Americanism vs. Communism

America is being ripped apart by two diametrically opposed worldviews – Americanism and communism. These contending forces are locked in a savage death match. They are so incontrovertibly incompatible that they cannot peacefully coexist. At the end of the day, only one flag will wave over the United States. It’s our duty and mission as freemen to determine which side will prevail.

The American Founding Fathers gave the world a Freedom philosophy unique in human history. No other nation enjoys the heritage of Freedom we enjoy. No other country has the same institutions for securing the blessings of Liberty that we have. No other People centered their society upon the idea of protecting God-given rights like our forefathers here in America. Our Republic, with its unparalleled power, wealth, influence, success, and Freedom, was born with this immortal declaration from the pen of Thomas Jefferson:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”

These simple words declare our People’s commitment to God, to Liberty, and to our mutual Union. Out of their burning desire to secure their God-given rights, our Founding Fathers declared Independence, waged a war against British tyranny, and created the Constitution. However imperfectly we may have implemented these profoundly powerful principles, they have been our guiding light.

After touring the United States nearly a century ago, the famed philosopher G.K. Chesterton made a keen observation:

“The American Constitution . . . is founded on a creed. America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence; perhaps the only piece of practical politics that is also theoretical politics and also great literature. It enunciates that all men are equal in their claim to justice, that governments exist to give them that justice, and that their authority is for that reason just. It certainly does condemn anarchism, and it does also by inference condemn atheism, since it clearly names the Creator as the ultimate authority from whom these equal rights are derived” (G.K. Chesterton, What I Saw in America, 7).

Our American Republic is founded on a creed. To be sure, this creed is political, social, and cultural, but it is also highly religious in nature. Thomas Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration of Independence in fact did not use the term “unalienable Rights.” Rather, it called our rights “sacred and undeniable.” Life, Liberty, property, individual stewardship, and all the things that make life worth living, are indeed sacred.

Significantly, Americans have traditionally viewed their rights as endowments from Almighty God – not as mere privileges granted by government. Alexander Hamilton, for instance, stated:

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power” (Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, February 23, 1775).

Thomas Jefferson confirmed Hamilton’s position when he wrote:

“The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them” (Thomas Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America, 1774).

And John Adams expressed the idea this way:

“I say RIGHTS, for such [the People] have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government, — Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws — Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe.” (John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, 1765).

This fervent belief that rights did not come from government, but from God, formed the basis of the American political and cultural system. Biblical principles, including prominent parts of the civil law revealed to Moses, are tightly interwoven into our federal, state, and local structures of law and justice. In his book The Ten Commandments & their Influence on American Law, William J. Federer detailed the ubiquitous blending of politics and religion during colonial times and throughout most of U.S. history. He noted:

“The belief in a monotheistic God is so basic to America that it is almost unnecessary to discuss. We have to look no further than our National Coinage, National Currency, National Motto, National Anthem, Pledge of Allegiance, Inaugural Addresses, State Constitutions, the wall above the chair of the Speaker of the House, National Monuments, National Day of Thanksgiving Proclamations, etc., to see examples” (William J. Federer, The Ten Commandments & their Influence on American Law: A Study in History, 43).

Out of our ancestors’ reverence for their God-given rights grew a movement to codify Liberty in written documents and to restrain the hand of tyranny by a strict and limited national Constitution. The American People knew that they held all political power and that government is their servant. The Declaration of Independence had made that abundantly clear. Moreover, they knew that they were accountable to God, not to the state, and therefore endeavored to remove government from their lives to the fullest extent possible while still maintaining a civil society with enough strength to secure their collective Freedom.

To fulfill these hopes, the finest American minds came together in Philadelphia in 1787. Carefully, they crafted an instrument capable of preventing usurpation by despots, delegating limited power for specific purposes to government, and retaining to the People and the states the lion’s share of social duties and daily governmental functions. The Constitution which they produced contained a short list of powers that would be delegated by the People to the federal government for particular purposes, such as to repel invasion, put down insurrection, maintain state militias, build postal roads, and to coin money. Beyond this, the government could not go.

The Bill of Rights was later added to safeguard specific fundamental rights, such as the rights of self-defense, peaceable assembly, speech, discrimination, privacy, habeas corpus, due process, and religion. The Bill of Rights serves as a list of “thou shalt nots” to government. The right to keep and bear arms for self-defense against criminals and tyrants, for instance, “shall not” be infringed. Our patriot forefathers loved their Liberty too much to leave anything to chance.

The purpose of the Constitution, as stated in the Preamble, is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” It is the Constitution which activated our forefathers’ hopes and dreams. It is this wise document, so beautifully constructed with checks and balances, a brilliant division of powers, and an almost perfectly limited scope of operations when correctly followed, that truly launched the Republic to greatness. James Madison in fact referred to the Constitution as “the cement of the Union” (James Madison, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1809).

Former British Prime Minister William Gladstone famously called the Constitution “the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man” (Thomas W. Hanford, ed., William Ewart Gladstone: Life and Public Services, 323). It was such a brilliant feat because it was created by honorable men who understood that their rights came from their Creator, that government’s duty was to secure those rights, and that the People justly held all political power and were capable of governing themselves.

These were also men who knew that “Freedom hath been hunted around the globe” and that America was to be Liberty’s final “asylum” (Thomas Paine, Common Sense, February 14, 1776). Not only did early Americans see God as their national Benefactor, but they viewed themselves as chosen instruments in His hands to set the ball of Freedom rolling. For instance, President George Washington remarked:

“[T]he preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people” (George Washington, First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789).

In harmony with their convictions, the patriots of 1776 fought zealously for their rights as if on a holy crusade. They revered George Washington and his fellow Founders nearly as highly as prophets. And the Declaration of Independence and Constitution held a place of sanctity akin to scripture in the American mind. Taken altogether, this Freedom philosophy and the sense of prophetic national destiny that emerged in early America has sometimes been termed the “American Gospel.”

When we speak of “Americanism,” therefore, it is this constitutionally-guaranteed Freedom philosophy, undergirded by formal belief in God and a sense of our People’s special destiny, to which we refer. The “American Gospel” is our true heritage. It is our mission as a People to carry forward the sacred fire of Liberty and protect it from the tumultuous torrents of tyranny.

Unfortunately, we have lost touch with our Founding Fathers’ vision for this great Republic. Their vision of an “Empire of liberty” (Thomas Jefferson to George Rogers Clark, December 25, 1780) has not been taught in schools, heralded by the media, celebrated in the movies, or uttered in the halls of government for generations. Parents have failed to convey a proper love of our Republic to their children. And churches, once the guardians of the sacred flame of Freedom, have become mere mouthpieces for the mantra “obey government.”

As a People, we have let the Constitution collect dust while allowing our public servants to glorify themselves at our expense. We’ve sat silently as our political power has been usurped and our precious rights have been trampled. We’ve allowed the memory of our national heroes – men such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Robert E. Lee – to be denigrated and twisted into something horrid and repulsive while anti-American agitators are held up as icons worthy of emulation. We’ve let a rabid minority of activists foist perversions upon us and our children in the form of the LGBT movement, feminism, and so forth.

Our society has been so thoroughly indoctrinated that it recoils at the terms “American exceptionalism” and “Manifest Destiny.” We become offended by those things which make us characteristically American and which made America great. Our language has been hijacked and the free speech of those who defend traditional values is viciously attacked. Our noble history has been transformed into something “oppressive” and “shameful.” Our culture has become corrupted inside and out. Political correctness taints everything.

Who is responsible for this campaign of mass brainwashing and societal transformation – transformation that causes us to turn inward and condemn our history, belittle our ancestors, hate our institutions, and, ultimately, devour ourselves in tribalistic hostility? The origin of the term “brainwashing” points us in the right direction. In his book Brain-Washing in Red China, Edward Hunter explained:

“The plain people of China have coined several revealing colloquialisms for the whole indoctrination process. With their natural facility for succinct, graphic expressions, they have referred to it as “brain washing” and “brain-changing.”

“Brain-washing became the principal activity on the Chinese mainland when the Communists took over. Unrevealed tens of thousands of men, women, and children had their brains washed. They ranged from students to instructors and professors, from army officers and municipal officials to reporters and printers, and from criminals to church deacons. There were no exceptions as to profession or creed. Before anyone could be considered trustworthy, he was subjected to brain washing in order to qualify for a job in the “new democracy.” Only then did the authorities consider that he could be depended upon, as the official expression is worded, to “lean to one side” (Soviet Russia’s) in all matters, and that he would react with instinctive obedience to every call made upon him by the Communist Party through whatever twists, turns, or leaps policy might take, no matter what the sacrifice. He must fight by all possible means and be ready, too, with the right answer for every contradiction and evasion in Party statements. . . .

“. . . Man has learned not only some of the theoretical processes that go on in a man’s head but also how to direct his thoughts, and to do this in a “democratic group discussion,” in a “self-criticism meeting,” on the operating table, or in the hypnotist’s chamber. The whole field of psychology has broadened to embrace everything that influences thought and attitude, from the first crude publicity put out for a movie actress to Ivy Lee and psychological warfare, and the whole wide range of activities that lies within – in effect, our entire field of modem communications media, from public opinion surveys to aptitude testing. . . .

“The politicians of the world have been quick to seize upon these discoveries in the realm of the brain in order to advance their own objectives. Initially, they worked primitively in the field of propaganda. Then the vast possibilities of psychological warfare, what we call a cold war, dawned upon them. Cold war as a term is unfortunate in one respect. It sets up a line between cold and hot war that exists only on the writing table, not on the field of battle. What actually is meant by cold war is warfare with unorthodox weapons, with silent weapons such as a leaflet, a hypnotist’s lulling instructions, or a self-criticism meeting in Red China” (Edward Hunter, Brain-Washing in Red China, 4, 11-12).

Modern brainwashing is communist in origin. While variations of their tactics have been used throughout time, it was the communists who perfected the art, combined it with modern technology, science, and medicine, and employed it on a global scale. In particular, the unholy alliance between Marxism, psychiatry, and the drug industry threatens to upend our civilization and reduce us to bedlam.

This insidious program of mental and moral transformation – our version of Mao’s Cultural Revolution – is not native to our fertile American soil. Rather, it was imported to the United States by Soviet agents, covertly engrafted upon us, and cunningly cultivated. They first brought political correctness, of which the Encyclopaedia Britannica has noted:

“The term [political correctness] first appeared in Marxist-Leninist vocabulary following the Russian Revolution of 1917. At that time it was used to describe adherence to the policies and principles of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (that is, the party line).”

Brainwashing techniques arrived on our shores soon after political correctness. The purpose of these twin tactics of subversion was and is to convince people to toe the communist line and embrace socialism. Of course, they didn’t refer to it as “the Communist Party line” – they used other terms to disguise their true motives. They preached about “democracy” and “equality,” heaped praise on “diversity,” force fed us the vice of “tolerance” (i.e. toleration of criminality, corruption, and communism), deceptively referred to themselves as “Progressives,” “liberals,” and “social democrats,” and did everything they could to project the failures and abuses that they were guilty of onto America, her People, and her constitutional system, thus inverting reality and confusing our citizenry.

In order to push political correctness and wash Americans’ brains, the social engineers went about convincing us that our history was “shameful,” that our heroes were “villains,” that our principles were “hateful,” that our institutions were “oppressive,” and that our Republic was founded by “bigots.” The current rash of monument-destroying and the ghastly effusion of self-hated and “white guilt” is the long-cultivated fruit of the communist effort to demoralize and indoctrinate our People.

Let’s make something very clear: Communism is not American. It is a hostile, alien ideology that seeks to destroy and then supplant our Amercanist Freedom philosophy. The great statesman J. Reuben Clark, Jr. observed:

“This influence is in leadership largely alien, – in birth, or in tradition, or in training and experience, or possessing alien concepts and alien philosophies. With them are some American-born rebel conspirators. These all form a vast army . . . all ready, able, and willing to take over if their opportunity shall come, or be made” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., October, 7, 1943).

This alien conspiracy is wholly anti-American. It is a parasitical force sapping the lifeblood of our nation. Its values are the opposite of those codified in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. Its principles were forcefully rejected by our ancestors. Its aim is to convert the United States of America into the United States of Soviet America. All their study, planning, and work is aimed at transforming us from Freedom to high-tech feudalism.

In a 1951 article, David O. McKay warned of the attempt to use sophisticated, long-range methods to subvert our country. He wrote:

“More destructive to the spreading of Christian principles in the minds, particularly of the youth, than battleships, submarines, or even bombs, is the sowing of false ideals by the enemy. . . .

“Misrepresentation, false propaganda, innuendos soon sprout into poisonous weeds, and before long the people find themselves victims of a pollution that has robbed them of their individual liberty and enslaved them to a group of political gangsters” (David O. McKay, Salt Lake Telegram, April 26, 1951).

For a very long time, our People have been asleep. We were lulled into a hypnotic trance. We’ve been so beguiled that we didn’t listen when Charles Lindbergh, Henry Ford, Huey Long, Senator Joseph McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, W. Cleon Skousen, Fred Schwarz, Antony C. Sutton, Robert W. Welch, Jr., Bella Dodd, Whittaker Chambers, Louis Budenz, Yuri Bezmenov, and hosts of others in and out of government, attempted to alert us to the creeping dangers of socialism here in America. We failed to pay attention when the FBI, the U.S. House Un-American Activities Committee, and the Reece and Cox Committees, churned out material exposing the communist conspiracy and its backers on Wall Street, in banking, in academia, in Hollywood, in the news media, and in Washington, D.C.

Perhaps some did listen to the warnings, but never acted on them either out of fear or out of being labeled a “conspiracy theorist” or “intolerant” or one of the other smears the communists love to use. The esteemed Ezra Taft Benson made this relevant observation. He said:

“The communists bring to the nations they infiltrate a message and a philosophy that affects human life in its entirety . . . Communists are willing to be revolutionary; to take a stand for this and against that. They challenge what they do not believe in – customs – practices – ideas – traditions. They believe heatedly in their philosophy.

“But our civilization and our people here in America are seemingly afraid to be revolutionary. We are too “broadminded” to challenge what we do not believe in. We are afraid of being thought intolerant – uncouth – ungentlemanly. We have become lukewarm in our beliefs. . . .

“This is a sad commentary on a civilization which has given to mankind the greatest achievements and progress ever known. But it is even a sadder commentary on those of us who call ourselves Christians, who thus betray the ideals given to us by the Son of God Himself. I ask, are we going to permit atheistic communist masters, fellow travelers and dupes to deceive us any longer?” (Ezra Taft Benson, The Red Carpet: Socialism – the Royal Road to Communism, 53-54)

Though written decades ago, Benson’s question is one we must ask today. We must decide how much longer will we allow ourselves to be deceived, lied to, and abused before we stand up, speak out, and take back our country. Can we afford not to be “revolutionary” in the cause of our Freedom? Is it wrong to be radical for Liberty when the alternative is socialist slavery? Was it wrong when the Sons of Liberty became extremists against British tyranny in 1776?

Americans have generally believed that the threats we face are those hiding in the shimmering sands of Arabia or the sweltering jungles of the Pacific. We don’t like to think that the enemy is here, in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in court houses, in our Congress. Yet, that’s precisely where he is! Over a long period of time, as we’ve sat apathetic and distracted by TV, hedonism, political correctness, party politics, and pride, a ruthless cadre of criminals has helped one another rise to fill key positions in our government, media, justice system, military, medicine, universities, and so forth.

This group of gangsters may be called many names, from the “deep state” to the “swamp” to the “globalists.” I simply call them communists, however, because the thing they share in common, regardless of where you find them, whatever outward differences they may have, and whatever sinister organizations they belong to, is their communist ideology. They are committed to internationalism, one-world government, legalized plunder, centralization and collectivization, economic monopolies, humanism, loose morals, political correctness, and so on. In short, the adherents of this global cabal all support the core planks of The Communist Manifesto.

Some try to draw distinctions between the various isms. In particular, they endeavor to separate socialism and communism. Ezra Taft Benson explained the fallacy in their attempts:

“It is high time that we recognize creeping socialism for what it really is – a Red Carpet providing a royal road to communism. . . .

“This is a most important lesson for all of us to learn, namely, that the communists use the socialists to pave the way for them wherever possible. This is why communists and socialists are often found supporting each other, collaborating together and fighting for the same goals.

“The paramount issue today is freedom against creeping socialism. . . .

“. . . the worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have himself openly identified with the work of the communists who are generally feared and despised. . . .

“We must ever keep in mind that collectivized socialism is part of the communist strategy. Communism is fundamentally socialism. We will never win our fight against communism by making concessions to socialism. Communism and socialism, closely related, must be defeated on principle” (Ezra Taft Benson, The Red Carpet: Socialism – the Royal Road to Communism, 65, 69, 75).

The blunt reality is that socialism is communism with a smiley face. Karl Marx was instrumental in launching the First International, forerunner of today’s world-wide Socialist International (SI). George Bernard Shaw and the others who created Fabian Socialism, which has utterly devastated our nation, were ardent followers of Marx. Red China openly promotes socialism. Russia, after the fake “fall” of the USSR, proclaimed it was instituting more socialism and getting back to its Leninist roots. And so it goes, with communists invariably supporting socialism, and socialism invariably leading to communism.

When you compare the principles and inevitable outcomes of socialism, communism, social democracy, democratic socialism, Maoism, Marxism-Leninism, or the more vague “statism,” “globalism,” and “collectivism,” you realize that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them. They all lead to the destruction of Faith, Families, and Freedom and to the establishment of state domination over human beings. Socialism and communism must be seen as two wings of the same ravenous bird of prey and defeated by any means necessary.

America is long overdue for another great awakening. Thankfully, the blatant attacks on our rights using the Coronavirus sham as a pretext, as well as the violent rioting in our cities with its bestial destruction of our national monuments, has awakened many to the awful situation we find ourselves in. Many more need to awaken, however, if we are to tip the scales back in favor of Freedom.

In order to accomplish this great awakening, one thing we can do is to point the finger of blame in the right direction. No longer should we point to Jihadists in Afghanistan or to vaguely-defined “terrorists” as our primary enemy. Rather, the finger of blame must be pointed inward. And not merely to the Democrats, but to people of any party or persuasion who fail to uphold the Constitution, who excuse and justify the violence on our streets, who promote cultural corrosion, who advocate greater government centralization, who denounce the godly principles America was founded upon, or who promote any form of socialism.

Dr. John Coleman encouraged us to cut out the cancer within our society above and beyond all else. He wrote:

“The greatest danger arises from the mass of traitors in our midst. Our Constitution warns us to be watchful of the enemy within our gates . . . The UNITED STATES is where we MUST begin our fight to turn back the tide threatening to engulf us, and where we must meet, and defeat these internal conspirators” (John Coleman, Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, 30).

From Black Lives Matter agitators to Antifa thugs to turncoats on the Supreme Court to LGBT activists to oath-breakers at all levels of government, it’s time to fight the enemy within. We can’t long endure a situation where 97 members of congress belong to the openly Marxist Congressional Progressive Caucus – the largest single faction in the government. We can’t long endure a situation where governors allow communist revolutionaries to take over city buildings, police precincts, and residential areas, declaring them autonomous zones where U.S. law doesn’t apply. We can’t survive if we allow thugs to vandalize and destroy memorials to our fallen soldiers and monuments to our past heroes with impunity. We can’t last when we empty our prisons of hardened criminals while arresting mothers playing in the park with their children or people who rightly refuse to wear a face mask. We can’t endure in an atmosphere where anything you say that doesn’t agree with the communist agenda is labeled “racist” and “hateful” by the media. None of this is sustainable if our goal is to be free.

Until we wake up and realize the stakes of this war we’re engaged in, we don’t have a prayer of winning. Until we point the finger of blame in the right direction and square off against the traitors among us, we will forever lose ground. We would do well to recall words written during the height of the Cold War:

“Let’s get one thing straight at the very beginning. International communism is the self-avowed enemy of every loyal American. It has declared war against us and fully intends to win. The war in which we are engaged is total. Although its main battlefields are psychological, political and economic, it also encompasses revolution, violence, terror and limited military skirmishes. If we should lose this war, the conquering enemy’s wrath against our people and our institutions will result in one of the greatest blood-baths in all history. Call it a “cold war” if it makes you feel better, but our freedom and our very lives are the stakes of this contest” (Ezra Taft Benson, An Enemy Hath Done This, 165).

As precarious as our situation is, we haven’t lost yet. We have a choice. We can choose Americanism with its Freedom philosophy and reliance on God or we can side with communism and its unparalleled system of Satanic oppression. We can uphold the Constitution or we can sustain The Communist Manifesto. We can throw our lot in with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson or we can fly to the standard of Marx and Lenin. There’s no middle ground; neutrality is not an option.

With all her flaws and internal spasms, America is still the greatest nation on earth. We are still the hope of the world. We are the only thing holding back the full tsunami of communistic tyranny from sweeping over the globe. We have the potential to yet realize our forefathers’ vision of America as a shining city on a hill – an asylum for Liberty. I hope and pray that we will do the right thing, utterly purge communism from our society, and reclaim our heritage as Americans.

© 2020 Zack Strong – All Rights Reserved

MUST WATCH: Devastating anti-Biden ad titled “Abolished”

Team Trump posted the following comments and video titled “Abolished” on Twitter:

Joe Biden’s allies are doing everything they can to Defund the Police.

If you call 911, who will answer the phone?

You won’t be safe in Joe Biden’s America.

©All rights reserved.

Watch Antifa Attacks on Conservative Journalists

The latest Antifa attacks were an assault against One America News Network (OANN) Reporter Jack Posobiec in a Washington, D.C. park. The video below shows an Antifa crowd threatening Posobiec, who remained remarkably poised and calm during the encounter.

The Antifa attack included dumping water on Posobiec, attempting to steal his phone, blocking any pathway for him to leave while at the same time demanding he leave not only the D.C. park but D.C. itself.

A security team intervened and escorted Posobiec out of the park. The team was sent by Kevin Corke, a White House Correspondent for Fox News.

It wasn’t enough for Posobiec to leave the park. The Antifa crowd followed Posobiec onto the street and continued to harass him. They threatened to capture his license plate if he went to his car and continued to prevent him from leaving. In the end, it took a police escort to get him out of the Antifa crowd.

That day, Antifa also harassed Daily Caller’s Vincent Shkreli who was there to film the Emancipation Memorial statute. The Antifa heckler told Shkreli he wasn’t allowed to film, to which Shkreli shot back that it was a public space.

Over and over again as Antifa attacks grow in boldness — and gets support from a public that naively believes Antifa is not an extremist group — Antifa shows its intention: It wants control of the public space.

Here’s what they do with that public space in the short time they’ve gained traction after the George Floyd protests:

  1. Antifa attacks aim to silence free speech.
  2. Antifa attacks harass and assault political opponents.
  3. Antifa attacks include ongoing psychological assaults, including creating segregated zones in territories they’ve taken over, like Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) — now renamed CHOP (Capitol Hill Occupied Protest).

The issue is not whether or not one supports or agrees with individual journalists.

The repeat pattern of Antifa attacks and harassment of American citizens is indicative of the larger desire to control the public space and push out ideological and political opponents. For anyone who still has doubts that Antifa is an “anti-fascist” movement, Antifa members are conducting themselves like the fascist extremists they claim to be against.

RELATED VIDEO:

RELATED STORIES:

How Gen Z is Most Vulnerable to Antifa

Antifa Attacks Children’s Facility

Guns, Police & Fear: How Antifa is Changing the Face of America

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

VIDEO: Blue Lives Matter, Too

Police are now the top targets for terror in America. Taking advantage of the anti-police anarchists currently wreaking havoc on America’s streets and neighborhoods, both a jihadi Islamist and white supremacists targeted and killed police officers recently.

The attackers, spurred on by the protesters, activated their own personal ideologies justifying the murder of innocent men. Both movements have always demonized the police, and along with Antifa and other extremists, thrive in a time of anarchy.

Listen to the director of the Clarion Intelligence Network and Shillman Fellow Ryan Mauro explain the dangerous confluence of these ideologies: 

RELATED STORIES:

‘Blue Flu’ as Atlanta Police Walk Out. Will Other Pushbacks Follow?

Guns, Police & Fear: How Antifa is Changing the Face of America

Instead of Defunding the Police, What If Minneapolis Would Do This

RELATED VIDEO:

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

PODCAST: Sick of Watching People Ruin Monuments? So Is Allen West.

Does anyone remember George Floyd? Allen West wonders, because his death is being lost in all of the noise of the protests, Antifa, mob riots, and this new war against American history. No one is having the conversation this country should be having. Hear what the former congressman and military vet has to say in my interview with Lt. Col. West on “Washington Watch.”


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


RELATED ARTICLES:

Precedents Day: Justice Roberts Pins Ruling on Past

New Jersey Ballots Hit Fraud-side

Religious Schools Win in Latest SCOTUS Decision

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

THE PURGE: Social Media Drops the Beard of No-Bias, Smashes all Venues for the Non-Left

Guest post by MissPiggy with many thanks!

Chronicling the Silencing of Dissenting Voices –

In the latest purge of offensiveness on online platforms (POOOOP), with nearly 800,000 users, The_Donald and 2,000 other “Hate” subreddits were removed yesterday from Reddit. The unsurprising final blow came after a series of measures “to contain” the group. Even before COVID-1984, The_Donald was placed under quarantine. (Was it foreshadowing?) In June of 2019, ironically, the quarantine was decreed, due to comments posted to the forum which threatened violence against the police. Seeing the writing on the wall, administrators of the group created their own website (thedonald.win) months ago, and a mass exodus from Chicom Spezland (Reddit) began. (The Donald can also be found on GAB and Discord.)

Tim Pool’s somewhat Debbie Downer coverage on the latest purge: 

As Tim mentions in the above video, yesterday Twitch also banned President Trump’s official campaign account for “Hate Conduct”.

The Trump campaign uses Twitch for broadcasting rallies and campaign events. Twitch, Amazon’s live-streaming site, claims that a speech Trump made 2016 (Mexico is sending rapists) and more recently in Tulsa, violated their rules. The streaming service says the ban is temporary.

This temporary ban happened minutes after Reddit shut down The_Donald.

The subreddit isn’t directly affiliated with the president, but the Twitch channel is.

Youtube is notorious for its censorship jail, throttling views, deleting subscribers and shutting down channels of dissenting voices. The Youtube channel from Vlad Tepes Blog got the ax in January of 2019 for violating the ever goal-post-moving, Community Guidelines formerly known as violating Youtube’s Terms of Service. Well, yesterday Youtube banned Stefan Molyneux’s channel.

“This is Stefan Molyneux as you may have heard, 14 years of my life, thousands of videos, billions of comments, hundreds of millions of views and nearly a million
subscribers has been destroyed. Has been erased from Youtube.

The accusation is the usual one, that i’m fermenting violence and hatred and so on, which is not true at all. I have consistently promulgated the non-aggression principle and called for reason and evidence as the methodology by which we can resolve social disputes and differences doesn’t seem to have mattered of course the reality is that the book burning is underway. Myself and many other dissidents and anti-communist
intellectuals and speakers have also had channels destroyed across a wide variety of platforms within the span of only one hour in what i assume is a highly coordinated
effort to silence us.”

I believe the last great purge from Youtube started in December of 2017, when it announced that they were hiring 10,000 new moderators “to remove problematic content”.

However, the real origin is the day Susan Wojcicki became CEO of Youtube and made it her goal to make Youtube “responsible”. That push for cleaning up Youtube has lead to 2 “ADpocalypses”, countless demonetizations, and HAL-like algorithms.

We’re all aware of similar shakedowns happening at Facebook and Twitter. These attacks are coordinated as we’ve seen above and are undoubtedly timed. Just 10 day ago, on June 19th, Katie Hopkins was banned from Twitter, the Federalist and Zerohedge comment section were destroyed by Google,

@VDARE got banned from their domain registrar and GAB got blacklisted by VISA. Two days before that, on June 17th, GoDaddy cancelled the domain from Vlad Tepes Blog without notice, warning or explanation. (BTW -The back-up page is https://vladtepesblog.net)

So stayed tuned, be prepared and get connected because more POOOOP is coming. Contrary to all the Debbie Downers out there, I think the only way they will stop us is by shutting it all down, but we’ll regroup and come back stronger. We’ve had practice.

MissPiggy

RELATED VIDEO: The Gulag Archipelago and The Wisdom of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog post by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘They Nearly Killed Me’: Journalist Andy Ngo Testifies Before Congress On Antifa Violence During Portland Protests

Journalist Andy Ngo shared his personal experience with Antifa violence and his first-hand knowledge of their strategies during a congressional hearing Monday.

Ngo testified in a virtual briefing called “The First Amendment Under Attack: Examining Government Violence Against Peaceful Civil Rights Protesters and the Journalists Covering Them” before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties June 29, according to his written testimony.

“For years, I have been the victim of hundreds of threats by Antifa extremists,” Ngo said. “They’ve threatened to kill me, they spread lies about me being a fascist, a neo-Nazi, even a terrorist. They’ve shown up to my family’s home in the middle of the night, and they nearly killed me when they beat me in broad daylight within view of the police in the middle of downtown Portland last year.”

WATCH:

Violence against journalists is frequently committed by protesters, rather than law enforcement officers, Ngo said in his testimony.

“There are endless examples of public servants harming the very people they’re meant to serve — but it is an incomplete picture to only focus on injuries perpetrated by law enforcement during the past month of riots,” Ngo said.

Protests and riots broke out recently across the country following the death of George Floyd, who died after a former Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes, video of his arrest showed. The protests turned to violent demonstrations in some areas, leading to the destruction of buildings, statues and other landmarks.

Ngo claimed in his testimony that the destruction done to property and injuries sustained by individuals during recent protests is not a result of “over-policing,” but caused by “under-policing.”

“America is experiencing the consequences of police in retreat because of biased media narratives and poor leadership,” Ngo said. “This has allowed violent extremists to cloak themselves under the banner of ‘peaceful protest’ to carry out widespread arson, shootings, looting and property destruction.”

Ngo said that though the First Amendment is important, protests needed to obey the law to avoid “anarchy, violence and death,” according to his testimony.

“George Floyd deserves justice. But so do countless Americans victimized by the riots,” Ngo said.

COLUMN BY

KAYLEE GREENLEE

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: ‘I’m Still Dealing With Some Lasting Health Issues’: Journalist Andy Ngo Sues Antifa

Detroit Police Officer Drives Into Crowd After Protesters Surround Car, Video Shows

1-year-old among 18 dead, 47 wounded during one weekend of Chicago shootings

George Washington Monument Defaced In New York City

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.

Media Displays Double Standard For Protests Vs. Trump Rally

Gallup study: Media rank dead last in public trust


While the liberal media has been condemning President Donald Trump’s rally over coronavirus concerns, it has also been praising Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests despite the same risks.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, Media Research Center (MRC) and others have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy in recent months. Protests over the death of George Floyd began in May and have since grown to cover the entire country.

“It’s hard to imagine a more blatant double standard at work: political gatherings for me, but not for thee,” Bill D’Agostino, the media editor for Newsbusters, noted during a June 18 article pointing out the double standard.

MRC compiled a video depicting some egregious examples of double standards by liberal networks.

WATCH:

MSNBC host Joy Reid was just one person to criticize Trump’s rally. She wondered if the White House understands “that people showing up to his precious rallies might get sick” during a segment on June 11, according to MRC.

Meanwhile, just days before on June 2, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell interviewed a protest organizer and simply wondered what it was like “to be marching arm-in-arm there with the police chief.” O’Donnell said just over a week later that the president was “pretending the coronavirus has disappeared,” according to MRC.

CNN host Chris Cuomo criticized Trump’s June 20 rally, saying it is “the worst thing you could do” during a global pandemic.

ABC, CBS and NBC have also appeared to downplay risks associated with the protests, the publication pointed out. One person referred to the protests as “a celebration … a carnival-like atmosphere.” Meanwhile, another said that people “might get sick and die” at a Trump rally, according to MRC.

McEnany herself noted this during a press conference June 17, using the front page of the New York Post – which also pointed out the double standard among the media.

The Post’s front page showed both a “black trans lives rally” protest and a Trump rally, Fox News reported. The protest was captioned “This is OK” and the Trump rally was captioned “This is dangerous.”

“While we appreciate the great concern for our rally goers, you should exhibit that same concern for the protesters who are out there not socially distancing in many cases,” McEnany said.

COLUMN BY

SHELBY TALCOTT

Follow Shelby on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

News Anchors Blame Coronavirus Spikes On Reopening While Ignoring Recent Protests

‘Political Agenda Of The Radical Left’: Pence Refuses To Say ‘Black Lives Matter’ During CBS Interview

Trump Dismisses NYT Report That Russia Offered Bounties To Taliban Forces To Kill US Soldiers

Nancy Pelosi: Nationwide Mask Requirement Is ‘Long Overdue’

Nearly Half Of All COVID-Related Deaths In The US Are Directly Tied To Nursing Homes: Report

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

The Lack Of Constitutional Standing For Interstate Quarantines

You can’t order quarantines forever, and at some point a state of medical emergency becomes a new reality.

In an article last updated yesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported that New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut have instituted a mandate requiring travelers from states they designate as “experiencing a surge in COVID-19 cases,” to observe a 14-day quarantine upon arrival.

This mandate that took effect on midnight Wednesday carries with it varying consequences for non-compliance.  In New York, a first-time violation merits a fine of $2,000.00 with subsequent violations earning fines of $5,000.  Higher penalties would be enforced if the non-compliance caused harm.  In Connecticut, there will be no fine, and in New Jersey, the quarantine would take the form of an “advisory.”

There’s one overarching problem with these mandated quarantines.  They’re of questionable constitutional legality.

Following our independence from England, our nation stood as an inept giant. Yes, it was young.  It was also financially broke, but perhaps even more importantly a powerless Congress led it.  Under the Articles of Confederation, our first system of government, the states created a very loose alliance of sovereigns, so loose in fact that they were able to impose harsh restrictions upon each other.  Each state could print its own currency, ignore other states’ currencies, and restricted interstate travel and commerce.  Protectionist laws casting advantages to those citizens living within each state at the expense of their fellow countrymen loomed large, and there was nothing Congress could do about it.  Such divisions could never work, and it is for this very reason that the nation’s leaders convened a Constitutional Convention with the aim of preventing the disintegration and fractionalization of the young confederacy.  Protections against limitations in travel and interstate commerce were chief amongst the corrective measures implemented in the new Republic’s founding document.

Clearly, a state restricting an individual to a certain location for a fortnight simply because he or she is from a targeted state acts in a manner repugnant to interstate commerce and individual travel rights.  The Supreme Court was explicit in this regard when it decided Saenz v. Roe, (1999).  Here, the Court ruled that there are constitutionally prescribed travel protections including “the right of a citizen of one State to enter and to leave another State, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second state, and for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, the right to be treated like other citizens of that State.”  Mandatory interstate quarantines violate all three.

It is true that the governments may claim certain latitudes during times of crisis. For example, Congress is given the authority to suspend the privilege of Habeas corpus, “when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require.”  And the states are afforded certain liberties if “actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.”  But these contentions do not apply to a pandemic.

President Trump declared a health emergency regarding SARS-CoV-2 on March 11, over 90 days ago.  Since that time, we have been able to establish that there is no imminent exhaustion of our medical supplies.  Despite “surges” in certain states, the nation’s daily new-case rate has flattened. As of this writing, the nation’s daily death rate has not been this low since March 30.  In New York, arguably the state guilty of the nation’s worse COVID-19 mismanagement, there were a mere 742 new cases on June 23, the lowest since March 17, and the daily death rates rival those of March 22.

In the meantime, in Florida, one of those states experiencing a surge, the number of new cases for June 24 was 5,511, but the number of deaths was 45.  And to add to the inconsistency in the data, New York carries a 1,611 death per million rate compared to Florida’s 153, and an active case per million rate of 294,660 compared to Florida’s 84,570.

Adding to the absurdity, Florida presently has a quarantine still in place for visitors from New York similar to the quarantine New York implemented against Floridians on Wednesday, albeit it Florida’s is voluntary one, begging the question just who needs to be protected from whom?

As I explain in my book, Coronalessons, obtrusive interventions such as quarantines, shutdowns, and border closures only work to keep the virus out of a country.  But in America, the virus is already here. In Coronalessons, I also observe the Constitution, miraculous as it may be, is a very fragile document, easily ripped and irreparably destroyed.  The right to freely move from one state to another and engage in interstate commerce is one of the hallmarks of our Constitution. Although it may be appropriate to briefly restrict our interstate travel in the name of safety, morale, health, or welfare, prolonging these restrictions, as we are presently doing, threatens to hurt us much more than it will aid us.

The only real interventions we can take until the development of a vaccine or definitive treatment is for the elderly and the infirm to observe social distancing measures, for all of us to engage in frequent hand-washing, surface sanitation and mask use when in public places.  More aggressive interventions are mere opportunities for governments and people in authority to extend their ambits of power.  It is time for us to end these random and capricious interstate quarantines.

©All rights reserved.

‘An Orwellian Nightmare’: Young Congressional Candidate Madison Cawthorn Warns Of Anarchy Without Police, The Danger Of ‘Mob Mentality’

Madison Cawthorn, a 24-year-old Republican nominee for Congress, said defunding the police and “mob mentality” will create anarchy in an interview with the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Cawthorn won the Republican congressional nomination for North Carolina’s 11th District on Tuesday. His win was an upset for Lynda Bennett, who was widely endorsed by members of the Republican Party.

He said efforts to defund the police are “laughable” and likened them to an “Orwellian nightmare.” His comments came as many on the left are calling for defunding or even abolishing police departments following the death of George Floyd, who died May 25 in Minneapolis police custody.

If police departments were defunded, “American people would be crying out saying, ‘Please protect us,’ ‘I don’t feel safe in my home,’ ‘I don’t want to kill my fellow American,’ ‘Please come in and save us,’” Cawthorn said.

He added: “What I believe is going to happen is it’s going to create a nationalized police force … And you know what? I believe that this is going to push us more toward a centralization of power, and that is a really scary world to me. I mean, it just reeks of an Orwellian nightmare.”

“At the end of the day we cannot demonize the police, they are ones who keep us safe in society,” he continued.

Cawthorn claimed over 65% of the vote against Bennett when the race was called. President Donald Trump called the young nominee to congratulate him from Air Force One.

On other issues, particularly statue removal, Cawthorn said how “mob mentality has no intelligence,” and advocated for “sober-minded, candid conversations.”

“I’m not against pulling down our statues of Confederate generals and Confederate leaders,” he said. “I do not believe it should be done by a mob. I don’t think we should go out in the night masked, put a truck around it and pull it down.”

Instead, Cawthorn noted, it’s going to take some “sober-minded” and “candid” conversations leading to a debate and eventually a vote before making any decisions.

“I don’t believe in erasing history, but I don’t think we should romanticize what these Confederate generals did,” he said.

Cawthorn is favored to win the November general election against Democrat Moe Davis, a retired Air Force colonel, The Hill reported. If he succeeds, Cawthorn will be one of the youngest members ever to take a congressional seat at the House of Representatives.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mark Meadows Officially Resigns From Congress, Starts Job As White House Chief Of Staff

California Rep Calls To ‘Defund The Pentagon’

Protests Persist One Month After George Floyd’s Death

‘Y’all Don’t Even Know The History’: Sign-Carrying Black Man Rips Protesters Who Want To Take Down Lincoln Statue

DC Mayor Tells Residents To Stay Home For 4th Of July, Promotes Black Lives Matter Gatherings

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

Tell Pornhub and Planned Parenthood that Black Lives Matter

Activists are wasting their time tearing down old statues. Abuse is happening here and now.


Over the last month, global protests have been drawing attention to the unjust treatment of minority communities. As an organisation and as a slogan Black Lives Matter has captured the world’s attention.

In America particularly, police departments are facing serious scrutiny in an effort to root out racial bias and corruption. The Minneapolis Police—whose officers were responsible for George Floyd’s unjust death—is even being disbanded.

Many have suggested an unbroken link between systemic injustice today and the Trans-Atlantic slave trade to which most black Americans trace their roots. But for all the talk about a slavery that was outlawed 150 years ago, there’s an eerie silence about the slavery that continues today.

Pornhub is the world’s largest pornographic website, receiving some 42 billion visits every year. Users can upload their own content and view that of others, resulting in a vast video library of rape, revenge porn, abuse and torture—including that of children.

Several Pornhub-linked kidnapping cases have recently made the news, such as 15-year-old Rose Kalemba. As a result, Pornhub has been forced to remove the offending content. But even after 118 confirmed cases of child abuse, Pornhub itself remains untouched as a sex trafficker’s dream, rewarding the most popular content with monetised ads.

The company recently took to Twitter to polish its halo. It declared, “Pornhub stands in solidarity against racism and social injustice,” and it encouraged followers to donate to anti-racist charities.

But the New York Post has called Pornhub out on its hypocrisy. An article by anti-porn campaigner Laila Mickelwait highlighted recent Pornhub content like a video entitled “I Can’t Breathe” that made use of search tags such as “George Floyd” and “choke-out”.

Mickelwait went on: “Countless other titles on Pornhub feature variations on the N-word and “white master”. Exploited black teens” and “black slave” are suggested search terms deliberately promoted by Pornhub to its users.”

If you would like to tell Pornhub that black lives matter, you can join a million others in signing the Trafficking hub petition. The petition’s goal is to shut down Pornhub and hold its executives accountable for aiding sex trafficking. (Click here to sign the petition).

Planned Parenthood is another corporate giant causing immense harm to minority communities. In fact, if you were on the hunt for a still-thriving organisation to “cancel” for its racist past, you couldn’t find a better candidate.

With unblinking irony, Planned Parenthood also tweeted its self-righteous indignation, saying, “We’re devastated, grieving, and outraged by violence against Black lives.” This, despite the fact that Planned Parenthood kills an estimated 250 unborn black Americans every day.

Planned Parenthood was founded by the racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger, who had ties to the Ku Klux Klan. In a 1939 private letter, Sanger wrote, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” To this day, Planned Parenthood celebrates Sanger as a ‘woman of heroic accomplishments.’

And it continues to carry out her ambitions. The Guttmacher Institute, once Planned Parenthood’s research division, found that African-American women are five times more likely to choose abortion over white women. This data is used by Planned Parenthood with deadly effect.

In 2010, census statistics revealed that almost 80 percent of its surgical abortion clinics were within walking distance of African-American or Hispanic communities. Today, over one-third of Planned Parenthood’s 340,000 abortions are carried out on black babies, even though the black community makes up only 13 percent of America’s population.

As America’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood receives over US$500 million in federal tax dollars. If you would like to take a practical stand against systemic racism and tell Planned Parenthood that black lives matter, you can join 700,000 others in signing Live Action’s petition to defund the abortion giant. (Click here to sign the petition).

There really is no point saying that black lives matter if we don’t actually mean it.

Kurt Mahlburg

Kurt Mahlburg is a teacher and freelance writer, writing for the Canberra Declaration and occasionally the Spectator Australia. He also blogs at kurtmahlburg.blog. More by Kurt Mahlburg.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The challenge of changing a mindset to save Chicago lives

‘My Back Pages’ — Bob Dylan’s protest song about protests

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

America’s Top 20 Cities for Crime, and What Party Runs Them

Annoyed that Senate Democrats are blocking a police reform bill, President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the 20 U.S. cities with the highest crime rates are all run by Democrats.

“The Senate Republicans want very much to pass a bill on police reform,” Trump said during a Rose Garden press conference with Polish President Andrzej Duda. “I would like to see it happen. We won’t sacrifice. We won’t do that. We won’t do anything that is going to hurt our police.”

The president added:

We have a record positive rating on crime, a record positive rating on crime this year. The best. You hear about certain places like Chicago and you hear about what’s going on in Detroit and other cities, all Democrat-run. Every one of them is Democrat-run. The 20 worst, the 20 most dangerous are Democrat-run.


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 >>


A quick fact check shows that Trump is at least mostly correct. One ranking says the top 20 most dangerous cities are run by 18 Democrat mayors and two mayors who were elected in nonpartisan races.

According to the website Neighborhood Scout, which in January published a list of the 100 most dangerous cities in America, heavily Democrat Detroit tops the list. At No. 20 is Chester, Pennsylvania, also with a Democrat mayor.

Trump went on to refer to the so-called autonomous zone in central Seattle, where extremists have taken over six city blocks.

“We have one city, two cities in particular, worse than Honduras, worse than Afghanistan. These are cities within the United States, Democrat-run. Radical left-run. You see what’s going on in Seattle. Seattle of all places, who would even think that’s possible,” he said, adding:

The Democrats want to weaken very substantially our law enforcement, our police. Frankly, they want to defund [police departments], at least largely. Some want to defund and abolish our police. If nothing happens with [police reform], it’s one of those things. We had different philosophies. They want open borders. They want sanctuary cities. We don’t.

Here is the Neighborhood Scout ranking of the most crime-ridden cities and their mayors.

1. Detroit

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 20.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 50

Mayor: Michael Edward Duggan, Democrat

2. Memphis, Tennessee

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 19.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 51

Mayor: Jim Strickland, Democrat

3. Birmingham, Alabama

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 19.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 52

Mayor: Randall Woodfin, Democrat

4. Baltimore

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 54

Mayor: Jack Young, Democrat

5. Flint, Michigan

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor: Karen Weaver, Democrat

6. St. Louis 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor: Lyda Krewson, Democrat

7. Danville, Illinois

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor: Ricky Williams Jr. (nonpartisan election)

8. Saginaw, Michigan

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.7

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 60

Mayor: Floyd Kloc (nonpartisan election)

9. Wilmington, Delaware 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 61

Mayor: Mike Purzycki, Democrat

10. Camden, New Jersey

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 62

Mayor: Francisco Moran, Democrat

11. Pine Bluff, Arkansas

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 62

Mayor: Shirley Washington, Democrat

12. Kansas City, Missouri

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 15.9

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 63

Mayor: Quinton Lucas, Democrat

13. San Bernardino, California

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 15.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 65

Mayor: John Valdivia, Democrat

14. Alexandria, Louisiana 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.6

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 68

Mayor: Jacques Roy, Democrat

15. Little Rock, Arkansas 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.6

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 68

Mayor: Frank Scott Jr., Democrat

16. Cleveland

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 69

Mayor: Frank Jackson, Democrat

17. Milwaukee 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 70

Mayor: Tom Barrett, Democrat

18. Stockton, California

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 70

Mayor: Michael Tubbs, Democrat

19. Monroe, Louisiana

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.1

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 71

Mayor: James Earl Mayo, Democrat

20. Chester, Pennsylvania

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 71

Mayor: Thaddeus Kirkland, Democrat

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

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

RELATED ARTICLE: Criminals Tearing Down DC Statues Should Be Prosecuted. Here Are the Laws They’re Violating.

RELATED VIDEO:


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.

Appeals Court Orders Judge To Dismiss Michael Flynn Case

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COLUMN BY

MERCEDES V. SCHLAPP

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

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

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

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

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

RELATED VIDEO:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Facebook Could Lose Its ‘Section 230’ Immunity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Help Project Veritas continue its investigations

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

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

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

Yours in truth,

James

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