HHS Scraps Obama Rules on Gender Identity, Abortion

/in , , , , , , /by

Federal health officials announced a final rule Friday scrapping an Obama-era regulation that forced medical workers to perform abortions despite their religious beliefs.

The Obama administration’s 2016 regulation, already vacated by a court ruling, also redefined sex-based discrimination in health care to include questions of gender identity.

The old rule would have imposed nearly $3 billion in costs on the economy, the Department of Health and Human Services said in announcing the change. Prompted by the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, the rule had not been implemented after being halted in court.

When Congress passed the Obamacare law in 2010, it included a section broadly prohibiting discrimination among health insurance plans.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

Under the  Obama administration, HHS tried to apply that provision to both abortion and gender identity in the 2016 rule. The rule defined gender identity as “one’s internal sense of gender, which may be male, female, neither, or a combination of male and female.”

The real-world effects of prioritizing gender identity in health care became clear after a 32-year-old pregnant woman went to the emergency room complaining of abdominal pains and claiming to be a man.

The attending nurse treated the patient as a man, based on the electronic medical record, and the end result was a stillborn baby in a case first reported by The New England Journal of Medicine in May 2019.

“That’s one example where confusion over what the meaning of sex is—whether it’s based on biology or based on gender identity—can have some real-world and in this case tragic consequences. That’s why clarity is so important,” Roger Severino, director of the HHS Office for Civil Rights, told The Daily Signal.

“This [new] rule will establish clarity over the confusion that was unleashed by the Obama administration’s previous definition, which included male, female, neither, both or some combination, which is very difficult to administer in a health care setting.”

The new rule will enforce the provision by returning to the government’s interpretation of sexual discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word “sex” as male or female and as determined by biology, HHS said.

The 2016 regulation did not recognize sexual orientation as a protected characteristic, and the Trump administration’s rule doesn’t change that.

“The Obama administration itself thought that was a bridge too far. And this final rule leaves undisturbed that judgment from the Obama era,” Severino said. “So if people take issue with that, they should also take issue with the Obama administration as well.”

The Trump administration’s HHS says it will continue to enforce federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in health care on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, and sex.

The final rule keeps a section that ensures physical access for individuals with disabilities to health care facilities, as well as communication technology to assist those who have impaired vision or hearing.

Regulated entities still will have to provide written assurances of compliance to HHS.

“Truth matters and words have meaning,” said Ryan T. Anderson, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, asserting in a written statement that the Trump administration was right to rescind the previous rules:

In addition to being an unlawful abuse of agency power, these rules would have caused serious harm. They would have required doctors, hospitals, and health care organizations to act in ways contrary to their best medical judgments, their consciences, and the physical realities of their patients, or face steep fines and become easy targets for unreasonable and costly lawsuits.

All people should be treated with dignity and respect. Therefore, federal law should not outlaw reasonable disagreements about the best medical care for gender dysphoria. Nor should federal law force anyone to violate their pro-life conscience or the privacy and safety of others in the name of political correctness.

The revised rule provides protections for non-English speakers, including the provision of translators and interpreters.

However, the final rule relieves Americans of approximately $2.9 billion in regulatory costs over five years by eliminating a mandate for regulated health care entities to insert “notice and taglines” to patients and other consumers in 15 or more languages in almost every mailing. Those costs got passed down to consumers.

In December 2016, a federal court preliminarily enjoined the Obama administration’s attempt to redefine sex-based discrimination. The court said the provision likely contradicted existing civil rights law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act.

In October 2019, a second federal court agreed. That same month, the initial federal court vacated the Obama HHS rule and remanded the provisions it found unlawful back to the department.

The court action stemmed in part from an Obama administration  rule regarding abortion. Existing laws said doctors and nurses can’t be compelled to perform an abortion if it would violate thier religious beliefs or conscience.

“Other federal laws prohibit discrimination against health care providers who refuse to participate in abortion,” Severino said. “If not performing abortion is sex discrimination, then of course you have clear conflicts of federal law protecting conscience.”

Also Friday, the Department of Housing and Urban Development began to undo an Obama administration regulation by proposing a rule to allow men’s and women’s shelters to make their own sex-specific housing policies.

“The Trump administration is also correct to unwind an Obama-era housing regulation that imposed a gender identity mandate at the expense of privacy and safety,” Anderson said. “The proposed HUD rule allows shelters to determine their own policy on single-sex housing, thus protecting female-only spaces.”

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.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Trans Teen Revolution

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

Trump Finalizing Executive Order, Says He Wants To Increase Police Funding

/in , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump said Thursday that his administration was finalizing an executive order focusing on police reform amid widespread protests over the death of George Floyd.

The statement, which came during a roundtable with law enforcement officers in Dallas, addressed police funding, social workers and de-escalation tactics, Politico reported. It also came amid demonstrations and rioting over Floyd, who died May 25 after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for about nine minutes, video showed.

“We’re working to finalize an executive order that will encourage police departments nationwide to meet the most current professional standards for the use of force, including tactics for de-escalation,” Trump said. “Also, we’ll encourage pilot programs that allow social workers to join certain law enforcement officers so that they work together.”

Trump emphasized his support for law enforcement and said he wanted to increase funding toward it.

“We’re not defunding the police. If anything we’re going the other route. We’re going to make sure our police are well trained, perfectly trained, they have the best equipment,” Trump said.

The announcement came amid growing calls to defund police departments nationwide or even abolish police altogether.

The president also announced Thursday preliminary plans to build “safety and opportunity and dignity” in communities of color by increasing access to capital for minority-owned small businesses and by confronting the health care disparities that have long existed.

COLUMN BY

ANDREW TRUNSKY

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLES:

Charles Barkley Rips Movement To Defund The Police

Poll: 55% Of Democrats Support Defunding The Police

Chicago Police Union President Says He Won’t Tolerate Officers Kneeling With Protesters

Two-Thirds Of Americans Don’t Want To Defund Police: Poll

‘Absolute Monarchy’: Catholic Priests, Jewish Congregants Sue Cuomo, De Blasio Over Alleged Double Standards On Worship,…

RELATED VIDEO:

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.

White Privilege and Other Matters

/in , , , , /by

I grew up the beneficiary of white privilege. It was my “privilege” to spend my first fifteen years in a cold-water tenement at 131 Beverage Hill Avenue in Pawtucket, Rhode Island.  There was no central heating.  The tenement was heated by the same kitchen stove on which the cooking was done.

If you wanted to wash your hands or face in warm water, you had to heat a bucket of water on the stove and then pour it into a sink.  If you wanted a warm bath, you had to heat many buckets of water and pour them into the bathtub.  There was of course no shower.

In the winter, to conserve heat, you closed off the front room of the tenement.  The kitchen became our all-purpose room.  To replenish the fuel that supplied the heating segment of our stove, you went down to the basement, filled a container with kerosene, then walked up two flights of stairs.

When my young sister needed medical treatment, we had the “privilege” of selling our old second-hand (or was it third-hand?) car, and then living for years without an automobile.  But this in turn gave us the “privilege” of riding the bus to downtown Pawtucket to do our shopping.  On Friday evenings my mother and I would go to one of the supermarkets then located in downtown Pawtucket, and I, a shrimp of a lad, had the “privilege” of lugging heavy grocery bags back home on the bus.  My mother had the same “privilege.”

Around 1950, my father suffered a crippling attack of arthritis that kept him out of work and often in bed for a year.  At that time we had the “privilege” of slipping from near-poverty into downright poverty.  Fortunately, almost miraculously, my father recovered, and as soon as he did he got a job and went back to work, traveling via three buses from our home to his workplace at the distant western edge of Providence.

But in addition to my many “privileges,” I had some real advantages growing up in Pawtucket.  First and foremost, I had two married parents with a very strong sense of parental duty.  They worked hard, they played by the rules, they put family above individual self.

Second, I had Pawtucket public schools: Prospect Street School and Goff Junior High School.  The teachers, the great majority of them unmarried women, were marvelous.  They stuffed my head with knowledge and, more importantly, the desire for further knowledge.  Later, when my family had rebounded from poverty and could afford to pay the $100 annual tuition, I went to St. Raphael Academy, a Christian Brothers school with marvelous teachers.  (The tuition now is well over $10,000 per annum; and there are no longer any Christian Brothers there.)

Third, I had the Catholic religion and its many Pawtucket churches.  The religion reinforced the lessons in good conduct that I had learned at home and at school.  It taught me to behave myself, and it taught me to feel guilty when my behavior fell below ideal standards (which it sometimes still does).

Fourth, I had the Pawtucket Boys’ Club, which supplied me with friends and with good clean recreation.

*

Finally, I had the city of Pawtucket itself – “the birthplace of the American industrial revolution,” for it was here that America’s first textile factory was built in 1790.  In my boyhood (the 1940s and ‘50s) Pawtucket was in the last stages of what may be called its golden age.  It was a splendid city for a boy to grow up in – a blue-collar city just right for boys from blue-collar families.

Downtown Pawtucket was vibrant, filled with people and stores and banks and restaurants and movie theaters – plus the Boys’ Club.  (Nowadays downtown is a ghost town).  The streets were safe.  Violence rarely went beyond an occasional fistfight.  Even though much of the city was densely packed with tenement houses, there always seemed to be plenty of room for kids to play.

Everybody who is not a complete idiot knows and admits that America has a long and horrible history of anti-black racism – 250 years of slavery and 100 years of post-emancipation racial segregation.  And everybody, not just virtuous liberals, deplores that history.  But everybody who is not self-deceived also knows that white racism is at most a minor factor in the misery that prevails today in much of black America.

If blacks, on average, are worse off than the average white in almost every category of well-being – health, income, education, jobs, and many others – this is chiefly because of an appallingly dysfunctional culture that is pervasive among the black lower classes and tends even to “percolate” upwards into the black middle classes.

This culture fosters and condones attitudes that lead to astronomical rates of out-of-wedlock births (more than 70 percent of black births are to unmarried women), millions of fathers who give little or no support to their children, high rates of crime and violence, high levels of drug abuse, a poor work ethic, very poor academic achievement.

Unless these aspects of the culture are reformed and healed, we may expect that great numbers of blacks will live in misery for the next few hundred years.

The greatest enemies of American blacks today are, in my humble opinion, white liberals who have a vested interest in keeping alive the myth of white racism.  White liberals – who by and large are truly privileged, having good educations, jobs, incomes, houses, cars, wine, coffee, etc. – like to believe that all whites other than themselves are racists.  For this allows white liberals to feel morally superior to everybody else.

And so white liberals – who dominate the “command posts” of American moral propaganda (the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, and our leading colleges and universities – are endlessly telling blacks that they are the victims of white racism, thus encouraging blacks to feel powerless, angry, and resentful, and diverting them from focusing on their real problem, a dysfunctional subculture.

Dear God, send us some truth.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Judicial Watch Asks DC Mayor for Permission to Paint ‘Because No One is Above Law!’ on Capitol Hill Street

/in , , , , , /by

Seeks Equal Access to New Free Speech Forum After DC Government Authorized Painting of Political Slogan on DC Street.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has formally asked District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser and DC Attorney General Karl Racine for permission to paint “Because No One is Above the Law!” on a Capitol Hill street (Independence Ave, SW between 2nd and 4th Streets SW). The Judicial Watch message would be the identical size and coloring of the DC Government’s “Black Lives Matter” political message on 16th Street NW.

On June 5, 2020, after days of protests and riots in Washington, DC, Mayor Bowser authorized the painting of “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW, and later allowed “Defund the Police” to be painted alongside it.

“Mayor Bowser made a decision to turn DC streets into a forum for public expression. Judicial Watch seeks equal access to use this new forum to educate Americans by painting our organization’s motto and motivation, ‘Because No One Is Above the Law!,’ on a Capitol Hill street,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This rule of law message is timely, as it a reminder that rule of law applies to – and protects – all Americans. If we are unlawfully denied access and face viewpoint discrimination, we are prepared to go to court to vindicate our First Amendment rights.”

The following is Judicial Watch’s June 10 letter to Mayor Bowser and Attorney General Racine:

Re: Request to Paint Message on Independence Avenue SW

Dear Mayor Bowser and Attorney General Racine:

We note with interest Mayor Bowser’s recent decision approving the painting of “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW and the approval of and/or acquiescence in the painting of “Defund the Police” alongside the first message. Both messages are expressive activity.

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a Washington, DC-based, non-profit organization headquartered in Southwest DC. For more that twenty-five years, Judicial Watch, Inc. has promoted transparency, accountability and integrity in government and fidelity to the rule of law. Our motto is “Because No One Is Above the Law!” – a message that is particularly relevant today because it applies equally to law enforcement and public officials as well as to protesters, looters, and rioters.

Because DC streets surfaces are now being used as public fora for expressive activity, we would like to have our motto painted on a street, preferably Independence Avenue SW, between 2nd and 4th Streets SW, which is near our offices. The lettering would be identical in size and color to the lettering used to paint “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW. Judicial Watch, Inc. would pay the cost of the painting, but we would likely need the assistance of the DC Government to aid in traffic diversion and parking restrictions while the painting is completed. Of course, the painting could be completed when traffic is typically light, as was done with the “Black Lives Matter” message.

As the timeliness of our message is important, please respond within 3 working days. If the Independence Avenue location is not possible, we are open to considering alternative locations. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Tom Fitton
President, Judicial Watch

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

We Must Never Forget the 100 Million Victims of Communism

/in , , , , , , /by

You know you’re doing the right thing when your enemies condemn you.

When President George W. Bush 13 years ago on June 12, 2007, dedicated a U.S. memorial in Washington, D.C., to the more than 100 million victims of communism, both the Chinese communists and the Russian communists immediately attacked the president and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.

The Chinese Embassy in Washington dismissed the memorial as “an attempt to defame China.” Gennady Zyuganov, the head of the Russian Communist Party, called the memorial “clumsy propaganda” intended to divert the world’s attention “from the true bloody crimes of U.S. imperialism.”

Tellingly, what neither the Chinese communists nor the Russian communist boss tried to do was to deny the bloody crimes of communist imperialism. After stating that “we the living have a solemn obligation to the victims to acknowledge their sacrifice and honor their memory,” Bush listed some of communism’s victims:

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

They include innocent Ukrainians starved to death in Stalin’s Great Famine or Russians killed in Stalin’s purges; Lithuanians and Latvians and Estonians loaded on cattle cars and deported to Arctic death camps of Soviet communism.

They include Chinese killed in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution; Cambodians slain in Pol Pot’s Killing Fields; East Germans shot attempting to scale the Berlin Wall in order to make it to freedom; Poles massacred in the Katyn Forest and Ethiopians slaughtered in the “Red Terror”; Miskito Indians murdered by Nicaragua’s Sandinista dictatorship; and Cuban balseros who drowned escaping tyranny.

Since the dedication of the memorial 13 years ago, national leaders from around the world have visited the site to lay a wreath and offer a silent prayer. Ethnic groups from every continent have held rallies and candlelight ceremonies for their fallen brethren.

Each June, representatives of more than 20 foreign embassies and dozens of anti-communist organizations have participated in a memorial service, recommitting themselves to the words at the base of the memorial: “To the Freedom and Independence of all Captive Peoples and Nations.”

All freedom-loving people are encouraged to join a virtual memorial ceremony at 9 a.m. on Friday, June 12, at victimsofcommunism.org.

Each June brings the world closer to that day when communism finally will be dumped on the ash heap of history, and freedom will take its place in the five countries that still groan under communist dictatorship—defame China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, and Cuba.

How can we be sure that day will come? We remember the words of the East German communist boss Erich Honecker, who boasted in January 1989 that the Berlin Wall would stand for at least another 100 years. Before the year was out, the Berlin Wall had fallen, and Honecker was under house arrest.

Each June, those in attendance at the Victims of Communism Memorial ceremony pledge that never again will they allow so evil a tyranny to enslave peoples and nations.

They hear the voices of the fallen crying out, “Remember us,” and vow they will never forget them.

COMMENTARY BY

Lee Edwards

Lee Edwards is the distinguished fellow in conservative thought at The Heritage Foundation’s B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics. A leading historian of American conservatism, Edwards has published 25 books, including “Just Right: A Life in Pursuit of Liberty.” 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: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Legal Challenge to No-Fault Divorce

/in , , , , /by

LINCOLN, Neb. (ChurchMilitant.com) – After five decades of legality, so-called no-fault divorce — in which the dissolution of a marriage does not require the showing of wrongdoing by either party — is being challenged in court.

On Sept. 3, 2020, Attorney Bob Sullivan will appear on behalf of his client before the Nebraska Supreme Court to discuss the appeal he made against a no-fault divorce order from a county judge.

The appeal brief says the Nebraska statute is unconstitutional and that the court made multiple errors, including denying the husband’s motion to dismiss the case.

The injustice of Easy Divorce

Bai Macfarlane of Mary’s Advocates, a nonprofit working to reduce unilateral, no-fault divorce on behalf of those who are unjustly abandoned, posted on Twitter a live video that Mike, the estranged husband, took when he returned home one December night, 2019.

https://twitter.com/Marys_Advocates/status/1204603391973961728

“No-fault divorce is absolutely evil,” said Mike, as he met an eviction notice taped to his front door when returning home. He reads it to himself. “[The notice] basically says I’ve been kicked out of my own house.”

Then his wife opens the door and with a stern voice threatens to call the police on him for trespassing. He only wanted a few of his belongings.

“Can you believe this? Two cop cars [coming],” Mike said. “I’m evicted from my home. I’m peaceably here trying get some toiletries and some personal items so I can sleep someplace other than my home of 28 years,” he lamented.

Then a police officer showed up to escort him off his own property, per order of a judge. Mike explained to the officer the injustice of what is going on.

“I’m a pretty strong Catholic and I don’t believe in divorce at all,” Mike told the officer. “I can’t cooperate with the divorce itself. Had I followed the orders and took off and left, it would have probably shown that I was cooperating with the divorce.”

The officer did not acknowledge what Mike said, but ordered him to immediately leave his own property. As Macfarlane says, Mike was never accused of abuse or adultery; the judge just found the marriage to be “irretrievably broken.”

Mike’s wife, who filed for the no-fault divorce, was granted sole ownership of the marital home, and he was ordered to pay all his wife’s attorney fees.

“No-fault divorce violates the defendant’s constitutional right to due process and equal protection under the law,” said Sullivan, Mike’s attorney. And, according to Mike’s Catholic faith, it attempts to tear apart what God has joined together (Matthew 19:6).

Origin Within Soviet Communism

The first modern, no-fault divorce law was enacted in Russia in December 1917, following the October Bolshevik Revolution that ushered in Soviet communism. California was the first U.S. state to adopt no-fault divorce laws in 1969, and all states gradually followed. Australia followed in 1975 and Canada in 1986.

Easy divorce laws did not occur in a moral vacuum. Observers note that America’s skyrocketing divorce rates immediately followed the cultural acceptance of contraception shortly after Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) legalized use of the birth control pill.

Christian social scientists have seen widespread use of contraception taking sex outside of its exclusive relationship to marriage, and Pope St. John Paul II noted that it creates a wedge between spouses by lying with one’s body. The marital act inherently says “I give my whole self to you without reservation,” he taught; but contraception holds back life-giving love, devolving the act of union to one of self-gratification.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) calls divorce “a grave offense against the natural law” (CCC 2384) that “introduces disorder into the family and into society” (CCC 2385). No-fault divorce hastens the process whereby sexual and other sins become permanent injustice.

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

Actress Debra Messing Falsely Puts a Bible in Hitler’s Hand

/in , , , , /by

Last week, during some of the race-related protests, President Trump famously held up a Bible in one hand outside of an historic D.C. church that rioters had set afire.

Actress Debra Messing (Will and Grace) then sent out a tweet, in which she showed Trump with the Bible and next to it she juxtaposed a picture of Hitler supposedly holding a Bible. She had the caption: “A dog whistle to white nationalists and Nazis.” She also declared, “This is no accident!”

Of course, the picture of Hitler holding a Bible is a total fake. Furthermore, putting a Bible in Hitler’s hands is totally incorrect on every front.

I realize that actors and actresses are not necessarily well-read when it comes to history. But it’s important to be clear about this. If there is any book that Hitler did not approve of, it was the Bible.

The leader of the Nazi Party rued the day that Christian missionaries ever set foot in his beloved Germany.

One of the best books on Adolf Hitler was written by the history professor and author, Dr. Richard Weikart. He is perhaps best known for his book, From Darwin to Hitler. He also wrote an important book a few years ago called, Hitler’s Religion: The Twisted Beliefs That Drove the Third Reich. What was Hitler’s religion? Short answer: Nature red with tooth and claw—not the Christian God by a long shot.

Just a few quotes from Weikart’s book on Hitler and the Bible show how ignorant Messing’s tweet was, not to mention deceptive.

  • “Since Hitler was a radical anti-Semite, his characterization of Christianity as a Jewish plot was about as harsh an indictment as he could bring against Christianity.”
  • “He saw the Old Testament as the antithesis of everything he stood for.”
  • “He regretted that Finnish people’s religiosity was based on the Bible because it was permeated with Jewishness. According to Hitler, religious people like the Finns, who during long winters seek their religion in the Bible ‘must become mentally crippled’ and fall into ‘religious delusion.’”
  • “Hitler lamented that the Bible had been translated into German, because this made Jewish doctrines readily available to the German people. It would have been better, he stated, if the Bible had remained only in Latin, rather than causing mental disorders and delusions.”
  • The “Fuhrer” declared, “The idiocy of the Christian doctrine of salvation is for our time completely unusable….That even today one views the Christian doctrine of salvation as giving direction through a difficult life is completely incomprehensible.”
  • “Many SS members followed [Heinrich] Himmler’s example and encouragement to withdraw from the churches, and Hitler lauded them for their anti-church attitude.”
  • “Hitler harshly castigated Christianity for not supporting his eugenics and racial ideology.”

This is just a smattering of anti-Bible examples found in Weikart’s book, showing that Hitler had no tolerance for Christianity (although he sometimes hid that antipathy for political purposes).

Hitler denied that Jesus did miracles, that He was divine, that His death was anything but martyrdom, and that He rose from the dead. Hitler even denied that Jesus was Jewish.

I shared the article about Debra Messing’s ignorant tweet with Dr. Weikart (who has also written on the tendentious Trump-Hitler comparisons) and asked him if he would provide me a statement or two for this column.

Weikart told me, “Hitler rejected the Old Testament as a book of Jewish provenance, and he scorned the apostle Paul, who wrote about half the New Testament, as a sneaky Jewish rabbi who corrupted Christianity from its earliest phases. He liked a few Bible stories that corresponded with his worldview, such as Jesus driving the Jews out of the temple because of their greed, or Jesus saying that he had come not to bring peace, but a sword. However, he forthrightly criticized Jesus’ teaching about turning the other cheek. He also once stated, ‘The New Testament is full of contradictions.’ Clearly Hitler did not have much respect for the Bible.”

Furthermore, I asked Weikart if the German people prior to the rise of Hitler were steeped in the Bible—as many of them had been in previous centuries.

He answered, “Most German Protestants (and Protestantism was in the majority in Germany) by the twentieth century did not view the Bible as historically (or doctrinally) accurate, because they had embraced liberal theology, which denied that the biblical text was accurate.”

Of course, Messing’s silly tweet overlooks the fact that numerous U.S. presidents have been photographed holding Bibles. In fact, a photograph of Bill Clinton holding a Bible in front of the exact same church resurfaced recently.

It’s not surprising that the photo of Hitler holding a Bible in Messing’s tweet was fake. Hitler and his ardent followers had no use for that book.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Did “Roe” Really Recant?

/in , , , , , , /by

A new FX documentary, AKA Jane Roe, raises many questions about the real Jane Roe.

Jane Roe, who pseudonymously sought an abortion in Texas, was at the heart of the infamous 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade. She claimed she had been impregnated in a gang-rape.

In the mid-1980s, Roe was revealed to be Norma McCorvey.

In the mid-1990s, she stunned the world by professing to have become a Christian and an opponent of abortion. She then claimed she had never been raped at all.

And now comes a documentary in which she, in the final year of her life, apparently claims that her switch to the pro-life position was all an act, for which she was paid.

It should be noted she was paid to appear in the FX documentary. Nick Sweeney, the documentary producer, has made movies about sex robots and girls becoming “boys.”

The Daily Beast reports on perhaps the most critical scene in the FX documentary:

“This is my deathbed confession,” [McCorvey] chuckles, sitting in a chair in her nursing home room, on oxygen. Sweeney asks McCorvey, “Did [the evangelicals] use you as a trophy?” “Of course,” she replies. “I was the Big Fish.” “Do you think you would say that you used them?” Sweeney responds. “Well,” says McCorvey, “I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say. That’s what I’d say.” She even gives an example of her scripted anti-abortion lines. “I’m a good actress,” she points out. “Of course, I’m not acting now.” 

In addition, she is alleged to have said that she didn’t really care if a woman got an abortion. This doesn’t seem to fit the picture of the reborn Norma. However, in the big picture of things, the preview appears to contradict the vast majority of her words and deeds, from the time of her conversion in 1995 to her death in 2017. She even unsuccessfully sought to have the Supreme Court overturn Roe since it was all based on lies.

As reports came out last week about this disturbing new documentary, many prolife leaders that knew Norma McCorvey personally have spoken out to say that this is not the Norma McCorvey they have known all these years—nor does it represent who she truly was.

Cheryl Sullenger is the Senior Policy Advisor for the activist pro-life group, Operation Rescue—a group that played a critical role in McCorvey’s stated conversions to Christianity and to the pro-life position.

Cheryl told me: “I knew Norma personally….I have seen her in unguarded moments. She was a person that was a bit rough around the edges, but that never bothered me. If she was in a mood, she could say things that were controversial or even shocking, but I can attest that she was always pro-life.”

On my radio show, Sullenger added that the claim McCorvey received money from the prolife movement proves nothing. Receiving honoraria for speaking engagements is a common practice, no matter one’s politics.

Furthermore, Norma claims in the FX documentary that they (pro-lifers/the evangelicals/the Catholics) told her what to say. That can sound worse than it was. Sullenger noted that Norma had little education and she was not a polished public speaker. Thus, in various venues in which she spoke, speech writers crafted the copy she read. That type of thing happens all the time, again, no matter one’s politics.

Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, knew Norma McCorvey for 22 years. He said about her, “Her desire to protect children in the womb was no act.” On my radio show, Father Pavone noted that the documentary interview was in May 2016, but she died in February 2017. This was no “deathbed confession.” He also noted that Norma was unpredictable. You never knew what would come out of her mouth.

He notes that the producers of the FX film never asked him for an interview, despite how close he was to Norma. Father Pavone, who preached her funeral, even spoke with Norma on the day she died (by phone), and he says she told him to keep up the fight on behalf of the unborn.

I also spoke with Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood abortion clinic director, whose dramatic pro-life conversion is described in her book (with Cindy Lambert) and movie, Unplanned. She said pro-lifers should not be distracted by this recent controversy: “Stay focused on the goal—abortion is wrong no matter what.”

Only God knows the heart. Norma McCorvey was a fiery, unpredictable woman with rough edges. But regardless of who was telling the truth between the Norma of 1995 and the Norma of 2016 (in that one interview), the realities of abortion, legalized in her court case, do not change. Abortion unjustly takes an innocent human life, and does incredible damage to the mother. That’s not a matter of changing opinions or the passage of time. That’s a fact.

©All rights reserved.

NEW VIDEO: RefuseFascism uses ANTIFA-like tactics, Organizer claims they received money from Soros, met with Steyer

/in , , , , , /by

Today we released undercover footage of a RefuseFascism national organizer detailing who is funding their militant operation and shares their objectives.

You can watch our latest video HERE.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:

  • Head of the Atlanta Chapter of RefuseFascism, Tee Stern: “We actually did get a grant from them (Soros) around – we started a thing called a national day of appreciation for abortion providers.”
  • National Organizer for RefuseFascism, Andy Zee: “…I believe he (Steyer) has political ambitions, and he might not want to be directly connected.”
  • National Organizer for RefuseFascism, Andy Zee: “…Steyer might not want to be connected” “…Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, this at a certain point dominates the national news…it’s a very disruptive force.”
  • National Organizer for RefuseFascism, Andy Zee: “…you’ll see, there’s people even in the Hillary campaign worked with RefuseFascism because they see the danger.”

Watch our latest video HERE.

RELATED ARTICLE: How George Soros Controls the Human Rights Industry

RELATED VIDEO: #EXPOSEANTIFA Part III: “We believe in complete abolition of the system itself, including police…”

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

Red Flag?: What We Know About 18 Complaints on Cop Who Put Knee to George Floyd’s Neck

/in , , , , , /by

Before Derek Chauvin became a national name, Minneapolis resident Michelle Gross was familiar with the veteran police officer and his badge number.

When the video of George Floyd’s death in police custody went viral, Gross—president of Minneapolis-based Communities United Against Police Brutality—got a call from a friend telling her to check social media.

Viewing the video, she heard someone in the crowd shout: “Badge number 1087, you’re not going to get away with this.”

“I’m like, badge 1087, damn, I know that badge number, because I handle this data so much,” Gross told The Daily Signal, adding:

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

I looked up 1087, and it said Derek Chauvin. I had seen pictures of this guy before and was familiar with him from other complaints. I thought, that looks like Derek Chauvin. I think that is him. I didn’t want to put it out immediately.

It has been reported widely that Chauvin faced 18 formal complaints alleging misconduct during his 19 years on the force before Floyd’s May 25 death in his custody.

Only two of the complaints resulted in a reprimand, both involving shootings by police. Several of the incidents resulted in three deaths, based on published news reports.

After viewing a close-up of the badge number and confirming it was Chauvin’s, Gross said, she identified Chauvin as the officer in the video on her organization’s website and social media sites by 2 a.m.—just hours after Floyd died.

“The idea that he could get away with this for 19 years is outrageous, but we know what the source of it is,” Gross said of Chauvin, adding:

Our city leadership is very poor in addressing police accountability. They don’t want to hold police accountable. They don’t want to discipline officers. And the lack of discipline is exactly why a guy like Derek Chauvin can continue to the point where he can kill Mr. Floyd.

However, with little information available on the bulk of the complaints, it’s difficult to make a judgment on the number alone, contends Jason Johnson, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, a police advocacy group.

“To just look at this superficial number [of complaints] really is not very telling,” Johnson,  a former deputy commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department, told The Daily Signal. “In fact, over the course of a 19-year career, the number is not even really that high.”

According to published reports, two of the deaths occurred during a high-speed chase and another involved a criminal suspect aiming a gun at police.

In one case, Chauvin reportedly shot and wounded someone suspected of domestic violence. One of the three shootings listed in the complaints was done by Chauvin’s partner, not by him.

Chauvin, who has been charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death, was awarded a police medal of valor in both 2006 and 2008. The awards, interestingly, were related to two of the complaints against him.

Anyone can make complaints against a police officer. However, Gross said, Minnesota law penalizes those who make false complaints against officers.

It’s not yet possible to conclude that the 18 complaints against Chauvin should have prompted the Minneapolis Police Department to act on him, and thus prevented Floyd’s death, Johnson said. 

“There is a pretty prescribed way that most police departments handle complaints in terms of investigation and adjudication of complaints,” Johnson, head of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said.

“It would be similar to a report of a person who has been arrested a number of times and we have no idea what the charges were or what the outcome was of that case,” he said. “Everyone is entitled to due process under the law and a presumption of innocence.”

Minneapolis Police Department spokesman John Elderman did not respond to phone and email inquiries this week and last week for this report.

Over a career of nearly two decades, a total of 18 complaints isn’t shocking for an officer working a patrol-heavy job, said Rafael Mangual, deputy director of legal policy at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank in New York.

“The way he behaved with George Floyd was extremely excessive and abusive,” Mangual told The Daily Signal, adding:

But I don’t think anyone who hasn’t evaluated those complaints carefully can say that’s prima facie evidence that he shouldn’t have been on the streets to begin with. The nature of his interactions with George Floyd certainly is circumstantial evidence of that, but that’s about as far as it goes.

Generally, only about 6% to 8% of complaints against officers are sustained, whether by a citizen review board or a police board, Mangual said.

“Look at the data in New York. A very slim minority of complaints processed in New York are sustained. Most of them are not sustained or [are] found to be unfounded,” he said. “Some police have interactions that are not pleasant. That makes people upset. It doesn’t necessarily mean a rule is violated.”

A majority of the Minneapolis City Council has vowed to dismantle the city police force because of Floyd’s death while under arrest.

Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson, did not respond to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal.

Neither the national Fraternal Order of Police nor the Minnesota FOP responded to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal.

When a judge set Chauvin’s bail at $1.25 million Monday, Nelson didn’t contest the amount or the second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. Nelson reportedly hasn’t commented publicly on the case.

Past controversies with Chauvin in Minneapolis include these incidents:

  • In 2005, Chauvin and another officer were involved in a vehicle chase, during which the car they were pursuing hit another vehicle, killing two passengers in that third vehicle, according to the Los Angeles Times and other outlets.
  • In 2006, Chauvin and five other Minneapolis police officers opened fire on stabbing suspect Wayne Reyes, according to the Associated Press. Reyes aimed a sawed-off shotgun at the officers and they fatally shot him, AP reported. The officers were justified in their actions, a grand jury determined. Chauvin received a medal of valor for his actions.
  • Also in 2006, a Minnesota inmate filed a civil rights lawsuit against the Minneapolis Police Department, naming several officers, including Chauvin, the Los Angeles Times reported. However, the newspaper reported, court records don’t show specifics and the case was dismissed when the plaintiff didn’t pay a filing fee.
  • In 2008, after responding to a report of domestic violence, Chauvin shot and wounded an accused batterer, according to Twin Cities Pioneer Press. A woman had called 911, yelling for someone to stop hitting her. When Chauvin and another officer arrived at the apartment, a man identified as Ira Latrell Toles locked himself in a bathroom. Chauvin forced his way into the bathroom and, when Toles tried to grab the officer’s gun, Chauvin shot him twice in the stomach, according to the police account.

Toles was charged with two counts of felony obstruction, but pleaded out to misdemeanor charges. The Minneapolis Police Department placed Chauvin on administrative leave while reviewing the shooting.

In an interview with The Daily Beast after the Floyd killing, Toles denied trying to take Chauvin’s gun in the 2008 case. Toles claimed that Chauvin broke into the bathroom and began beating him up, and that he was defending himself. Toles said the mother of his child had called police.

For his actions, police gave Chauvin the second medal of valor.

  • In 2011, Chauvin was among officers who chased after a man with a handgun on foot. Police said Chauvin’s partner shot the man, identified as Leroy Martinez. The department placed both officers on administrative leave. Martinez, a Native American, subsequently was charged in a separate shooting incident.
  • In 2013, a group of teens filed a complaint against Chauvin and another officer, saying at least one pulled his service revolver after one teen shot a Nerf gun that might have struck another person, BuzzFeed reported. The department notified the complainants of a review for “inappropriate language and attitude.” The teens reportedly were white.

The Daily Signal specified each of these listed cases in an email to Nelson, Chauvin’s lawyer.

The Minneapolis Police Department’s internal affairs records are in an online database, but it provides no details on the nature of the complaints and accusations, according to several media reports.

Details of the formal complaints described here came through a combination of court documents, old news reports, and information from Gross’ group, Communities United Against Police Brutality.

Johnson, of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said a clearly out-of-control, lawless officer probably would have been the subject of more complaints.

“Certainly police departments have a responsibility to ensure that problem officers are dealt with, whether they need to be retrained or they need discipline or [to] be removed from the police department,” Johnson said. “But because there is so little information about what underlies these complaints, what the outcomes of any investigations were, and what if any disciplinary action was taken, we don’t have enough information to know that the Minneapolis Police Department acted properly.”

Three other officers have been arrested and charged as accomplices with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.

They were at the scene May 25 as Chauvin pressed a knee into Floyd’s neck as he lay handcuffed on the pavement.

The Daily Signal left voicemail messages with lawyers for all three former officers.

One of the three officers, Tou Thao, reportedly has six complaints listed in the department’s database, none showing a disciplinary action. One complaint against Thao remains open, but likely won’t be adjudicated since he was fired the day after Floyd’s death, along with the others.

The two former officers charged as accomplices along with Thao are Thomas Lane and J. Alexander Kueng, both reportedly rookies on their fourth day on the job. Lane held Floyd’s legs and Kueng held Floyd’s back while Thao stood nearby, “keeping onlookers back,” AP reported.

“This guy literally left a trail of broken and dead bodies on his way to the jail,” Gross, of the Communities United Against Police Brutality, said of Chauvin. “The idea that he was allowed to continue on the force meant that almost certainly something like this was going to happen.”

Law enforcement officials and organizations strongly condemned the conduct of the officers involved in Floyd’s death.

Minneapolis used to have a citizens review board to adjudicate complaints, Gross said, but the city disempowered the board to the point of essentially putting the government in charge.

“In seven and a half years, they have adjudicated about 2,600 or so complaints,” Gross said. “They have sustained and disciplined 12 of those. That’s less than half of a percent. The national average for civilian oversight bodies is 7% to 8%. We are like the low-end outlier for the country.”

Because a police department spokesman did not respond to inquiries, The Daily Signal was unable to confirm those numbers.

The criminal charges against Chauvin are compelling in the Floyd case, but that doesn’t mean the prior complaints against him were an indictment of the Minneapolis police force, said John Malcolm, director of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

Malcolm said the 18 misconduct complaints about Chauvin “could be a red flag,” but added that the number in and of itself doesn’t mean he should have been fired or put behind a desk.

In the big picture, not specific to Chauvin, systems across the nation for resolving citizen complaints against police can be abused.

“We also know of instances when gang members and drug dealers make complaints on really good officers, to get them put on administrative leave,” Malcolm told The Daily Signal. “In some cases, complaints could be racked up because an officer is a good cop.”

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Problematic Women: There’s a Solution to Police Abuse, but It’s Not Defunding Police Departments

J.K. Rowling Doubles Down, Exposes Misogyny of the Woke

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

Judicial Watch: So-called ‘Dreamers’ Arrested in Arizona Riots

/in , , , , , /by

Never let a good crisis go to waste!  Leftwing agitators are milking the death of George Floyd for all it is worth.

Just this morning someone sent me news about the Sunrise Movement, ostensibly a green new deal group, that is also out stirring up unrest that you can only assume was planned well in advance of the Minneapolis meltdown.

One wonders if Floyd hadn’t died what fuse were they planning to light to ignite the 2020 (election year) revolution.

From Judicial Watch (hat tip: Lois):

Dreamers Arrested in Protests Helped Those who “Were There to Commit Crime and Damage”

Illegal immigrants protected by an Obama-era amnesty for adults who came to the U.S. as children are among the rioters arrested and charged with crimes in Arizona. One of them, 30-year-old Mexican illegal alien Maxima Guerrero, is a community organizer with a Phoenix-based grassroots migrant justice organization called Puente Movement.

She has been shielded from deportation under Obama’s controversial program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) since 2013. The former president issued the DACA executive order after Congress repeatedly rejected legislation offering illegal immigrants similar protections. The failed measure was called Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM Act) and DACA recipients are often called “Dreamers.”

More than 100,000 DACA applicants have criminal histories, according to figures released late last year by the U.S. government. Many have been arrested for serious crimes such as murder, rape and driving under the influence. The government can deport those charged with crimes, immediately stripping them of the Obama protections but that rarely occurs.

The recent Phoenix arrestees were apprehended in the course of criminal behavior, according to a local news report and information obtained by Judicial Watch from police sources on the ground. Guerrero and two other Dreamers were out rioting and looting in a “Justice for George Floyd” protest in downtown Phoenix, city police sources tell Judicial Watch.

Phoenix Police Chief Jeri Williams said this in the media about the vehicles occupied by the arrested Dreamers: “Those cars were used to fortify and give rocks and water bottles, food to those individuals who were there to commit crime and damage, to do dangerous things to our community.”

The information is especially relevant considering the source is an open borders advocate. A few years ago Williams, who joined protestors in downtown Phoenix, tried to make her law enforcement agency an illegal immigrant sanctuary at the request of a leftist group.

Judicial Watch obtained records of a secret meeting in 2017 in which the police chief of Arizona’s largest city took orders from Will Goana, policy director for the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Continue reading here.  There are links to supporting documents and other information.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Media Suppresses Anyone Who Thinks Like You

I Predicted The Left Would Ban ‘Gone With the Wind’

Why You No Longer Recognize Your Country

George Floyd Protesters Seek a ‘Diverse’ PD – But Will That Matter?

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

551 Rapes Reported In Minneapolis In 2019. Activists, City Leaders Still Want To ‘Dismantle’ Police Department

/in , , , , , /by

More than 500 rapes were reported to police in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 2019, according to crime data maintained by the city.

The high number of rapes in Minneapolis hasn’t prevented activists and local leaders from pushing to abolish the city’s police department.

A veto-proof majority of city council members has pledged to “dismantle” the Minneapolis Police Department following the death of George Floyd, a black man who died after a police officer was seen on video kneeling on Floyd’s neck for longer than eight minutes. That officer, Derek Chauvin, has been charged with second-degree murder.

Minneapolis crime data reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation showed 551 rapes were reported in the city in 2019, an increase from 475 rapes reported in 2018. A plurality of reported rapes in 2019, 23%, were in Minneapolis’s third precinct, the data showed.

The third precinct’s police station was burned to the ground by rioters following Floyd’s death.

The office of Minneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender, an outspoken advocate of abolishing the police department, didn’t return a voicemail seeking comment on how she plans to combat sexual violence if the city gets rid of its police officers.

MPD150, a Minneapolis-based activist group seeking to abolish the police, said on its website that putting more money into social services will prevent violent crimes, though it doesn’t specifically address sexual violence.

“Crime isn’t random. Most of the time, it happens when someone has been unable to meet their basic needs through other means. By shifting money away from the police and toward services that actually meet those needs, we’ll be able to get to a place where people won’t need to rob banks,” MPD150’s website stated.

The group conceded that “in this long transition process, we may need a small specialized class of public servants whose job it is to respond to violent crimes.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Attorneys Accused Of Firebombing NYPD Car Donated To Bernie Sanders

Pastor Darrell Scott Says Calls To Defund The Police ‘Makes Absolutely No Sense At All’

Chicago Alderman: ‘Easy To Call For Defunding The Police … In a Safe Neighborhood’

Cutting Police Funding Will Lead To Understaffing, Reduced Training, Union Official Says

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.

PODCAST: Beware of the RINO Lead ‘Lincoln Project’

/in , , , , /by

I recently received a tip from a reader regarding The Lincoln Project, a group of people claiming to be Republicans and dedicated to the defeat of President Trump in 2020. If you listen to this group carefully, they would have us believe they carry the true spirit of the Republican Party, not President Trump. Their mission, therefore, is to simply “Defeat President Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box.” They characterize themselves as “dedicated Americans protecting Democracy.” Frankly, I see this as a Freudian slip as we live in a Republic, not a Democracy and, as such, hints at their true intentions, to become another political arm in support of the Democrats. I therefore describe them as “Democrats in GOP clothing.”

All of the people connected to this project are either former political strategists who supported people like Sen. John McCain or Sen. Mitt Romney, or Trump administration wannabe’s who were rejected. They are moderates in every sense of the word, who were snubbed by the White House, for good reason is my guess, but there is nothing worse than a spurned political strategist who now seeks revenge.

Their web site claims, their group consists of “prominent republicans.” Prominent? These are RINO’s who are more dedicated to politics in general as opposed to a specific ideology. However, you be the judge; here are the key people in the Lincoln Project:

George T. Conway, III – is an attorney but is probably best known as the husband of Kellyanne Conway, the well known counselor to President Trump. Mr. Conway had been considered for posts in the Justice Department, including Solicitor General, but the appointment was given to someone else. His feud with the president grew from then on which gained considerable attention due to his wife’s dedication to the president.

Reed Galen – according to the Lincoln Project web site, Reed “is an independent political strategist. He left the Republican Party in 2016 and has spent the last three years dedicated to the political reform movement, creating a better system for all voters.”

Jennifer Horn – is perhaps the most conservative of the group and is a former Chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party. She was the first Republican woman in New Hampshire nominated for Federal office, but lost to Democrat Paul Hodes in the general election. In 2010, she ran again but lost the Republican primary.

Mike Madrid – according to the Lincoln Project, Mike “is a Republican strategist and former political director of the California Republican Party. He serves as a senior advisor to the California Latino Economic Institute.”

Steve Schmidt – is a moderate Republican, now independent, who had worked on the campaigns for Sen. McCain, President George W. Bush and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. In May 2018, Schmidt had a problem accepting the new American embassy in Jerusalem, along with the president’s immigration policies. This led him to renounce the GOP and become an independent. He now refers to the Republican Party as, “corrupt, indecent and immoral.”

Stuart Stevens – was a senior strategist for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign.

John Weaver – a political consultant best known for his work on the John McCain presidential campaigns, as well as former Ohio Governor John Kasich.

Rick Wilson – another former GOP strategist and political media consultant. Wilson is a well known critic of the president, and author of the book, “Everything Trump Touches Dies.”

So, are these people “prominent Republicans?” Their names are not well known by the public, and I can hardly call them committed Republicans. No, these are RINOs who are beginning to realize the GOP has changed under Trump; it is no longer moderate and no longer accepts the Washington establishment. As to being political consultants, they are now on the outside looking in. Frankly, it is fair to say their ideology is more aligned with the Democrats, more specifically to former VP Joe Biden who they have already endorsed.

Why did the group use “Lincoln” in their name? According to their web site, they liken their mission to saving the union as Lincoln did during the Civil War, claiming President Trump is the cause of the political divide in the country. This is a mistake as this clearly started years earlier between the Democrats and the GOP; e.g., the Nixon investigation, the Clinton impeachment, the hounding of George W. Bush by the media, the weak administrations of Carter and Obama, and the divisive attitudes of Barack Obama. This historical background is conveniently overlooked, causing them to pin the sole responsibility on the President.

If you read between the lines of their rhetoric, this group simply doesn’t want to admit it is President Trump’s personality that rubs them the wrong way; that he acts “un-presidential.” They obviously overlook his accomplishments.

As to what type of work they perform, first, we have to recognize they are nothing more than a Political Action Committee, which means they can collect money for political activities such as writing, making videos, and supporting candidates of their choice. This is not so much designed to turn Republicans away from President Trump, as much as it allows them once again to play “political strategists.” From what I have read thus far, their work will only interest Democrats, the news media, and Romney related Republicans (RINOs), but not true Republicans who are tired of the “business as usual” in the nation’s capitol.

So, what really is the Lincoln Project? Nothing more than a PAC for Democrats based on sour grapes. To deal with these people properly, we must first understand their intentions, so be advised; these are Republicans unlike whom I have ever met. They should simply change their party affiliation and quit trying to fool everyone.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also, I have a NEW book, “Before You Vote: Know How Your Government Works”, What American youth should know about government, available in Printed, PDF and eBook form. DON’T FORGET GRADUATION DAY. This is the perfect gift!

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

VIDEO: Exposing the Hoaxes Killing America

/in , , , , /by

Linda Goudsmit has published a new book titled The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’.

The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’, exposes fifty of the most sinister leftist, Islamist, globalist interconnecting attacks on America deceitfully disguised as altruism. Goudsmit’s warning is designed to ensure an informed American electorate in advance of the pivotal 2020 presidential election. The Book is a powerful éxpose of the deceptive policies and practices of the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis attempting to destroy America from within. Goudsmit’s unique talent is deciphering the many political hoaxes being played on us by those who present themselves as our advocates but who are, in fact, America’s enemies. This remarkable book tells us the many ways in which we’ve been had–but don’t know it.

The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’, describes the corrupt underbelly of the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis attacking America, American democracy, and America-first President Donald J. Trump. Written in her signature conversational style, each hoax chapter unmasks a distinct and destructive axis policy deceitfully presented to an unsuspecting public as humanitarian. Americans do not like being duped. Linda Goudsmit is the consummate truth-teller in an era of profound political deceit.

The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’ should be compulsory reading in advance of the crucial 2020 U.S. presidential election.

Watch Alex Newman’s interview with Linda Goudsmit:

©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Libs Handcuff Police with Defund Cry

/in , , , , , /by

The fringe Left: Great at making slogans. Terrible at considering consequences. Maybe “DEFUND THE POLICE” makes an edgy statement slathered in yellow letters on D.C.’s 16th Street — but putting it on paper, like Democratic lawmakers are threatening to do, would be one of the worst policy mistakes in history. And it’s not just Republicans who think so.

As usual, the Left’s new crusade to defund the police — like “Abolish ICE!” and “Open the Borders!” — is full of the requisite shock value, as everyone from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) stokes their base with calls to embrace the lawlessness their agenda depends on. But is it really a serious movement? The liberal media certainly hopes not. Months away from a general election, outlets like CNN and the New York Daily News are warning the crusade could be “deadly” for Democrats. Even Joe Biden, who’s been off the reservation on policy for most of the year, knows you don’t win over voters by leaving their homes and children unprotected.

But then, this was always about rhetoric — not reason. To the Left, the practical implications of defunding police, like crime, disorder, and mayhem, are another inconvenient sidebar. That’s because, Randy Petersen points out in the Federalist, “the screams and emotions and nonstop news coverage have given the idea legs that are not easily countered without thoughtful debate.” Even the Minneapolis city council, who’s actually considering a defund proposal, admitted they hadn’t even thought about what a “police-free future looks like.”

If so, Judicial Watch’s Chris Farrell says, then maybe they ought to be held personally responsible for the fallout. Is AOC going to accept the liability for the property damage and loss of life that results from her rally cry? Because ironically, he points out, the people who would be most at risk in this lawless society are the ones she and her fellow liberals claim to care most about: minorities, the elderly, children, and women. Without police, “that’s exactly who will be placed in the greatest danger.”

Fortunately, like most of their wildly unpopular ideas (legal infanticide, late-term abortion, socialism, immigration, environmental fanaticism), the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to defunding the police. While Minneapolis, New York, and Los Angeles leaders move ahead with the absurd suggestion, only 16 percent of Democrats and 15 percent of Republicans support it. Like most sane people, they understand that while our law enforcement system is flawed (what public institution isn’t?) the solution is reforming it — not removing it altogether.

Just consider what’s happened in the last week and a half. Seventeen lives have been lost in the riots despite the massive police presence. Based on the damage that’s been done, does anyone seriously believe that America is at the point where we’re sufficiently capable of controlling our own behavior? “If ever there was a time to fund the police or to recruit for the police,” Sarah Perry argued on “Washington Watch,” “I would think it would be now.”

Instead, the mobs want to take away the only thing separating America from absolute anarchy. And at the end of the day, that’s almost certainly the Left’s real goal: destabilizing the country so they can step in and reorder. “It’s all part and parcel of the revolutionary firebombing — trashing the whole system and starting over,” Sarah shook her head. “It’s not, ‘Let’s take the good parts,’ or ‘Let’s modify what isn’t working.’ It’s ‘Let’s throw it all out.'”

Attorney General William Barr agreed, warning, “There’s a witches’ brew of extremist groups looking to exploit this on all sides,” But destroying law and order is a bridge he’s shocked anyone would cross. “You would have increases in vigilantism and increases in chaos in the city,” he warned. It would be a mistake. Just like it is to judge all 900,000 U.S. police officers by one man’s actions.

Obviously, bad policing does exist in certain areas. Let’s address it. Let’s do a thorough audit of what the behavior is, what the training is, who we’re recruiting, and what their backgrounds are. Let’s reevaluate police unions and internal discipline. But this should be the first sign of really bad policy, Petersen argues, “punishing everyone regardless of their culpability.” That’s “precisely the argument that many in the black community make — that its members are unfairly targeted by agents of the government, mostly (but not only) the police, without regard to individual guilt or innocence… Both sides need to step out of the elevator and have a real discussion on what the goals are and the best way to get there. Alienating all of our police officers is not a good way to start.”

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Extraordinary Measures: Voters Tackle Life on the Ballot

Garden State Gradeschoolers Learn Trans Advocacy in Sex Ed

RELATED VIDEO: New York police chief accuses media of treating police like ANIMALS.

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