel, the Palestinians, and to all of their neighbors. May there be peace. May God bless this embassy. May God bless all who serve here, and may God bless the United States of America.”


Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama Prison Rule Gets Correctional Action

Colorado Makes a Mesa Religious Freedom

Podcast: The US Embassy Opens in Jerusalem

RELATED VIDEOS: 

U.S. embassy opens in Jerusalem – Full cemermony

Dr. Robert Jeffress – Opening Prayer at the U.S. Embassy Dedication in Jerusalem | 5-14-18

The Jerusalem Maneuver

The Obama Legacy Deserves to Be Destroyed

It’s strange that a president who had such a transformative effect on our national discourse will leave such a negligible policy legacy.

But Barack Obama, whose imperial term changed the way Americans interact and in some ways paved the way for the Trump presidency, is now watching his much-celebrated and mythologized two-term legacy be systematically demolished. This, in many ways, tells us that American governance still works.

When President Donald Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, he was able to do so without much difficulty because the agreement hinged on presidential fiat rather than national consensus. Obama’s appeasement of Iran was only one in a string of unilateral norm-busting projects that deserve to be dismantled.

You’ll remember the panic-stricken coverage we endured when the United States withdrew from the faux international Paris climate agreement last year. It’s true that the deal was oversold as a matter of policy (by both parties for political reasons), but it was symbolic of how the Obama administration concerned itself more with international consensus than domestic compromise.

We know this because the president would never have won ratification for a deal remotely similar to the one he entered—nor did he attempt to. Obama, despite the hagiographic framing of his scandal-ridden presidency, had about as much interest in genuine concession as his political adversaries did.

Obama allies at home incessantly pointed to poll numbers as a justification for his executive abuse, mostly because the only polls that really mattered, congressional elections, continued to soundly reject his agenda.

The defense rested on the idea that the Republican-led Congress had failed to “do its job” and act on issues Democrats had deemed vital. But Congress, of course, “acted” all the time by checking the president’s ambitions. This was not only well within its purview but also in many ways the reason the electorate handed the GOP Congress in the first place.

Even if you substantively supported Obama’s actions—as I do on legalizing the children of immigrants who are in the country illegally, for instance—the reasoning that girded these supposedly temporary executive decisions was soon revealed to be abusive.

In 2012, Obama told the nation that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which by any standard was a stand-in for legislation, was merely a “temporary stopgap measure.” By the time Trump overturned it, the measure represented “who we are as a people.” That’s because by “temporary,” Obama always meant “until Democrats can make it permanent through the courts or electoral victories.”

Even when implementing laws Congress could pass, Obama and his allies relied on coercing participation through mandates. But when it became inconvenient, they began arbitrarily implementing parts of laws. Administrative discretion became administrative abuse. When the president decided Obamacare’s employer mandate was politically inconvenient, for example, he simply skipped it for expediency.

The Constitution doesn’t say, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law unless liberals tell us it’s super important.” Yet shortly after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration realized it would need more subsidies and asked for an appropriation from Congress.

When Congress, then teeming with politicians elected on the promise of overturning Obamacare, refused, then-Treasury Secretary Jack Lew ordered the administration to begin making “cost-sharing reduction” payments anyway, without any public legal justification.

Obama created a $7 billion per year appropriation for insurance companies participating in the supposedly self-sufficient and competitive state health care exchanges. Not a single liberal pundit that I know of concerned himself with this norm-breaking.

One federal court found the Obamacare subsidy unconstitutional, and the case was working its way toward the Supreme Court. But then again, no administration in memory was stopped more often by courts, often by unanimous Supreme Court decisions. Whether it was ignoring the Senate in making appointments or claiming to rewrite employment law, Obama tried to function without constitutional restraints.

None of this even breaches the unprecedented regulatory regime Obama built to circumvent the legislative branch. Even The New York Times characterized his governing as “bureaucratic bulldozing, rather than legislative transparency.”

Fortunately, it is also unsustainable. As we now see, this kind of governance not only corrodes constitutional order but also undermines stability, as new presidents busy themselves overturning the executive actions and international agreements enacted by the previous.

While most Americans aren’t sticklers for process, it seems they are content with destroying legacies built on the rickety foundation of unilateralism for political reasons.

That’s fine, too. It means that if Trump engages in similar legislative efforts through the executive office, his agenda will also be dismantled one day. That’s as it should be.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of the forthcoming “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of former President Barack Obama, who is now watching his much-celebrated and mythologized two-term legacy be systematically demolished. (Photo: Leigh Vogel/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

The Downside of Regulating Facebook

James L. GattusoThe end result would likely be a shift to a fee-based system, where users would have to pay to use Facebook and other platforms.


In congressional testimony last month, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he would support regulation of his own company.

Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and John Kennedy, R-La., have now taken him up on the offer, introducing a bill, S. 2728, to impose broad new restrictions on how Facebook and other social media companies can collect and handle consumer data.

Taking Facebook to Task

The legislation—dubbed the Social Media Privacy Protection and Consumer Rights Act—was no surprise. Klobuchar and Kennedy had made clear weeks ago that they were planning to propose federal intervention in social media markets.

As Kennedy succinctly put it to Zuckerberg: “Your user agreement sucks.”

The goal was to address privacy concerns raised by the acquisition and use of consumer data from Facebook users by Cambridge Analytica data firm.

“We can do it the easy way or the hard way,” Kennedy bluntly stated regarding his regulatory plans, adding, “I do not want to regulate Facebook half to death, but we do have … problems we’ve discovered.”

The bill is a grab bag of mandates and restrictions on how social media networks operate. The most widely discussed provision is a requirement that social media platforms use “plain English” in their user agreements, so consumers can better understand them.

That line was memorable and garnered quite a bit of attention for the Louisiana lawmaker. But the irony is that Congress is hardly in a position to lecture private companies on the plain use of the English language, as anyone who has ever read congressional legislation can attest.

It’s About the Data

The meat of the bill, however, is not linguistics, but limits on the collection of consumer data by Facebook and other social media platforms.

Among its provisions, the bill would require social media networks by law to disable consumer data tracking and collection (when so requested by a user); to provide notice of a data breach within 72 hours; to delete user data when asked; and to provide copies of what has been collected about them.

The end result would likely be a shift to a fee-based system, where users would have to pay to use Facebook.

The bill avoids the most extreme restrictions that have been proposed. It doesn’t ban the use of consumer data, nor does it require an affirmative “opt-in” for such data to be used as a general rule.

But consumers should not celebrate. The Klobuchar-Kennedy plan is likely only the first volley in a probable bidding war over regulating social media networks. Even the mandates in the current bill could threaten the benefits consumers receive from social media platforms.

For instance, by making data more difficult to acquire and to use, advertising revenue may no longer be able to support social media platforms. The end result would likely be a shift to a fee-based system, where users would have to pay to use Facebook and other platforms.

That would be a net loss for most users, who—based on their usage habits—like the free access to social media made possible by advertising revenue.

So far, Facebook has not made a fuss over the proposed new rules. In fact, it has openly supported some of the provisions, including notifications of breaches within 72 hours and the “plain English” requirement.

We Don’t Need a New Law

But this should create no free pass. Regulations making it more difficult to use consumer data often make competition more difficult because smaller rivals may find it harder to absorb the regulatory costs.

The impact of regulations varies, of course, based on the specific regulation, but it’s a danger policymakers should always keep in mind.

Robust laws are already on the books addressing breaches of commitments to consumers.

This doesn’t mean government should do nothing to ensure that an internet-based company such as Facebook complies with its promises to consumers.

If data has been used in violation of commitments made to the users of a platform, the firm should be held accountable for the violation. But that does not necessarily require new regulation.

Robust laws are already on the books addressing breaches of commitments to consumers. Moreover, agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission already have rules that can—and often are—used to enforce privacy commitments.

Consumers can also use state contract law to sue Facebook for any breach of its commitments. No new rules should be imposed without a clear showing that the many existing tools are not already adequate to protect consumer privacy.

This may not be the “easy way” or the “hard way” of making markets work, but it is the right way.

Reprinted from the Daily Signal.

EDITORS NOTE: Many former Facebook users are go to new social media platforms. One of them is MeWe.com.

Podcast: The Influence Netflix, Other TV Has on Kids

Joining us today is Tim Winter, president of the Parents Television Council. Winter explains how Netflix and other new media technologies have made it harder than ever for parents to monitor their kids’ media consumption. Yet now media is promoting, in addition to sex and violence, suicide, making it crucial for parents to be involved. Plus: President Trump floats the idea of taking away the media’s credentials.

PODCAST BY

Portrait of Katrina Trinko

Katrina Trinko

Katrina Trinko is managing editor of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal podcast. She is also a member of USA Today’s Board of Contributors. Send an email to Katrina. Twitter: @KatrinaTrinko.

Portrait of Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis is the commentary editor of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal podcastSend an email to Daniel. Twitter: @JDaniel_Davis.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of the Netflix show, “13 Reasons Why,” which has been accused of romanticizing suicide. (Photo: Mike Blake/Reuters/Newscom)