COVER-UP: Broward County Sheriff’s son held down 14-year old boy while friend sodomized him with a baseball bat

Bob Norman an investigative reporter for ABC News in Miami in his article “Parents call for investigation into Stoneman Douglas assault involving sheriff’s son” reports:

…But now, a report that recently surfaced has some victims’ families calling for a renewed investigation of [Broward Deputy Sheriff and Stoneman Douglas resource officer] Peterson for a case he handled four years to the day prior to the massacre. The case involved two 17-year-old students bullying a 14-year-old freshman, with one holding down the younger boy by his ankles while the other kicked the victim, grabbed his genitals and then took the victim’s own baseball bat and began shoving it against his buttocks, simulating rape, through the boy’s clothes. 

One of those assailants, the boy who allegedly held down the victim, was Israel’s son, Brett. Defense attorney Alex Arreaza, who represents shooting victim Anthony Borges, who was shot five times in the Valentine’s Day massacre but survived, said the case could have led to felony charges.

“He could be charged with a lewd and lascivious, and I’m being conservative,” Arreaza said.

Peterson claims in the report that it was a “simple battery” under the board’s discipline matrix, and he decided to give both of the boy’s attackers a three-day suspension. [Emphasis added]

Read more.

Heavy.com in an article titled “Brett Israel: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know” reports:

Deputy Scot Peterson is being sued by Andrew Pollack, the father of Meadow Pollack who was shot dead at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on February 14. Pollack told ABC Miami, “[Peterson] was lazy and this could have given him protection to keep his job at the school during those four years.” Pollack, who is also on an investigative committee looking into the Parkland massacre, said that Peterson was rewarded with job security for protecting the sheriff’s son.

Peterson was widely criticized for his perceived cowardice during the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. As the school’s resource officer, Peterson did not engage the suspect.

[ … ]

On his Twitter page, Brett Israel has been constantly defending his father against attacks over the handling of the Douglas High School shooting.

[ … ]

Brett has also been [at] odds with Parkland survivor, Kyle Kashuv, who is known for placing the blame of the massacre at the feet of “the cowards of Broward,” referring to Sheriff Israel’s department. When Kashuv shared a Daily Caller article about a no-confidence vote for Sheriff Israel, Brett wrote on Twitter, “You know Kyle, I hate to denounce you because I like what you stand for but this whole “politically motivated” movement to have the Sheriff removed has to stop. There is no basis for criminal conduct.”

Read more.

It is the duty of the Broward County School Board to protect its students. It is the duty of the Broward County Sheriff to protect and defend the citizens of Broward County, Florida. As the case of Nickolas Cruz moves forward more information about the shooting will be revealed. As the civil suit moves forward more information will be revealed.

It appears the political systems in Broward county are dysfunctional at the least and potentially criminal at the worst.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Brett Israel from his Facebook page.

‘Collusion against Trump’ Timeline by Sharyl Attkisson

Sharyl Attkisson

Sharyl Attkisson is an Emmy award winning investigative journalist, host of Sinclair’s Sunday morning news program “Full Measure,” and author of the New York Times bestsellers: “The Smear” and Stonewalled.” Ms. Attkisson has compiled a complete collusion against Donald J. Trump timeline and published it on her website. This timeline is most valuable as it connects-the-dots from 2011 to the present.

I highly recommend you visit Ms. Attkisson’s collusion against Trump timeline to understand the who, what, where and why of what is now become known as “Spygate.”

Ms. Attkisson writes:

t’s easy to find timelines that detail Trump-Russia collusion developments. Here are links to two of them I recommend:

Politifact Russia-Trump timeline

Washington Post Russia-Trump timeline

On the other side, evidence has emerged in the past year that makes it clear there were organized efforts to collude against candidate Donald Trump–and then President Trump. For example:

  • Anti-Russian Ukrainians allegedly helped coordinate and execute a campaign against Trump in partnership with the Democratic National Committee and news reporters.
  • A Yemen-born ex-British spy reportedly delivered political opposition research against Trump to reporters, Sen. John McCain, and the FBI; the latter of which used the material–in part–to obtain wiretaps against one or more Trump-related associates.
  • There were orchestrated leaks of anti-Trump information and allegations to the press, including by ex-FBI Director James Comey.
  • The U.S. intel community allegedly engaged in questionable surveillance practices and politially-motivated “unmaskings” of U.S. citizens, including Trump officials.
  • Alleged conflicts of interests have surfaced regarding FBI officials who cleared Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information and who investigated Trump’s alleged Russia ties.

But it’s not so easy to find a timeline pertinent to the investigations into these events.

Here’s a work in progress.

(Please note that nobody cited has been charged with wrongdoing or crimes, unless the charge is specifically referenced. Temporal relationships are not necessarily evidence of a correlation.)

“Collusion against Trump” Timeline

 

Laying Down Their Lives for Their Friends

“It’s something I will never forget. Never,” recalled 106-year-old Ray Chavez, America’s oldest survivor of the attack on Pearl Harbor in an interview this morning with FRC’s radio producer Russ Jones. The World War II veteran was honored yesterday by President Trump — a visit Chavez called “the highlight of my life.” But he also shared another motivator for traveling more than 2,600 miles away from his home in Poway, California: to ensure the nation never forgets “what we went through.”

Last year, the San Diego Tribune reported Chavez’s role in history on the morning of the Pearl Harbor attack:

“Chavez had just gone to bed after a night aboard the Condor. A San Diego fishing boat that had been converted into a minesweeper and stationed in Hawaii, the Condor was cruising near Pearl Harbor when a lookout spotted a submarine. ‘We’ve got company!’ the lookout yelled.

At the helm, Chavez couldn’t see the intruder. When a friend relieved him, he walked to the Condor’s port side and scanned the dark sea.

“All I saw was a periscope,” he said.

“About 3:50 a.m. on December 7, the Condor reported the sighting. The destroyer Ward searched the area and around 6:37 a.m., sighted and attacked the sub.

“Preceding the Zeros assault on Pearl Harbor by more than an hour, this was the first American action in World War II.”

Within hours, 2,341 of his fellow brave Americans in uniform would lay down their lives for the cause of freedom. On this Memorial Day, we can and should remember their sacrifice and the sacrifice of so many others who have given the last full measure of devotion to this country of ours. This is not just another three-day weekend. It’s a time for remembrance. It’s a time for thanksgiving, that our country still has so many who are willing to risk all in this world for the sake of their families, and fellow Americans.

We also honor all those who stand ready to defend America. As President Trump said yesterday in announcing the cancellation of the summit with North Korea, “I’ve spoken to General Mattis and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our military, which is by far the most powerful anywhere in the world that has been greatly enhanced recently, as you all know, is ready if necessary.” And more ready they are – especially now that they finally have a commander-in-chief who is putting the focus on the military’s mission: preparing to fight and win wars.

North Korea’s Kim Jun Un is learning that this is a president who won’t be pushed around like President Obama. As FRC’s General Boykin noted, “Kim got overconfident and pushed the president too far. He is now most likely thinking through where he went wrong and what he has to do to resurrect the summit.”

A lot is at stake especially for the estimated 300,000 Christians in North Korea – with as many as 50,000 of them in hard labor camps. Open Doors USA ranks North Korea as #1 in the world as the most dangerous country to be a Christian. To the relief of North Korea’s Christians and so many persecuted people of different faiths around the globe, America is regaining its voice on international religious liberty. While the move toward North Korea’s denuclearization is at the forefront of everyone’s minds, we must continue to pray and press North Korea to move away from totalitarianism where religious minorities have suffered so greatly.

As we pray that the people of North Korea will one day live in freedom, let us thank God for the freedoms we enjoy. And let us also remember that freedom is not free, which is what Memorial Day is designed to do. So this weekend take time to pray; pray a prayer of thanksgiving for those who have bought and fought for our freedom. And just as importantly, pray for those families who are reminded of the cost of freedom each time they see the empty seat at the table or the absence at the family gathering. In remembering their deeds, paying homage to their memory, and praying for those left behind, we preserve this last best hope of men on earth.


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


RELATED ARTICLES:

Activist Judges Scrub Bathroom Complaint

Watchmen: Standing on the Wall and in the Gap

Clapper Spills the Beans on ‘SPYGATE’ — It was all a set-up from the get-go!

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper spilled the beans on Tuesday in an exchange with Joy Behar on The View that will undoubtedly make its way into the history books.

The question was whether the FBI had ordered undercover agents to “spy” on the Trump campaign in the spring and summer of 2016, well before Donald Trump had won the Republican nomination for president.

Here is the transcript:

Behar: … So, I ask you, was the FBI spying on Trump’s campaign?

Clapper: No, they were not. They were spying on, a term I don’t particularly like, but on what the Russians were doing. Trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage and influence which is what they do.

Behar: Well, why doesn’t he like that? He should be happy.

Clapper: Well, he should be.

Clapper’s admission – for that’s what it was – was astonishing: the FBI had in fact infiltrated the Trump campaign and was spying on the candidate and his team.

That’s a first. And it’s on the record.

Remember all the indignation from the deep state when Trump claimed that the FBI had “wiretapped” Trump Tower? While Trump might not have used the term of art, he was right. He and his campaign were the targets of hostile U.S. government surveillance.

Clapper has tried to wrap himself in the flag, spinning his monumental admission as an effort to “protect” the Trump campaign from nefarious influence from bad Russian actors.

But such claims fall flat for one simple reason: whenever the FBI discovers through a counter-intelligence investigation that an American has been targeted by a foreign power, they almost always inform the American to warn them off.

I know. It has happened to me. (More on that below).

So when did the FBI warn the Trump campaign of the hostile Russian attempts to penetrate the campaign?

Certainly not in the spring of 2016, when the FBI detected the first effort to penetrate the Trump campaign by a suspected Russian agent, Joseph Mifsud.

How do we know this? Because in their cockamamie indictment of George Papadopolous, Robert Mueller’s legal team told us that a suspected Russian agent, code-named “the Professor,” twice approached Papadopolous in London with an offer to provide damaging information on Hillary Clinton obtained by the Russian government. Papadopolous then blabbed about the stolen emails at a bar with an Australian diplomat, an event the FBI claims “triggered” the investigation into the Trump campaign.

The next attempt to penetrate the Trump campaign came soon afterwards, when Stefan Halper, a long-time CIA asset, again dangled the Clinton emails to a Trump campaign volunteer, Carter Page. As we learned on Wednesday, Halper also met with top Trump advisor Sam Clovis, in a failed attempt to insinuate his way into the campaign.

But Halper wasn’t acting on behalf of the Russians. As we learned just recently, he was an FBI mole.

Clapper wants us to believe that the intelligence community was protecting the Trump campaign and that the President should thank them.

But the truth is just the opposite. Once the intelligence community detected some type of approach by Mifsud – possibly by a Russian agent, possibly not –- they took no steps to notify Donald Trump or anyone involved in his campaign in order to “protect” our political process. Instead, they launched a classic undercover operation in an attempt to entrap campaign workers, and hopefully the candidate himself, into accepting Russian offers to help them against candidate Clinton.

But this also failed, because there never was any Russian offer. The Russia-collusion spin, jinned up in January 2017 by Clapper, Comey and Brennan, was just a sham, a deception to take our eyes away from what had really been going on.

They wanted to hide the sting operation. And no wonder: it’s called treason, a series of overt and covert acts aimed at overthrowing the duly elected government of the United States.

Who was behind the plot against Trump?

Clearly Clapper was involved; he has admitted as much. Senior officials at the FBI and the DoJ also were involved, but according to their accounts, not until they filed the first wiretapping request with the FISA court in late July 2016.

So what other U.S. intelligence leader would have the power and the authority to engage covert assets operating overseas in an operation against an American political campaign? Only one: CIA director John Brennan.

Both Brennan and Comey have been furiously attacking Trump in recent weeks, as Congressional investigators and the Department of Justice Inspector General gets closer to revealing their illegal acts. I believe they both should be indicted for treason.

In 1996, I was reporting on the Gore-Chernomyrdin commission, which the U.S. and Russian governments established to exchange information on (then) alleged Russian assistance to Iran’s ballistic missile programs.

One of my sources at the time was a Russian diplomat, ostensibly a press officer, who offered hard information on the Russian companies helping Iran that he said had been presented by the Russian government to Vice President Al Gore.

I suspected my “source” was an intelligence officer. But I was able to corroborate his information and found it to be genuine—if embarrassing to Al Gore, who was trying to downplay Russia’s involvement in Iran.

I was not terribly surprised when I got a call from an FBI agent, who asked to meet me in a public park in Georgetown. He proceeded to tell me that the Russian was an intelligence officer the FBI was keeping tabs on, and that I should be careful about his efforts to cultivate me.

I thanked the agent, and promised to let him know if the Russian ever pumped me for information (he did not). The Russian was later targeted by the FBI in March 2001 for his alleged involvement in the Robert Hansen case and quietly left the United States before he could be expelled.

That’s how the FBI is supposed to work. Under Jim Comey and his merry band of partisan hacks, it went woefully astray.

RELATED ARTICLE: Sorry, But Obama White House, Not Dossier, Was Behind Trump Investigation

RELATED VIDEO: The latest edition of Inside Judicial Watch–with special guest Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) to discuss Robert Mueller’s career working in law enforcement–from the U.S. Attorney’s office to the special counsel investigation into alleged Trump/Russia collusion.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Church Resources for You to Share!

My Faith Votes sent out an email stating:

I need your help with something important while we are still in the primary election season for most states.

There are over 10,000 critical elections taking place at the local, state, and national level that will decide issues related to life, religious liberty, family values and how we care for those in need.

Yet, millions of Christians will sit on the sidelines and fail to vote. We can’t afford for this to happen this year. You can do something about this!

We want to see churches across the nation take a stand and encourage Christians to vote. We are sending our non-partisan My Faith Votes Toolkit out to as many churches as we can, but we need to reach more. Will you help by sharing this toolkit with your pastor?

Check out these church resources and share them with your pastor!

  • In-Service Church Videos
  • In-Service Slides
  • In-Service Voting Announcements
  • Do’s and Don’ts for Church and Government: Know Your Legal Rights

Primary elections are the best opportunity Christians have to choose Godly leaders who uphold Biblical and Constitutional values to run in the November general elections.  If Christians don’t select strong candidates now, we may be disappointed with our options come November.

Together, let’s work to see 90-million Christians stand united in the public square for Christian values! Thank you for standing with us.

United. We Stand.

Jason Yates
CEO
My Faith Votes

P.S. Click here for the church toolkit.

ABOUT MYFAITHVOTES

MYFAITHVOTES exists to inspire and motivate Jesus followers to vote.

Freedom from Facebook — Sign the FCC Petition to Breakup FB’s Monopoly

Citizens Against Monopoly sent the following petition to those frustrated with Facebook:

Today, the European Parliament confronted Mark Zuckerberg with our #ImNotYourProduct demand to let users opt out of targeted advertising.

He refused to answer.

He was also asked to explain why his Facebook-Instagram-WhatsApp-Messenger monopoly shouldn’t be broken up.

He didn’t have any answer for that, either.

Sign our petition to tell the Federal Trade Commission to break up Facebook and protect our data and democracy.

Most of us use Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger. They’re important ways for us to communicate and connect with each other.

But Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have amassed a scary amount of power. Facebook unilaterally decides the news that billions of people around the world see every day.

It buys up or bankrupts potential competitors to protect its monopoly, killing innovation and choice.

It tracks us almost everywhere on the web and, through our smartphones, even where we go in the real world.

It uses this intimate data hoard to figure out how to addict us and our children to its services.

And then Facebook serves up everything about us to its true customers — virtually anyone willing to pay for the ability to convince us to buy, do, or believe something.

And it is spending millions on corporate lobbyists, academics, and think tanks to ensure no one gets in their way.

Enough.

We’ve joined a new coalition to fight back, to demand the Federal Trade Commission take necessary action to give us freedom from Facebook.

The five members of the FTC can make Facebook safe for our democracy by spinning off WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger into competing networks, requiring interoperability so we have the freedom to communicate across networks, and imposing strong privacy rules.

Tell the Federal Trade Commission to break up Facebook and protect our data and democracy.

Thank you,

Sarah Miller
Citizens Against Monopoly

RELATED VIDEO: Nigel Farage Challenges Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook Censorship of Conservative Content

The Two Faces of the United Nations

The United Nations was against sodomy before it was for it.

On April 11, 2014, the BBC reported:

The UN has accused the Vatican of “systematically” adopting policies allowing priests to sexually abuse thousands of children.

Pope Francis has said that dealing with abuse is vital for the Church’s credibility, and that “sanctions” must be imposed against perpetrators.

But the Church has been accused of failing to address some allegations properly.

Read more…

On June 22, 2018 Emilie Kao and Grace Melton from The Daily Signal reported:

UN Bureaucracy Run Amok

One of the most egregious examples of bureaucratic overreach occurred in the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Rather than focus on the U.N. General Assembly’s mandate to “promote and protect” the effective enjoyment of fundamental human rights that are in the texts of treaties, this U.N. office launched the Free and Equal campaign.

This highly visible and well-funded global campaign aims to socialize same-sex marriage, criminalize so-called “hate speech,” and normalize transgender ideology, even though the terms sexual orientation and gender identity are not in the text of any U.N. treaties.

This campaign is not only a massive overreach by U.N. bureaucracy, but it threatens to silence public debate on controversial topics like marriage and sexuality throughout the world.

So is sodomy bad when Catholics “systematically” adopt policies allowing priests to sexually abuse thousands of children, but it is perfectly fine when the United Nations “systematically” does the same?

Kao and Melton note:

The United States Supreme Court is currently considering the case of a Christian cake artist whom Colorado ordered to endorse same-sex marriage by designing a custom wedding cake despite his religious objections.

The U.K. Supreme Court is hearing a similar case. None of these individuals turned someone away because they identify as LGBT; rather, the conflicts were all the result of disagreement over the definition of marriage.

No state, much less the unelected U.N. bureaucracy, should compel a person who believes that marriage is between one man and one woman to endorse something they believe is untrue because of pressure from a politically powerful identity group.

Emilie Kao and Grace Melton warn:

Unfortunately, this campaign is just the beginning. Charles Radcliffe, Free and Equal’s founding director, has stated that a dozen U.N. agencies have made public commitments to advance sexual orientation and gender identity policies in individual member states and that more than 100 countries have implemented changes in their domestic laws in response to U.N. sexual orientation and gender identity recommendations.

Should the United States “sanction” the United Nations for its policy in the name of equality to allow the sexual abuse of children globally? You be the judge.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

UN Poses Danger to Free Speech, Parents’ Rights. Here’s How Trump Administration Can Fight Back.

The Pope’s New Clothes

Can a pope change moral truth?

What the Bible Really Says on Homosexuality in 5 Quotes

AP Exclusive: 2015 letter belies pope’s claim of ignorance

Pope Francis: World Government Must Rule U.S. ‘For Their Own Good’

CRITICS: Pope Losing Credibility in Abuse Cases

EDITORS NOTE: Reading Galatians‬ ‭6:7-8‬ ‭ASV‬‬:

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life.”

‘Boy Scout’ Policy Requires Condoms to be ‘Readily and Easily Accessible to All Participants’ at World Jamboree Scouting Event

(Orlando, FL) The World Organization of the Scout Movement (WOSM) released itshealth and safety guidelines for the World Jamboree to be held at the Summit Bechtel Reserve in West Virginia July 22 through August 2, 2019.

The guidelines require that host organizations, who in this case include the former Boy Scouts of America (now Scouts BSA),

“… ensure that condoms are readily and easily accessible for all participants and IST [staff] at a number of locations on the site. Heads of Contingent must be informed in advance and made aware of their responsibility in communicating this policy to their Participants, Unit Leaders, Contingent Staff, and IST in an appropriate way.” (See Guideline 7.3 on page 10 of the document.) 

Stunningly, the World Jamboree Guideline 7.3 also has “exceptions,” allowances and instructions for the consumption of alcohol in “confined areas” at the 12-day camping event. (It appears the Jamboree guidelines were drafted after the 2015 World Jamboree in Japan in preparation for the 2019 event and were just recently released in an email.)

The 2019 World Jamboree will be hosted by three national Scout organizations: Scouts Canada, Asociación de Scouts de México, and the Boy Scouts of America (now Scouts BSA). The theme for the 24th Jamboree will be to “Unlock a New World” and promotional materials claim the event will be “a celebration of cultural exchange, mutual understanding, peace, and friendship.”

This announcement comes on the heels of the BSA changing its membership policy earlier this month to allow girls to fully participate in local Boy Scout Troop programs and their official name change to remove the word “boy” to transform into the new genderless “Scouts BSA.”

The change to allow girls into the BSA provoked a blistering response from the national Girl Scouts of America organization last year when they issued the following statement:

“The Boy Scouts’ house is on fire. Instead of addressing systemic issues of continuing sexual assault, financial mismanagement and deficient programming, BSA’s senior management wants to add an accelerant to the house fire by recruiting girls.”

Florida Family Policy Council President John Stemberger, who also serves as Chairman of the Board for the Christian scouting movement Trail Life USA issued the following statement:

“In light of the mandatory condom policy, it is not clear how far down the rabbit hole the Boy Scouts will continue to fall. With the addition of condoms and alcohol, the World Jamboree is starting to sound more like a 1960s Woodstock festival rather than a campout that parents would want to send their children to! All of this should be deeply disturbing to the churches that are chartering Boy Scout Troops. These policies present a clear youth protection problem that the BSA absolutely refuses to recognize. The fact that they are requiring that  condoms be ‘readily accessible’ and are communicating this to everyone– including youth participants–shows that the BSA is both anticipating and facilitating sexual conduct between minors at this event. These policies are both outrageous and completely irresponsible.”

More than 160 national scout organizations representing more than 200 nations and territories are expected to participate in this massive West Virginia 12-day camping event, which based on recent membership policy changes should include openly-gay boys, openly-gay adult scout leaders, transgendered boys and adults and now also girls.

ABOUT TRAIL LIFE USA

Trail Life LogoTrail Life USA has over 739 local troops chartered with various churches and school organizations in 48 states. For more information on joining a troop or starting a troop with this Christ-centered, boy focused, high adventure program see www.TrailLifeUSA.com. More on the history of the launch of Trail Life USA can be found here.

The Florida Family Policy Council is one of 40 other state-based policy organizations associated with Focus on the Family and the Family Policy Alliance.

It’s Been 1 Year Since Mueller Began His Investigation. It’s Past Time for It to Wrap Up.

Robert Mueller was appointed one year ago Thursday as a special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and whether the Russian government coordinated its activities with associates of candidate Donald Trump.

Over the past year Mueller has managed to spend $10 million in taxpayer funds, taken up enormous amounts of time of people being questioned, forced many to run up big legal bills, and had a disruptive effect on the functioning of the White House. His probe has dominated the news, squeezing out coverage of many of the Trump administration’s accomplishments.

And in a new development Wednesday, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani—now working as an attorney representing Trump—told Fox News that Mueller told the Trump legal team he will not seek an indictment against the president, based on a 1999 Justice Department memo that concluded federal prosecutors can’t indict a sitting president.

That means the only way Mueller could act against Trump would be to provide evidence that would be welcomed by Democrats in Congress eager to impeach the president.

So is the Mueller probe really a taxpayer-funded effort to overturn the results of the 2016 election and oust the duly elected president from office?

How long this seemingly endless probe will continue is anybody’s guess.

Mueller may have evidence that will result in actual indictments that have something to do with his original task and that justify his continued spending of taxpayer funds.

But after a year, we still have not seen him produce anything publicly that supports the claim he was originally assigned to investigate—whether there was any collusion of any kind in the 2016 election between the Trump campaign and Russia.

In addition to the issue of Trump-Russia collusion, Mueller was also authorized to look at additional issues uncovered in his investigation. That allows him to cast a very wide net in a fishing expedition looking for wrongdoing.

The special counsel’s probe has expanded to also examine whether the president and his associates sought to obstruct justice by impeding the investigation; whether Trump associates engaged in illegal financial dealings; and whether there were improper contacts between Trump officials and Russians during the presidential transition period.

Trump has said many times that “there was no collusion.” The president has also said that “there was no obstruction” and called the Mueller investigation a “witch hunt.”

The House intelligence committee recently released its report on the investigation that it conducted of Russian election interference, concluding that that there “was no evidence” that the Trump campaign “colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russia.” Democrats dissented from that conclusion by the Republican majority on the committee.

A report by the Senate intelligence committee released Wednesday agreed with the intelligence community’s finding that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election with the goal of helping Trump be elected president. But the committee said it will issue another report in the future examining allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The report out Wednesday did not address this issue.

We do know that there was no actual interference with the voting and balloting process that could have changed the outcome of the election. Jeh Johnson, who headed the Department of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama, told us right after the election that Russians didn’t do any of that.

Since Mueller’s appointment, 19 people have been charged with illegal actions, including four Trump campaign aides and three Russians companies. But many of these alleged crimes have nothing to do with the election or with Trump.

For example, Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, was indicted on charges involving alleged money laundering, tax fraud, and violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. However, the charges are related to his representation of the Ukrainian government years before Trump even thought about running for president. Linking Trump to these charges is absurd.

Mueller’s indictment of former national security adviser Michael Flynn also had nothing to do with the election. Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian government during the presidential transition.

Many are questioning the legitimacy of the FBI’s questioning Flynn, since the questioning was apparently based on a potential violation of the Logan Act, which makes it a crime for unauthorized people to negotiate on behalf of the United States with foreign governments. No one has been successfully prosecuted under the Logan Act since it was passed in 1799. Many scholars believe it is unconstitutional.

Mueller also has indicted 13 Russians for using social media platforms to stir up trouble in the U.S. over racial and social issues. But those Russians used social media to push people toward rallies and actions that in some cases supported Trump, in some cases supported Hillary Clinton, and in some cases opposed one of the presidential candidates.

It is obvious from reading this indictment that the Russians are accused of using fake and stolen identities to ensure no one knew they were Russians and that they were trying to sow dissension and social unrest rather than help a particular candidate. In any event, no collusion is even alleged in the indictment.

The yearlong special counsel investigation seems to have raised more questions about the possible misbehavior by Mueller’s investigators and other government officials than by the Trump campaign. This includes serious questions about:

  • The basis for starting an FBI counterintelligence investigation and surveillance of the Trump presidential campaign, apparently based on unverified opposition political research.
  • The possible bias of FBI and Department of Justice officials involved in the investigation against Trump.
  • The legitimacy of the far-flung expansion of Mueller’s investigation into things that seemingly have nothing to do with Russia and President Vladimir Putin, such as hush money paid to a porn star who alleges she had a one-night affair with Trump a decade before the election. The president denies the claim.

Like a soap opera that goes on and on and an on, the Mueller probe continues, expanding into new story lines and growing ever more complex. How far back in time and how wide-ranging this investigation will become is a mystery.

But whether you are a Trump supporter or opponent, do you really want this investigation to continue for months or even another year? Is the cost and the disruption of the functioning of the White House worth it? Shouldn’t Trump and his team be allowed to focus on dealing with the challenges our nation faces at home and abroad?

If you think Trump is doing a bad job, vote against him if he’s on the ballot in 2020. Criticize his conduct and his policies between now and then. But like it or not, he was elected president of the United States.

Mueller needs to wrap up his investigation, report to Congress, and then let lawmakers either act against the president or allow him to finish his term, focused on making America great again.

Originally published by Fox News

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky

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

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 President Donald J. Trump is by Face to Face/ZUMA Press/Newscom.

VIDEO: The Suicide of Europe

Europe is committing suicide. How did this happen?

The civilization born of ancient Greek philosophy, Judeo-Christian values, and the discoveries of the Enlightenment is staring at the abyss, brought there by its own hand. To put it starkly: Europe is committing suicide. How did this happen? In this week’s video, Douglas Murray, author of The Strange Death of Europe, explains the two major causes of Europe’s impending downfall.

Broward County Sheriff’s Office Training Materials Say First One or Two Officers on Scene should ‘Confront the Shooter’

‘Remember, every time you hear a gunshot in an active shooter incident; you have to believe that is another victim being killed.’ 

Four Officers on Scene at February 14 Parkland Shooting Did Not Enter School Building 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released Broward County Sheriff’s Office training and operation materials that specifically dictate that the first one or two officers on the scene of an active shooter incident “will immediately go to confront the shooter.”

The Broward County Sheriff’s Office’s Standard Operating Procedure and lesson plans for an active shooter incident were obtained by Judicial Watch via a Florida Sunshine Act records request.

The Broward County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that armed school resource officer Deputy Scot Peterson was first on the scene of the February 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, but he did not enter the school to confront shooter Nikolas Cruz.

Three other deputies also arrived on the scene but did not enter, the sheriff’s office said. The Broward County materials direct that if four officers are on the scene of an active shooter incident they are to form a “Quad” formation and enter the building.

The lesson plan instructs officers to immediately confront a shooter:

History shows when a suspect is confronted by any armed individual (police, security, concealed carry person) they either shoot it out with that person or kill themselves. Either way, the shooting of innocent bystanders must stop. Now, the first officer or two officers on scene will immediately go to confront the shooter. Military tactics work well in this situation. The two man “bounding overwatch” is our response.

Using lessons learned from Columbine (the 1999 high school massacre where officers waited for a SWAT team and allowed two shooters to continue) the first four responding officers are directed to form a “Quad” and approach from all directions:

During Columbine, the response to an ongoing shooting situation was to contain the suspect. After Columbine the International Chiefs of Police addressed the problem with the response and came up with the “Quad” or diamond formation. With the quad, the first four officers to respond entered the building with coverage in all directions. This was critical to address the concerns of officers who previously would not enter and just wait for SWAT.

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said during a news conference that “What I saw was a deputy [Peterson] arrive … take up a position and he never went in.” Israel said Peterson should have “went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

The lesson plan clearly states: “If you are on scene or in the area and hear gunshots, you should immediately access what you have and prepare to respond. Remember, every time you hear a gunshot in an active shooter incident; you have to believe that is another victim being killed.”

The training materials also state that the first officers on the scene will “engage the suspect,” which Peterson did not do. “There are now three teams during Active Shooter Incident [Contact, Extraction and Rescue Task Force]: Contact Team: Is first on scene, 1-4 deputies, they will be actively engaging/searching for suspect (HOT ZONE).”

The lesson plan lists “priorities of life” as: 1) Hostages/victims; 2) Innocent Bystanders; 3) Police/deputies; and 4) Suspects. “If in doubt about going through the door after a suspect, think about the victims and where they stand on the list.”

The importance of a fast and effective response is emphasized: “Time is critical in each of these incidents. This is like no other crime. The motive is to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. Why? Because the bad guy knows ‘we’ are coming.”

An exercise designed for a lone deputy on the scene of an active shooting is intended to “get the deputy moving towards the gunfire, passing dead students and others running by him.” However, “there is no reason to give up a good position of cover” if the shooting has stopped. “Remember the cavalry is on their way, so it’s better to hold, than to expose yourself to unknown threats.”

The Broward County Sheriff’s Office Standard Operating Procedure states:

“If real time intelligence exists the sole deputy or a team of deputies may enter the area and/or structure to preserve life. A supervisor’s approval or on-site observation is not required for this decision…. If the situation turns to a barricade or hostage situation the response team will contain, isolate, communicate and wait for SWAT.”

Records obtained by Judicial Watch also show that Sheriff Israel is the second highest paid of Florida’s 67 sheriffs at $186,631 for Fiscal Year 2017/18. The sheriff was eligible for $2,000 in supplemental pay for completion of a 20-hour training course. In 2016, Israel received a warning letter that he had not successfully completed the course and his supplemental pay was being withheld.

“These Broward County Sheriff’s Office documents obtained by Judicial Watch show that the law enforcement agency failed the victims of the Parkland shooting,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Lives were lost in Parkland because the Sheriff’s Office personnel were either poorly trained or failed to follow training protocols.”

New CIA Director, ‘One of the Most Accomplished Officers of Her Generation’

ast week, the Senate confirmed then-Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Mike Pompeo to be America’s 70th Secretary of State. Upon Secretary Pompeo’s swearing-in, CIA Deputy Director Gina Haspel assumed the role of Acting Director for the Agency. Haspel is President Donald J. Trump’s choice to succeed Mike Pompeo at the CIA’s helm on a permanent basis.

The President’s decision was an easy one. Like Secretary Pompeo, Haspel’s credentials as a public servant are far-reaching. She joined the CIA in the waning days of the Cold War and has spent many of the 33 years since in dangerous posts and foreign capitals on America’s behalf. That dedication has earned her multiple honors over her career, including the Intelligence Medal of Merit, a Presidential Rank Award, and the George H. W. Bush Award for Excellence in Counterterrorism.

Gina Haspel

Haspel’s first overseas assignment was as a case officer in Africa. Years later, with the fight against al Qaeda heating up, she requested a transfer to the CIA’s Counter Terrorism Center. Her first day on the job was September 11, 2001.

Service in the CIA is largely quiet, behind-the-scenes work to keep America safe. The names of these men and women are often unknown to the wider public, but their contributions to national security are indispensable. Haspel’s promotion from within the Agency is a testament to the crucial work of these public servants.

Her rise is also a milestone for women. She is the first woman in the CIA’s 70-year history to climb the ranks to become Deputy Director, as well as the first woman to be nominated for CIA Director. When Haspel first took over as a Chief of Station in a tumultuous capital abroad, the skepticism of some of her male colleagues was obvious. It didn’t take long for her to prove the doubters wrong.

As with Secretary Pompeo, a number of public officials have put country above party to support Haspel’s nomination. One example comes from a letter to the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence from more than 50 national security experts. “The U.S. Senate can help protect our country by swiftly confirming Gina Haspel,” they write. The signees include former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George P. Schultz, as well as Democratic former Secretary of Defense and former CIA Director Leon Panetta.

Haspel draws this bipartisan admiration because of her reputation for providing objective, unbiased assessments to policymakers. She values the rule of law and Congressional oversight of the CIA, which aligns fittingly with President Trump’s accountability agenda for Washington.

The CIA workforce trusts Haspel to oversee these responsibilities. “She is one of the most accomplished officers of her generation,” former Director of the CIA Clandestine Service John Bennett says. “She has taken on some of the most demanding and least rewarding assignments in the War on Terror, not because she sought them out, but because she felt it was her duty.”

That sense of patriotism is precisely what Americans deserve in a CIA Director. The Senate has confirmed Haspel as the first woman Director of the CIA.

WARNING: Being LGBT is Hazardous to Your Health

The Recall Report has a section on LGBT health. The Recall Report warns:

Men and women who identify as LGBT have any number of health concerns depending on each individual.

[ … ]

Cancer is another big health risk for Americans in general, but there are some specific risks for LGBT people. For example, lesbians are at a greater risk of developing breast cancer than heterosexual women. This may be explained by the fact that lesbians are less likely to have full-term pregnancies, are more likely to be overweight, and are less likely to get mammograms and other cancer screenings.

Gay men are at a greater risk than their heterosexual counterparts for developing testicular, colon, and prostate cancers. Gay men and bisexual men who have sex with men are also at a greater risk for developing anal cancer because they are at a greater risk for being exposed to HPV, the human papilloma virus, which can cause cancer.

[ … ]

Both lesbian women and gay men report more harassment and physical abuse from family members. Lesbians, gay men, and bisexual men and women are all more often victims of domestic partner violence than heterosexual men or women. Gay men are both more likely to be victims of domestic abuse and criminal physical violence based on sexual orientation.

Read more.

Walt Heyer, who used to live as a transgender woman, now travels the country speaking about his experiences and reaching out to those who regret their own gender change.

The Daily Signal spoke with Heyer on camera about his story, as well as the lies he says society and the media tell young people today about gender.

David Carlin, professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, in a column titled “The Oddity of the LGBT Alliance” writes:

For some time now these rejections of nature have been celebrated, or at least condoned, on TV, in movies, in classrooms, in legislative chambers, and in law courts. What in particular?

  1. Homosexuality. It used to be called “the unnatural vice.” Now, according to the masters of our popular culture, it is a perfectly respectable form of love.

  2. Child abandonment. It used to be thought that only an unnatural parent would abandon his/her children, the parent-child bond being the most fundamental of all human connections. But for decades now American society has allowed fathers (though not yet mothers) to beget children and then walk out on them.

  3. Bodily mutilation. If you spend a lot of time among young people (as I myself do in my capacity as a community college professor), you will observe the relatively new fashion of making nickel-or-quarter-size holes in ear lobes or cheeks or elsewhere. That’s minor-league mutilation. More advanced advocates of mutilation (I have not, thank God, come across any of these at my college) go further, defending the amputation of fingers, hands, and limbs – either as a way of being “different” or as a way of maintaining solidarity with disabled (differently abled) persons.

  4. Suicide. It used to be that suicide was thought of as the most unnatural thing in the world. What could be more unnatural than to renounce life itself, the most fundamental of all natural goods? But now suicide or voluntary euthanasia is considered by truly “progressive” people to be a fine thing. To be sure, they don’t consider all suicide to be good. It is good that suicide or euthanasia should be chosen by very old people who are now (allegedly) incapable of getting any significant enjoyment out of life; or by terminally ill people who wish to shorten life by a few weeks or a few months; or by people whose life involves severe physical or mental suffering; or by mature (but not necessarily old) people who now find life boring. But it is not good (not yet, but stay tuned) if a 17-year-old girl commits suicide because her boyfriend dropped her.

  5. Transgenderism. In the other cases listed, nature gives us strong hints as to the correct way to proceed – e.g., “have sex with persons of the opposite sex only,” “don’t abandon your children,” “don’t mutilate your body,” and “don’t kill yourself.” But in the case of sexual/gender identity, what nature gives us is something more than a hint. It used to be thought that the question of whether a newborn is a boy or a girl could be answered by taking a quick glance at the baby’s genitalia. Now we are told that the question shouldn’t be answered by other persons (doctors, nurses, mothers, fathers) who “assign” a gender to the child.

Unnatural behaviors leads down a dangerous road that few travel. Even one person lost to the LGBT life style is one too many.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Drug and Alcohol Addiction in the LGBTQ Community

LGBT Lobby Rebutted by Medical Experts and Ex-gays

LGBT Playbook: Legally erase women through gender identity laws

Our ‘Cold Civil War’ Over 2 Constitutions

The United States is more than politically polarized amid a “cold civil war” over the meaning of the Constitution, constitutional scholar Charles Kesler said Tuesday.

Kesler, editor of the Claremont Review of Books, spoke as part of a panel discussion on “The State of the Constitution” during the 2018 Bradley Symposium at The Heritage Foundation.

“Underlying this cold civil war is the fact that increasingly America is torn between two Constitutions,” said Kesler, also a senior fellow with the Claremont Institute and distinguished professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. “Where it ends up then is some form of crisis, a crisis of the two Constitutions, a crisis towards which we are approaching if not yet hurtling, but which has no very good end available to us.”

Kesler outlined five possible ways to resolve the cold civil war.

One is to change the subject. Another is to change minds through persuasion, until one side wins. A third is a “reinvigorated federalism” that allows blue states and red states to address issues differently and coexist with minimal interference from the U.S. government. The others are more undesirable: secession or war.

“It’s possible we could agree to disagree in separate countries,” Kesler said. “Although that would be extremely difficult because succession, as we know from our history, leads to the fifth and final possibility—war.”

He described one Constitution, the original 1787 document as amended, as steeped in natural rights and limited government. This one, he said, is also the “conservatives’ Constitution.”

The other one is the “living Constitution,” or what he called “the liberals’ Constitution.”

“The living Constitution implies that the other Constitution is a dead Constitution, or at least is on life support, and that it must be transformed, it must be infused with new meaning, new ends and to some degree new means and institutions, to be kept alive in order to be a vital part of our politics,” Kesler said.

President Woodrow Wilson was one of the first to use the term “living Constitution” to suggest it changes with the times, Kesler said.

“A formula for the old Constitution was it was unchanging precisely because it was designed to keep the times in tune with the Constitution,” Kesler said. “The new Constitution is designed to keep the Constitution in tune with the times as much as possible.”

The “cold civil war” erupted when conservatives fought back, he said:

The conservatives who began an epic campaign against the inevitable emergency of the living Constitution had in common the desire, the duty to oppose the gradual disappearance of limited government from American political life. When it became clear in the ’50s and especially in the ’60s that the surrender was off, the cold civil war was on.

A part of the expanding federal government not identified under the Constitution comes in the form of independent enforcement agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Election Commission, and the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, among others, said Robert Alt, president of the Buckeye Institute, a conservative think tank based in Ohio.

Alt said that Congress and the courts have been far too deferential to federal agencies that bring charges and adjudicate matters.

Congress is largely to blame for expanding executive power, said Christopher DeMuth, a distinguished fellow at Hudson Institute.

“A lot of seizure of power in the Obama years, and we can find some in the Bush years as well, [was] simply going with the flow of congressional delegation of lawmaking power to the executive branch,” said DeMuth, a former president of the American Enterprise Institute. “They were wrong, but in a sense, they were understandable.”

In what might seem out of step with most commentary about President Donald Trump’s nontraditional presidency, DeMuth said Trump represents a “return to normalcy.”

“Every president and every regulatory agency in modern times sometimes oversteps the bounds of the authorities given to them by congressional statutory law,” DeMuth said, adding:

President Obama and his regulatory agencies made it an open and notorious practice, a matter of routine, something that affected the biggest decision of President Obama’s second term, so that many of us thought during his second term that we might be evolving—seriously—in the direction of a government by presidential decree.

The Trump administration has been a return to normalcy, at least [to] the situation before Obama or late Bush administration, and then some. Not only has the Trump administration withdrawn many of the Obama administration’s most brazen extrastatutory ventures such as the Clean Power Plan, but in two critical cases, President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals decree and his expenditure of billions of dollars for Obamacare cost-sharing expenditures without any congressional appropriation whatsoever, in these two cases, he has withdrawn them and sent them back to Congress.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLE: Podcast: As Seattle Passes Head Tax, Left’s Civil War on Full Display

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

Kanye West Threatens the Democratic Party’s Hold on Black Americans

In the aftermath of the Kanye West dust-up, my heart goes out to the white people who control the Democratic Party.

My pity stems from the hip-hop megastar’s November announcement to his packed concert audience that he did not vote in the presidential election but if he had, he would have voted for Donald Trump.

Then, on April 21, West took to his Twitter account, which has 28 million followers, to announce, “I love the way Candace Owens thinks.” Owens is Turning Point USA’s director of urban engagement and has said that former President Barack Obama caused “damage” to race relations in the United States during his two terms in office.

West’s support for Trump, along with his criticism of the “plantation” mentality of the Democratic Party, has been met with vicious backlash from the left. In one song, West raps, “See, that’s the problem with this damn nation. All blacks gotta be Democrats. Man, we ain’t made it off the plantation.” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said West “talks out of turn” and advised, “He should think twice about politics—and maybe not have so much to say.

The bottom-line sin that West has committed is questioning the hegemony of the Democratic Party among black Americans. The backlash has been so bad that West had to hire personal security to protect him against threats made against his life. Fortunately, the police are investigating those threats.

West is not saying anything different from what Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Jason Riley, I, and other black libertarians/conservatives have been saying for decades.

In fact, West has tweeted quotations from Sowell, such as “Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it” and “The most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best.” Tweeting those Sowell quotations represents the highest order of blasphemy in the eyes of leftists.

The big difference between black libertarians/conservatives and West is that he has 28 million Twitter followers and a huge audience of listeners, whereas few blacks have even heard of libertarian/conservative blacks outside of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. (I might add in passing that Sowell is one of the nation’s most distinguished and accomplished scholars alive today.)

The West problem for the Democratic Party is that if the party doesn’t keep blacks in line and it loses even 20 to 25 percent of the black vote, it can kiss any hope of winning any presidential and many congressional elections goodbye.

Democrats may have already seen that threat. That’s why they support illegal immigration and voting rights for noncitizens. Immigrants from south of the border who are here illegally may be seen as either a replacement for or a guarantee against the disaster of losing the black vote.

Keeping blacks blind to the folly of unquestioned support for the Democratic Party by keeping blacks fearful, angry, and resentful and painting the Republican Party as racist is vital. Democrats never want blacks to seriously ask questions about what the party has done for them.

Here are some facts. The nation’s most troublesome and dangerous cities—Indianapolis, Stockton, Oakland, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Kansas City, Baltimore, Memphis, St. Louis, and Detroit—have been run by Democrats, often black Democrats, for nearly a half-century. These and other Democratic-run cities are where blacks suffer the highest murder rates and their youngsters attend the poorest-performing and most unsafe schools.

Democrats could never afford for a large number of black people to observe, “We’ve been putting you in charge of our cities for decades. We even put a black Democrat in the White House. And what has it meant for us? Plus, the president you told us to hate has our unemployment rate near a record low.”

It turns out that it’s black votes that count more to black and white politicians than black well-being, black academic excellence, and black lives. As for black politicians and civil rights leaders, if they’re going to sell their people down the river to keep Democrats in power, they ought to demand a higher price.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams is a columnist for The Daily Signal and a professor of economics at George Mason University. 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 Kanye West is by John Barrett-PhotoLink/Newscom.