Fuel Prices Hit Record Highs After Biden Promised To Lower Costs

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The average price of gasoline in the U.S. shot up to a new all-time record Tuesday, less than two months after President Joe Biden guaranteed lower prices.

The average pump price nationwide surged to $4.37 per gallon early Tuesday, the highest since March, according to AAA data. In February, Biden said he would “work like the devil” to bring prices down and in March, he promised gasoline would decline between 10-35 cents per gallon after he announced a historic release of U.S. emergency oil stocks.

President Joe Biden ordered a 50-million-barrel Strategic Petroleum Reserve release in November, a 30-million-barrel release on March 1 and a 180-million-barrel release on March 31 to combat rising gasoline prices. Energy prices worldwide have skyrocketed in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“There’s little, if any, good news about fuel prices heading into summer, and the problem could become worse should we see an above average hurricane season, which could knock out refinery capacity at a time we badly need it as refined product inventories continue to plummet,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at research firm GasBuddy, said in a statement Tuesday.

Biden has also attempted to lower prices at the pump by temporarily scrapping an environmental regulation prohibiting the sale of gasoline with 15% ethanol. Experts and meat industry groups slammed the rule change, saying it would drive already-high food costs up.

But the Biden administration has dragged its feet on opening up domestic oil and gas drilling in light of surging consumer prices. The Department of the Interior has yet to hold a single onshore lease sale and chose not to appeal a federal judge’s ruling that a 2021 offshore lease sale was illegal.

“There is no doubt the White House is hoping that Americans simply become numb to yet another disastrous result of their energy failures, but the pain at the pump is too real and everyone intrinsically understands that Joe Biden is to blame,” Power the Future executive director Daniel Turner said in a statement.

“President Biden is now a two-time record holder for the highest gas prices, the most oil drained from the strategic reserve and re-injecting the term ‘inflation’ back into the national lexicon for the first time since the 1970s. This type of failure doesn’t happen by accident,” he continued. “The President’s green ideology is a man-made disaster and we’re all paying the price.”

Meanwhile, total oil production in the U.S. has declined for three consecutive months even as administration officials have argued it is at historic highs.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Ad Claims Biden Can Cut Gas Prices By 30 Cents Per Gallon ‘With The Stroke Of A Pen’

Democrats Urge Biden To Boost Oil, Gas Drilling Amid Energy Crisis

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

Left Condones Violence in Hysteria over Roe — Biden’s DHS, DOJ, FBI do Nothing

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Where is Law Enforcement in these examples of leftist violence and harassment? Since O’Biden condones it, does this make it okay?

Following excerpt from the Family Research Council article below:

“At the White House, where Joe Biden refused to condemn the protests against the Supreme Court justices last week, Press Secretary Jen Psaki finally put out a tepid tweet Monday morning, reiterating the president’s support for the demonstrations but finally acknowledging that judges should be “able to do their jobs without concern for their personal safety.” As usual, it was too little, too late. Justices like Samuel Alito have already had to cancel events, move to undisclosed locations, and cope with their entire family’s movements now involving “heightened security details.”

“In a pointless gesture, Google finally removed the map of the justices’ houses from the protestors’ website — but not until Sunday, when the harassment was already well underway. Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.) could only shake her head. “I’ve never seen an insatiable desire for a culture of death in this country like what we’re seeing right now… There is nothing sacred left in this country that the radical Left will not go after. If it doesn’t line up with their crooked thinking, then they’re going to oppose it. They’re over the top. They’re extreme… And Americans just don’t agree with [them]… I think we’re going to find that out when all is said and done.”

Unrest Assured in Left’s Hysteria over Roe

For Justice Brett Kavanaugh, it probably feels like 2018 all over again. With a hundred protestors outside his home, screaming at his daughters’ windows, the parallels to his ugly confirmation hearing were everywhere. And thanks to the angry mob’s ringleaders, the family’s flashbacks aren’t going away any time soon. “We’re about to get doomsday,” neighbor Lacie Wooten-Holway said, justifying her decision to share the Kavanaughs’ address, “so I’m not going to be civil to that man at all.”

Long before the Supreme Court leak, Wooten-Holway has stood with her signs on the sidewalk, a one-woman demonstration against a justice she can’t stand. In Facebook posts over the last several months, she’s urged area families to join her. Few have. They “worry about lines being crossed,” one told the Washington Post. “This constant escalation,” another neighbor argued, “makes it dangerous.” In January, when Wooten-Holway moved her vigil to Chief Justice John Roberts’s house, a neighbor drove by, rolled down the window, and yelled, “I may agree with you, but leave the justice alone!”

Months later, the hostile movement she belongs to isn’t about to leave anyone alone. Across the country, churches braced for the Left’s Sunday service threats to come true. In Los Angeles and New York, parishioners were swarmed by anti-life crowds, who either interrupted mass or “swarmed” churchgoers outside. That was tame compared to what happened in Madison, Wisconsin, where a state family policy council, Wisconsin Family Action, was set on fire and then vandalized. “If abortions aren’t safe,” the arsonists spraypainted, “then you aren’t either.”

Julaine Appling, who’s worked with FRC for years, couldn’t believe the damage. “There’s nothing we have done to warrant this,” she told reporters afterward. “We ought to be able to take different sides on issues without fearing for our lives.” The blaze, which was apparently set by a Molotov cocktail thrown through Appling’s window, could have hurt any number of people if the office had been open. “Apparently, the tolerance that the Left demands is truly a one-way street. Violence,” she insisted, “has become their answer to everything. This is what happens when leadership… implies that violence is okay,” Appling said in a nod to the state and federal Democrats who’ve stood by while the situation spirals out of control.

At the White House, where Joe Biden refused to condemn the protests against the Supreme Court justices last week, Press Secretary Jen Psaki finally put out a tepid tweet Monday morning, reiterating the president’s support for the demonstrations but finally acknowledging that judges should be “able to do their jobs without concern for their personal safety.” As usual, it was too little, too late. Justices like Samuel Alito have already had to cancel events, move to undisclosed locations, and cope with their entire family’s movements now involving “heightened security details.”

In a pointless gesture, Google finally removed the map of the justices’ houses from the protestors’ website — but not until Sunday, when the harassment was already well underway. Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.) could only shake her head. “I’ve never seen an insatiable desire for a culture of death in this country like what we’re seeing right now… There is nothing sacred left in this country that the radical Left will not go after. If it doesn’t line up with their crooked thinking, then they’re going to oppose it. They’re over the top. They’re extreme… And Americans just don’t agree with [them]… I think we’re going to find that out when all is said and done.”

Even so, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is plowing ahead anyway, forcing a second vote on a bill that already failed this past February. But that’s how desperate the party is. They’re willing to force Democrats back out on the limb of a wildly unpopular abortion measure that cannot pass — or even muster the full party’s support. At the end of the day, Walorksi said, “Schumer can do what he wants to do… But I think we’ll see the forces of life will win no matter what resistance [he] and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi put up.”

In the meantime, things aren’t exactly looking up for the leadership duo. Despite the Left’s hysterical reaction, party strategists were probably unhappy to learn that this entire fiasco is adding up to a big fat nothing for Democrats this November. As much as it must have pained CNN to admit it, the network’s polling shows that nothing about the controversy so far seems to “have shaken the midterm landscape.” In fact, if either side has been galvanized, it’s conservatives, where the number of Republicans energized about voting this fall rose nine percent to the Democrats’ seven. Even more telling, 38 percent of voters said that overturning Roe would make them “happy” — double digits over the number (20 percent) who said it would make them “angry.”

So while Pelosi calls for national prayer to protect the killing, and justices like Clarence Thomas refuse to bend (“We can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you the outcomes you want”), the only thing that’s clear to anyone is what the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel spelled out last week: abortion is all the Democrats have to run on. And so far, it’s turning out to be just as much of a political loser as the rest of Biden’s extreme agenda.

Royal A. Brown, III. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Purging, not packing, the Supreme Court

A 75-Year-Old Warning about Those Who Say ‘Listen to the Science’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

When people say “follow the science,” often what they’re really saying is “follow our plan.”

On his first day as president, Joe Biden, flanked by a portrait of Ben Franklin, called on the federal government to “advance environmental justice” and “be guided by the best science.”

In many ways, Biden’s words came as no surprise.

Throughout the 2020 campaign and after, Biden had often repeated the phrases “listen to the science” and “I believe in science,” presumably to contrast himself with his opponent.

Biden didn’t stop there, however. He included the mantra in one of the first executive orders he signed, noting that it would be his administration’s official policy to “listen to the science.”

The phrase seems harmless enough. The scientific method is highly trusted, and for good reason. It has been a boon to humanity and helped bring about many of the marvels of our modern world.

Yet distinguished thinkers new and old have warned us to proceed with caution when confronted with pleas to “listen to the science.”

The economist Ludwig von Mises once observed the problem with using scientific claims to shape the modern world. He suggested that in many cases people invoke science simply to tell people what they must do.

“The planners pretend that their plans are scientific and that there cannot be disagreement with regard to them among well-intentioned and decent people,” Mises wrote in his 1947 essay “Planned Chaos.”

Most people agree that science is a useful tool, and Mises was certainly one of them. The problem Mises was getting at was that science can’t actually tell us what we should do, which is the realm of subjective value judgments. Science can only tell us what is.

“[T]here is no such thing as a scientific ought,” Mises wrote, echoing a famous argument by David Hume. “Science is competent to establish what is.” (For a deeper dive on the is-ought problem, read Hume’s celebrated 1729 work, A Treatise on Human Nature.)

The economist continued:

“[Science] can never dictate what ought to be and what ends people should aim at. It is a fact that men disagree in their value judgments. It is insolent to arrogate to oneself the right to overrule the plans of other people and to force them to submit to the plan of the planner.”

As Mises correctly saw, oftentimes when people say “follow the science,” they’re really saying “follow our plan.”

When teen activist Greta Thunberg exhorts us to follow the science on climate change, she’s not saying we should acknowledge that the planet is warming and that humans play a role in the Earth’s climate. She’s saying people should adopt her plan and that of other climate activists, which includes transitioning off meat, giving up flying (something to be achieved either through shame or coercion), taxing fossil fuels, and myriad other proposals.

Billionaire climate activist Bill Gates explained in February why changes like moving off meat should be done, and how.

“I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef,” Gates remarked in an interview with Technology Review, noting that emissions per pound of beef are not quite optimal. “You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

The proposals offered by Thunberg and Gates—who also said government should just listen to the scientists—may be good ones; they may be bad. The key is to understand that their proposals entail value judgments, not just science.

Similarly, in 2020 we repeatedly saw pleas for Americans to “listen to the science.” But the fundamental disagreement over COVID-19 was not over science (though there was certainly some, evidenced by the CDC’s flip-flops, modeling disasters, and widespread confusion over the lethality of COVID-19).

Nearly everyone understood the overarching science: a new and deadly virus had emerged from Asia and was spreading across continents. The primary disagreement arose over what actions should be taken to limit the spread, who should execute them (individuals or the state), and whether people should be coerced into action.

Many of the questions Americans faced were complicated.

If social distancing saves lives, should businesses be ordered closed? If so, which ones? What should be done if people aren’t social distancing in public? Should sick people be physically confined in their homes? What about healthy people? Assuming that face coverings limit the spread, should they be recommended or forced? What happens when people refuse?

These are important questions. But again, they are ethical ones, not scientific ones. Sound science is merely a tool that can help us reach decisions on these matters. The point is that Americans should heed Mises’s warning and beware planners who say we must listen to them because their plans are scientific.

Complex ethical problems demand solutions, and, as journalist H.L. Mencken pointed out, “for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

Outsourcing our complex ethical problems to people with prestigious degrees may be simple, but it’s also wrong. Ethical questions are about what we ought to do, and, as Mises saw, there is no ought in science.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED ARTICLE: Reuters Director of Data Science: I Was FIRED For Showing Police Do Not Kill More Black Suspects

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

WATCH NOW ‘2,000 MULES’: Election Fraud 2020

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Watch this film by Dinesh D’Souza, 2,000 Mules, which analyzes data obtained by True the Vote, showing how ballot harvesting manipulated the 2020 election.

“America needs to wake up” and take the malfeasance that occurred in the 2020 election — most notably through ballot traffickers — seriously, or it could happen again in future elections, True the Vote president and founder Catherine Engelbrecht.

The film details how paid operatives, or “mules,” trafficked ballots, “typically in the middle of the night,” to mail-in drop boxes.

Filmmaker Dinesh ‘Souza explains, “True the Vote bought geo tracking data in the five key states. We’re talking here about Arizona, we’re talking about Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania,” he said, noting they “only bought the data in the urban cities.”

“And so this is a coordinated illegal operation. Now for me as a moviemaker, what made this so thrilling is that you don’t just have the geo tracking data, but you have, at least in some states, video surveillance,” he explained, adding that there is no good explanation for the actions revealed in the movie.

“I think this is really why this movie poses such a problem, because we’re not just talking about anomalies,” he said, adding that in the film you can see the ballot trafficking “with your naked eyes again and again and again,” he said, noting they traced the money trail.

“Remember these mules aren’t coming up with their own ballots. They’re picking up their ballots at left-wing organizations that we call vote stash houses. That’s where they get the ballots and then they go dump them in the mail-in drop boxes,” D’Souza said.

These are all connected, he said. “They’re going, by and large to a group — they’re going to NGOs, or ‘nonprofit organizations.’ These are deeply nested in these inner cities. These are the people that are sort of cultivating the ballots. They’re the ones that hire the mules,” he said, adding that True the Vote has a list of the organizations, and also the cell phone IDs of the 2,000 mules.

“The idea is that the illegal ballots are curated at these left-wing organizations and then delivered by the mules in a coordinated … operation,” he said.

D’Souza added that this revelation, in his opinion, is a “smoking gun.”

“True the Vote has filed an official complaint with the state of Georgia and the Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, has opened up an investigation and said publicly it’s specifically in response to the geo tracking data and reports filed by True the Vote. Now this is a very tricky situation because of course Raffensperger is the exact same guy who was on TV right after the election [saying], ‘This is a very secure election,’ he continued. D’Souza clarified that ballot harvesting is legal, to some extent, in some states. However, that does not change the revelations found in the movie.

“Now the most liberal laws are in places like California and Hawaii where you can literally give anyone your ballot and say, hey, you go drop it off for me. In Georgia, by contrast, you can only give your ballot to a family member, or if you’re sick or confined, to a caregiver, that’s it,” he said.

“But here’s the point: In no state is it legal to pay a mule or anyone else to deliver a ballot. Once money changes hands, once money appears in the process, the ballot is contaminated,” he continued.

“And so even if it were — these aren’t legal ballots — but let’s say they were, [that] there was a legal ballot. Once you pay a mule, by and large, that ballot is rendered invalid,” he said, making it clear that “everything we’re covering in this movie is illegal.”

Breitbart News:

The election integrity organization obtained the data through cellphone patterns, and the device patterns indicated that people were routinely going on routes to drop boxes. The data, she explained, is the same kind of data law enforcement uses “all day every day to solve crimes.”

“Just on the face of the geospatial data alone, there are investigatory expectations,” she said, as a “logical thinking person” would naturally find people “going to far-left nonprofits and then directly the drop boxes day after day, over and over” problematic. And in Georgia, she explained, they have video surveillance to compare, which is shown in the film.

“We want to know more about the money, the following of the money because we know that people were paid — at least we’ve been told they were paid. We want to know more about how, how all of the ways we know many of the ways, but all of the ways that those ballots arrived at those organizations. There’s a lot of investigation left to be done,” Engelbrecht said.

She said the lack of motivation from certain officials to pursue these leads is, in many ways, stunning. She explained that they first presented these claims in Georgia one year ago. At the time, they really thought officials would “jump in” and launch broad-scale state-level investigations, but she said “it’s been anything but,” calling it “confounding.”

“That feels more along the lines of a coverup than it does a willingness to really review the video, frankly,” she said, adding that they “should have been looking” at this all along.

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

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Was Ohio’s Primary A Sign Dems Are Heading For A Midterm Massacre?

/in , , , , , , /by

Dem Turnout Craters In Ohio As GOP Votes Soar

Turnout for Tuesday’s Democratic primary in Ohio was down significantly compared to 2018 as Republicans showed up in even greater numbers, MSNBC reported.

Democratic turnout was down 27% in Ohio, a decrease of over 185,000 votes, MSNBC reported. Republicans, on the other hand, increased their turnout by 28%, securing 230,000 more votes.

“I wouldn’t base projections for the midterm off of the primary, but … if you’re looking for signs of Republican enthusiasm and a lack of Democratic enthusiasm, then you probably could point to the Ohio primary results,” Kyle Kondik, managing editor of election forecaster Sabato’s Crystal Ball, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Republicans had a far more competitive Senate primary than Democrats in Ohio, with polling showing multiple different conservatives in the lead in the weeks prior to election day. Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan easily won the nomination with 70% of the vote.

Polls have continually shown the Republican Party increasing its lead over the Democratic Party when it comes to enthusiasm. The GOP had a 17-point enthusiasm advantage over Democrats in an NBC News poll released in March, up from the 11-point advantage it had in October.

The March primary in Texas had Democrats increasing their turnout by 4%, but Republicans increased their turnout by 27%. Five counties along the U.S.-Mexico border, which have large percentages of Latino voters, showed a turnout increase of 25% in the Republican primary.

All of former President Donald Trump’s endorsements in the Texas, Ohio and Indiana primaries have moved on to the general election with the exception of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who will face a runoff on May 24, Politico reported.

“I think his endorsement is valuable,” Kondik told the DCNF while adding that Trump’s record is likely to become more inconsistent as the primaries continue. “And I think Republicans believe it’s valuable, so they’ll continue to seek it.”

AUTHOR

SEBASTIAN HUGHES

Politics reporter.

RELATED VIDEO: MAGA Movement Gets Huge Win in Ohio Senate Race

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Why Stacey Abrams Could Lose In Georgia Even If Raphael Warnock Wins

‘Right To Be Concerned’: Trump-Era DHS Leaders Sound The Alarm Over Biden’s Disinformation Board

Biden’s Disinformation Czar Has It In For Americans Opposed To CRT

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

Wikileaks just dumped all of Hillary, CIA, FBI, PedoPodesta and more emails! Get them here!

/in , , , , , /by

Wikileaks just dumped all of their files online.

Everything from Hillary Clinton’s emails, McCain’s being guilty, Vegas shooting done by an FBI sniper, Steve Jobs HIV letter, PedoPodesta, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Bilderberg, CIA agents arrested for rape, WHO pandemic.

Happy Digging! Here you go, please read and pass it on. The info enclosed will take a lot of time to read and digest.

These are Clinton’s emails:

Send to everyone you can as fast as you can!

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

Trump’s ‘Save America’ Rally in Florence, South Carolina

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

There is nothing that is more therapeutic in these horrific times than a Trump rally. President Trump is going to run in 2024. And he is going to win. Every rational American must get behind the re-election of President Trump with everything they have. The country and the free world are on the line.

Thousands already in Florence for Former President Donald Trump’s ‘Save America’ rally

By WPDE, March 11, 2022

FLORENCE, S.C. (WPDE) — People from across the country have camped out near the Florence Regional Airport ahead of former President Donald Trump’s ‘Save America’ rally that takes place Saturday.

Sharon Anderson said she drove nearly six hours from Tennessee to attend the event.

Anderson has been to 23 rallies so far.

“Donald Trump, he’s fighting so hard for us. 24 hours a day. I want him to look out in that audience and see thousands just like me. That’s his cheerleaders,” said Anderson.

Rick Frazier traveled 10 hours from Ohio.

He’s a part of the group Front Row Joe’s that attend Trump’s rallies.

Frazier said he’s been to 55 rallies so far.

“We like to come to the rallies. And support the President, number 45. Primarily, because I believe in what he’s done for the country. It’s big family. I’m from Ohio. So, we give Ohio state tailgating. And when the folks come to these rallies. It’s like a big tailgate and most of these folks are like-minded. Everybody here comes for President Trump,” said Frazier.

Crews have been setting up most of the week.

They’ve brought in big lights, porta johns, tents for security, food trucks and other equipment.

ABC15 asked organizers as to how many people will attend the rally.

They said they don’t give numbers, but are preparing for thousands.

Florence Police Dept. said they’ll have 24 officers on hand to provide mutual aid to the Florence County Sheriff’s Office.

The Sheriff’s Office hasn’t said if they’ve been given an estimate of how many people will attend the event.

South Carolina Highway Patrol is providing officers to help with traffic.

Frazier said from the looks of how crews are preparing, he expects this rally to be huge.

“This is a big one. I think we’ve got more room here. This is probably one of the larger ones we done since we started in Burlington Ohio. And that was about 8 months, ago, I think they’ll be standing room only,” said Frazier.

Doors will open at 2 p.m. and the event is set to start at 7 p.m.

Also, Trump will be joined by endorsed candidates, members of the South Carolina Congressional Delegation, and other special guests.

Details about the event, including the newly listed speakers, have been highlighted and sectioned below.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Media Wage Harassment Campaign Against Freedom Convoy Donors Doxxed In GiveSendGo Hack

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

  • Media outlets are continuing to message small-dollar donors to the Freedom Convoy whose identities were leaked to the public after a hack of crowdfunding site GiveSendGo.
  • Several major publications, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, ran stories earlier this week based on the leaked data analyzing the origins of Freedom Convoy funding. Both outlets published the names of Freedom Convoy donors and reported contacting small-dollar donors to investigate their contributions.
  • Local newspapers have also begun to dig into the data and message donors as well as publish names of individuals included on the list; Delaware Online published a story Friday naming a high-level officer of the Delaware Transit Corporation whose name appeared in the leaked data.
  • Prominent media figures and politicians from across the political spectrum have criticized the practice of publications messaging small-dollar donors, including Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who ripped into a journalist reporting on the harassment of an Ottawa business owner.

Media outlets are continuing to message small-dollar donors to the Freedom Convoy whose identities were leaked to the public after a hack of crowdfunding site GiveSendGo.

The personal information of roughly 90,000 donors to the Freedom Convoy, a group of truckers and hackers protesting Canada’s vaccine mandates and COVID-19 restrictions, was leaked after hackers breached GiveSendGo late Sunday. The leaked data included names, email handles, IP addresses and zip codes, and was provided to “journalists and researchers” by Distributed Denial of Secrets, an activist group hosting the information.

Several major publications, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, ran stories earlier this week based on the leaked data analyzing the origins of Freedom Convoy funding. Both outlets published the names of Freedom Convoy donors and reported contacting small-dollar donors to investigate their contributions.

While The Times did not respond to the DCNF, The Post defended its reporting.

“We were reporting on a matter of public interest and reached out to people listed in the data in order to confirm its authenticity,” Shani George, the Post’s vice president of Communications, told the DCNF in a statement.

The Intercept published two stories Thursday based on the data, the first examining a $100 donation reportedly made by former Canadian politician Richard Ciano. The Intercept alleged Ciano, who denied donating to the Freedom Convoy, may have in fact made a small contribution, citing the hacked data.

“The Intercept did not contact individual donors because we did not identify them, except where that information was newsworthy, such as in the case of Silicon Valley billionaire Thomas Siebel or prominent political operative Richard Ciano, who apparently wasn’t telling the truth when he told the media that he did not donate,” a spokesperson for The Intercept told the DCNF in a statement Friday.

Local newspapers have also begun to dig into the data and message donors as well as publish names of individuals included on the list. Delaware Online published a story Friday naming a high-level officer of the Delaware Transit Corporation whose name appeared in the leaked data. The publication did not respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

Salt Lake Tribune political correspondent Bryan Schott, who wrote an article analyzing the leaked data to identify Utah donors by zip code, tweeted he had “reaching out to people from Utah who appeared on the leaked Canadian trucker donation data,” characterizing the responses he received as “aggressive.” He deleted the tweet after receiving harsh criticism on social media.

Schott declined to comment further when reached by the DCNF, but apologized in a tweet thread Thursday, saying it was “not my intention” to “cause any grief or upset.”

Several Canadian outlets such as the Toronto Star and Global News have also published stories in which they contacted small-dollar donors and published contributors’ names, the DCNF previously reported.

Prominent media figures and politicians from across the political spectrum have criticized the practice of publications messaging small-dollar donors, including Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who ripped into a journalist reporting on the harassment of an Ottawa business owner.

“I fail to see why any journalist felt the need to report on a shop owner making such a insignificant donation rather than to get them harassed,” Omar tweeted. “It’s unconscionable and journalists need to do better.”

Several individuals whose names appeared in the donor lists have reported experiencing harassment and negative consequences; Tammy Giuliani, who donated $250 to the Freedom Convoy fundraiser, was forced to close her gelato store after receiving threats of violence over her donation. Marion Isabeau-Ringuette, communications director for the Ontario Solicitor General, is no longer employed in the state government after her donation to the Freedom Convoy was revealed, according to Toronto CityNews.

COLUMN BY

AILAN EVANS

Tech reporter. Follow Ailan on Twitter @AilanHEvans.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Twitter Declines To Censor Tweets Reportedly Linking To Hacked Freedom Convoy Donor List

Arizona AG Demands GoFundMe Preserve Documents Related To Removal Of Freedom Convoy Fundraiser

A Canadian Gelato Shop Owner Said She Was Vilified And Threatened For Donating To Canadian Truckers

‘It’s A Beautiful Day’: Trucker Stands His Ground As Police Enclose On Him

Motorist Confronted By Canadian Police Officers At Border

‘Hold The Line’: Canadian Police Arrest Leaders Of Freedom Convoy, Several Others Amid Crackdown

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

Clinton Campaign Paid Techs to ‘infiltrate’ Trump’s Home and White House Servers to link Trump to Russia

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The biggest news story in the world – how much coverage is the treasonous media giving it?

Filings from Special Counsel John Durham this week allege the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign was working to establish a “narrative” linking the Trump campaign to a Russian bank, in an alleged gambit one expert said was an effort to “infiltrate” Trump servers to that end.

 

Clinton campaign paid to ‘infiltrate’ Trump Tower, White House servers to link Trump to Russia: Durham

First on Fox: Lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to “infiltrate” servers belonging to Trump Tower, and later the White House, in order to establish an “inference” and “narrative” to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, a filing from Special Counsel John Durham says.

Durham filed a motion on Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of interest related to the representation of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.

The indictment against Sussmann, says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work “for any client” when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented “purported data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.

Read more…

The allegations, first reported on by Fox News on Saturday, are another layer to the densely, multifaceted Durham investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, one that has continued long after Trump left office and that continues to produce fresh controversies on a regular basis.

Watergate was a nothing burger, a device which Democrats used to oust a sitting (Republican) President. This is high treason.

Trump demands prosecutions, reparations after explosive revelations in Durham court filing

“This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate,” the former president says.

By John Solomon, Just The News, February 12, 2022:

Former President Donald Trump demanded Saturday that there be prosecutions and reparations after Special Counsel John Durham revealed in an explosive court filing that Hillary Clinton’s campaign plotted to infiltrate the Trump campaign and White House computer servers years ago to concoct false Russia collusion allegations.

Durham’s latest court filing “provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia,” Trump said.

“This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate and those who were involved in and knew about this spying operation should be subject to criminal prosecution,” he added. “In a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death. In addition, reparations should be paid to those in our country who have been damaged by this.”

Durham’s court filing said lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to “infiltrate” servers belonging to Trump Tower and the Trump White House to create an “inference” of Russia collusion in 2016-17, hoping to get federal agencies to investigate.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Top Kyle Rittenhouse Tweets

/in , , , , , , , /by

Here’s some of the top tweets about America hero Kay Rittenhouse. Enjoy!

©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Whom Does the White House Represent?

/in , , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JACOB HUEBERT

Jacob Huebert is a Senior Attorney at the Goldwater Institute, litigating cases on free speech, property rights, and the Second Amendment. Before joining Goldwater, he served as Director of Litigation for the Liberty Justice Center in Chicago. There, he successfully litigated cases to protect economic liberty, free speech, and other constitutional rights, including the landmark Janus v. AFSCME case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld government workers’ First Amendment right to choose for themselves whether to pay money to a union. Jacob and his work have appeared in numerous national media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Fox News Channel.

TOPIC: Congress Can’t Use COVID Relief to Stop State Tax Cuts!

FRANK VERNUCCIO

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy & Government, providing objective coverage of key issues facing the United States today. Frank is the co-host of the Vernuccio/Novak Report, nationally both on broadcast radio and the web at amfm247.com. FRANK also co-hosts of the “The American Political Zone,” Broadcast on the AUN-TV Network and on cable in eastern Connecticut.

TOPIC: Whom Does the White House Represent?

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Election Integrity Recommendations Report — Official Release

/in , , , , , , , /by

Today we are proud to announce the official public release of our Election Integrity: Recommendations Report.

Although our team of independent experts has written eight other major reports pertaining to US elections, this is the most important one, by far. (Please pass on the link to this one-page document to anyone interested in the election integrity issue.)

We’ve been working on this for about two months, and set for ourselves four (4) standards that this report should meet:

Competent, Comprehensive, Collaborative and Creative.

Regarding collaborative, there is no shortage of partisan ideas regarding the US election process (e.g. HR.1/S.1). We are attempting to reasonably bridge the currently cavernous divide. To say the least, that is a Herculean challenge!

For those who favor brevity, we have also posted a one-page document listing our thirty recommendations.

Let me know any questions, or improvements to this report.

Please pass this information onto your social media sites, friends & family, and anyone else who values America. If we don’t have election integrity, every other aspect of our life will be adversely affected.

TY for your support and assistance on this extraordinarily important national matter!

Note 1: How does our Recommendations Report differ from the dozens of reports done on the election issue to date?

a) It is written by independent scientists, outside the election analysis field,
b) It is a meta-analysis of dozens of election related reports, extracting the best ideas from each,
c) It is an exceptionally comprehensive report, with thirty (30) election integrity recommendations,
d) Among these thirty recommendations are ideas never suggested before,
e) It aims to be reasonably non-partisan, with concessions made to both camps, and
f) It takes advantage of the latest election developments that happened through April 2021.

Note 2: What is urgently needed, is for election integrity allies to come together to aggressively support a package of improvements such as we are formally proposing today — then to agree on effective messaging, plus a quality plan-of-action.
Note 3: Our Recommendations Report is a living document, and will be updated as improvements are warranted.

Scientists Predict Death Spike in Vaccinated: Modelers are ‘following the science’ down a rabbit hole

/in , , , , , /by

WESTMINSTER, England (ChurchMilitant.com) – The most deaths in a third coronavirus wave will consist of people who have received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, British scientists are warning in a new doomsday report.

“The resurgence in both hospitalizations and deaths is dominated by those that have received two doses of the vaccine, comprising around 60% and 70% of the wave respectively,” the study predicts.

To combat the spike in mortality, the scientists are calling for new vaccines in the medium-term as measures to extend the period of lockdown before new vaccines are deployed.

The pessimistic scenario modeled by scientists at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) foresees deaths and hospital admissions on a scale similar to January 2021 — despite a high uptake of the experimental jab.

The mortality surge is expected to occur in the later stages of the U.K. government’s roadmap out of the lockdown, beginning around mid-May and peaking in late July or early August, according to the study reported in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) last Wednesday.

The predictions studied by the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), warn that the gloom-and-doom scenario is conservative as it does not take into account the “growth of an immune escape variant or a more rapidly spreading variant.”

A large proportion of Britain’s population would be susceptible to B.1.351 — the South African variant of the SARS-CoV-2 — whether they have been vaccinated or not, the modelers warn.

Speaking to Church Militant, academic and mental-health ethicist Niall McCrae noted that “the report’s prediction that 70% of COVID-19 deaths will be of dual-vaccinated people is quite startling.”

“Clearly these pseudo-scientific modelers would like us to be locked down ad infinitum, but do they know something that governments and public-health authorities aren’t telling us?” Dr. McCrae asked.

The academic slammed the study’s “Alice-in-Wonderland logic, ‘following the science’ down a rabbit hole” since “the report states, ‘this is because vaccine uptake has been so high in the oldest age groups,’ and that ‘this is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high.'”

McCrae elaborated:

We already know that for two to three weeks after the injection, elderly and vulnerable people are at increased risk of serious respiratory infection, due to lowering of immunity. That’s why there was a surge in deaths after vaccination rollout, with the evidence most stark in countries with the highest vaccination numbers; such as Hungary, Israel, Serbia, Gibraltar and the United Arab Emirates.

The report, however, suggests a longer-term risk to the vaccinated. Will they be more prone to COVID-19 variants or to other viruses? In the old joke when someone asks an Irishman for directions, and he says, “I wouldn’t start from here,” I fear for those who took the jab and thought that the road ahead would be safe and straightforward.

A SAGE source told Britain’s The Telegraph that the vaccines were not efficacious enough to allow a return to normal social mixing “without a big epidemic,” despite the jabs significantly reducing illness and deaths.

Addressing the question of low vaccine uptake among ethnic minorities in Britain, the report notes that “even if vaccination successfully drives down mortality and morbidity overall, it is highly likely that outbreaks will still happen in some communities.”

SAGE also reviewed models from scientists at Imperial College London and Warwick University that assumed lower virus transmission after all restrictions are lifted and used higher vaccine efficacy to make predictions.

Meanwhile, a new Israeli study involving 28 scientists has confirmed that those vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were more likely to become infected with B.1.1.7 (Kent variant) or B.1.351 compared with unvaccinated individuals.

In fact, vaccine recipients infected at least a week after the second dose were disproportionally infected with B.1.351, while those infected between two weeks after the first dose and one week after the second dose were disproportionally infected by B.1.1.7, the study revealed.

Despite the Pfizer vaccine showing high protection levels, apprehension exists that several variants of concern can surmount the immune defenses generated by the vaccines, the Tel Aviv University researchers concluded.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Pause’ on Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Reveals One Systemic Flaw Plaguing the FDA

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

Why Impeachment Failed

/in , , , , , , /by

It’s comforting, no doubt, to believe that Donald Trump has survived the impeachment trial because he possesses a tighter hold on his party than did Barack Obama or George W. Bush or any other contemporary president. In truth, Trump, often because of his own actions, has engendered less loyalty than the average president.

It’s difficult to recall, after all, a single Democratic senator throwing anything but hosannas Obama’s way, which allowed the former president to ride his high horse from one scandalous attack on the Constitution to the next.

In 1998, no Democrat voted to convict Bill Clinton, who had engaged in wrongdoing for wholly self-serving reasons, despite the GOP’s case being far more methodical and incriminating.

The chances of any party’s removing its sitting president without overwhelming evidence that fuels massive voter pressure are negligible. It’s never happened in American history—unless you count the preemptive removal of Richard Nixon—and probably never will. Democrats are demanding the GOP adopt standards that no party has ever lived by.

In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>

Perhaps if the public hadn’t been subjected to four years of interminable hysteria over the United States’ imaginary descent into fascism, it might have been less apathetic toward the fate of “vital” Ukrainian aid that most Democrats had voted against when Obama was president.

And perhaps if institutional media hadn’t spent three years pushing a hyperbolically paranoid narrative of Russian collusion—a debunked conspiracy theory incessantly repeated by Democrats during the impeachment trial—the public wouldn’t be anesthetized to another alleged national emergency.

You simply can’t expect a well-adjusted voter to maintain CNN-levels of indignation for years on end.

Beyond the public’s mood, the Democrats’ strategy was a mess. House Democrats and their 17 witnesses set impossible-to-meet expectations, declaring that Trump had engaged in the worst wrongdoing ever committed by any president in history. (I’m not exaggerating.) When it comes to Trump criticism, everything is always “the worst thing ever!”

Even if Trump’s actions had risen to the level of removal, Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler were terrible messengers to make the case. These are not the politicians you tap to persuade jurors; they’re the politicians you pick to rile up your base.

Despite all the fabricated praise directed at Schiff over the past couple of weeks, the man reeks of partisanship. Not only because he’s been caught lying about the presence of damning evidence against Trump on more than one occasion, but because he played a sketchy role in helping the whistleblower responsible for sparking the impeachment come forward.

Even then, instead of spending the appropriate time building a solid case, subpoenaing all the “vital” witnesses, and laying out a timeline, House Democrats, by their own admission, rushed forward.

They justified taking shortcuts by warning that the country was in a race to stop Trump from stealing the 2020 election just as he had allegedly stolen the 2016 election.

That wouldn’t have been a big deal if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hadn’t exposed the supposed need for urgency as a ruse, by withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate for weeks.

She did so despite having zero standing to dictate the terms of the trial, no constitutional right to attempt to dictate them, and no political leverage.

In the end, she got nothing from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for her trouble.

Meanwhile, Democrats had spent most of the House hearings focusing on difficult-to-prove specific criminal offenses of “bribery” and “extortion”—poll-tested words that were taken up after the House realized “quid pro quo” didn’t play as well with the public.

Then, they didn’t even bother including the “crimes”—no, you don’t need a violation of criminal law to impeach, but the word was incessantly used by House Democrats anyway—in their open-ended articles of impeachment, written expressly to compel Senate Republicans to investigate for them.

The House had no right to demand that, and the Senate had no reason to comply. So as soon as the upper chamber took up impeachment, Democrats began dropping one “bombshell” leak after the next—the same strategy they deployed during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings—to drag out the spectacle and maximize the political damage.

Some of us would certainly have preferred that more Republicans concede Trump’s call was unbecoming and, in parts, inappropriate, even if it didn’t rise to the level of an impeachable offense. But Democrats keep demanding that Republicans play under a different set of rules.

The Constitution, a document under attack by the very people claiming to save it from the president, worked exactly as it should.

The House is free to subpoena all the “vital” witnesses Republicans have supposedly ignored, and then send a new batch of impeachment articles. Impeachment isn’t tantamount to a “coup” any more than Senate acquittal is unconstitutional or corrupt.

Pretending that democracy is on the precipice of extinction simply because you didn’t get your way, though, is nothing but histrionics.

COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi

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

A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

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

GET ACCESS NOW! >>

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

The 2010s: A Decade of Marital and Sexual Erosion

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Originally published by USA Today.

A decade ago, President Barack Obama affirmed that marriage unites a man and woman. So did 45 states and the federal government.

The only states to redefine marriage had done so through activist court rulings or, in 2009, legislative action. At the ballot box, citizens had uniformly voted against redefinition. A majority agreed with Obama.

Then, in 2012, Obama “evolved,” and the Supreme Court took cases involving marriage law.

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

Nothing in the Constitution answered the actual question at hand: What is marriage? The court should have left the issue to the people. But in 2013, it struck down the federal definition of marriage as a male-female union in a 5-4 ruling.

The court also punted on a challenge to a state definition of marriage adopted in a 2008 constitutional referendum by which a majority of Californians—yes, Californians—overturned an activist court.

Only in 2015 did the Supreme Court, breaking 5-4 again, redefine marriage for the nation, provoking four irrefutable dissents.

Same-sex marriage advocates told the public that they sought only the “freedom to marry.” Same-sex couples were already free to live as they chose, but legal recognition was about the definition of marriage for all of society. It was about affirmation—by the government and everyone else.

It was never really about “live and let live”—that was a merely tactical stance.

It’s unsurprising that once a campaign that used to cry “live and let live” prevailed, it began working to shut down Catholic adoption agencies and harass evangelical bakers and florists.

This shows it was never really about “live and let live”—that was a merely tactical stance.

Family, Marriage—Redefined

While these were the early effects of redefinition, the more profound consequences will be to marriage itself. Law shapes culture; culture shapes beliefs; beliefs shape action.

The law now effectively teaches that mothers and fathers are replaceable, that marriage is simply about consenting adult relationships, of whatever formation the parties happen to prefer. This undermines the truth that children deserve a mother and a father—one of each.

It also undercuts any reasonable justification for marital norms. After all, if marriage is about romantic connection, why require monogamy?

There’s nothing magical about the number two, as defenders of “polyamory” point out. If marriage isn’t a conjugal union uniting a man and a woman as one flesh, why should it involve or imply sexual exclusivity? If it isn’t a comprehensive union inherently ordered to childbearing and rearing, why should it be pledged to permanence?

The law now effectively teaches that mothers and fathers are replaceable, that marriage is simply about consenting adult relationships, of whatever formation the parties happen to prefer.

Marriage redefiners could not answer these questions when challenged to show that the elimination of sexual complementarity did not undermine other marital norms. Today, they increasingly admit that they have no stake in upholding norms of monogamy, exclusivity, and permanence.

Same-sex marriage didn’t create these problems. Many in America had unwisely already gone along with the erosion of marital norms in the wake of the sexual revolution—with the rise of cohabitation, nonmarital childbearing, no-fault divorce, and the hookup culture.

It was no surprise that many would then question the relevance of the male-female norm. Legal redefinition is a consequence of the cultural breakdown of marriage.

Monogamy Is Old News

But same-sex marriage is a catalyst for further erosion. Already, we see respectable opinion-makers mainstreaming “throuples,” “ethical nonmonogamy” and “open relationships.” This was predictable; we and others predicted it.

Something we didn’t predict are the headlines about transgender and nonbinary “identities.” A decade ago, few Americans had given much thought to the “T” in “LGBT.” Today, transgender identity seems to dominate the discussion of sexuality and sexual morality.

There’s a logic here. If we can’t see the point of our sexual embodiment where it matters most—in marriage—we’ll question whether it matters at all. Hence the push to see gender as “fluid” and existing along a “spectrum” of nonbinary options.

There’s a deeper logic, too. Implicit in the push for same-sex marriage was body-self dualism—the idea that we’re actually nonphysical entities inhabiting physical bodies, or ghosts in machines. That’s why the “plumbing” in sexual acts seemed not to matter.

True one-flesh union, the foundation of conjugal marriage, was thought illusory. What mattered was emotional union and partners’ use of their bodies to induce desirable sensations and feelings.

Of course, two men or two women (or throuples or even larger sexual ensembles) could do that. But the logic didn’t stay with marriage. If the body is mere plumbing, then sex matters less than identity.

This has had tragic consequences, especially for children.

Children Burdened by Our Mistakes

Nearly unthinkable a decade ago, certain medical professionals tell children experiencing gender dysphoria that they are trapped in the wrong body, even that their bodies are merely like Pop-Tarts foil packets, as one expert explained.

Nearly unthinkable a decade ago, certain medical professionals tell children experiencing gender dysphoria that they are trapped in the wrong body.

Some doctors now prescribe puberty-blocking drugs to otherwise healthy children struggling to accept their bodies. They prescribe cross-sex hormones for young teens to transform their bodies to align with their gender identities.

As part of a government grant-supported study, doctors even performed double mastectomies on adolescent girls—including two 13-year-olds.

These changes weren’t grassroots movements. They’ve come from people wielding political, economic, and cultural power to advance sexual-liberationist ideology.

The change has been top-down—from Hollywood’s portrayal of LGBT characters to business executives boycotting states over religious freedom laws. Having lost at the ballot box over and over—even in California—activists found new avenues: ideologically friendly courts, federal agencies, big corporations.

Having secured a judicial redefinition of marriage, they pivoted to the “T,” with the Obama administration redefining “sex” to mean “gender identity” and imposing a new policy on all schools.

The change has been top down—from Hollywood’s portrayal of LGBT characters to business executives boycotting states over religious-freedom laws.

And having won government support, activists turned to eliminating private dissent. Former presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke wants to yank the tax-exemption of noncompliant churches. Megadonor Tim Gill vows to spend his fortunes to “punish the wicked.”

Who are “the wicked”? Those who refuse to accept the new sexual orthodoxy.

All of us, including those identifying as LGBT, are made in God’s image, are endowed with profound dignity and thus deserve respect. It’s because of this dignity and out of such respect that the institutions serving the human good—like the marriage-based family—should be supported, not undermined or redefined. That basic rights like religious freedom ought to be upheld, not infringed. That a healthy moral and physical ecology—especially for children—must be preserved.

The “progress” of the past decade has exacted steep costs.

COMMENTARY BY

Ryan T. Anderson

Ryan T. Anderson, Ph.D., is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation, where he researches and writes about marriage, bioethics, religious liberty and political philosophy. Anderson is the author of several books and his research has been cited by two U.S. Supreme Court justices in two separate cases. Read his Heritage research. Twitter: .

Robert George

Robert George is the McCormick professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University, where he directs the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. He also serves on The Heritage Foundation’s Board of Trustees. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: UNFPA’s Nairobi ICPD+25 Summit

Transgender Clinics Are Ruining Young Lives

Decadent Democrats — From Pedophilia to Sex with Animals

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.