Here’s What the Tax Cuts Have Done for America in 2 Years

It’s been two years this month since Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, providing the first major tax reform since 1986.

It was a historic overhaul that has delivered tangible benefits for our national economy.

The tax cuts lowered our federal corporate income tax rate, which was hurting American job creators’ ability to compete on a global stage. Previously at 35%, the U.S. rate was one of the highest in the developed world.

Now at 21%, it is closer to the average corporate income tax rate among developed countries, which allows U.S. companies to compete on a more level playing field.

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

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act also created innovative Opportunity Zones to provide tax incentives to boost long-term investment in historically distressed, underserved communities across our country.

Change doesn’t happen overnight, but this is an important part of a long-term effort to strengthen America’s economy and afford greater economic opportunities to all of our citizens in the decades to come.

In addition to bolstering our national economy as a whole, tax reform provided real relief for American families on a personal level. This came in the form of an increased standard deduction, as well as doubling the Child Tax Credit and expanding eligibility so more families can participate.

It also included strengthening 529 savings plans, which are one of the most commonly utilized tools for planning and saving for education expenses.

Under the old rules, families could only apply their 529 savings plans toward eligible colleges or universities. Now, thanks to tax reform, the money invested in your 529 savings plan can be used to cover qualifying expenses for private, public, or religious schools from kindergarten all the way through 12th grade.

Each of these reforms is playing a part in reenergizing our economy, one family at a time.

Consumers are highly optimistic. Richard Curtin, the chief economist at the Surveys of Consumers Attitudes, recently said consumer sentiment has been at 95 or higher in 30 of the past 35 months, according to CNBC. That’s a 20-year high.

Curtin also noted that, despite political uncertainties, “Personal spending will be energized by record favorable evaluations by consumers of their personal financial situation, with gains expected across the entire income distribution … .”

Our tax code will always be a work in progress, but this overhaul was an important step forward in updating our antiquated and overly complicated system. It also serves as a powerful reminder of what can be accomplished when we are directing our energy toward fixing real problems for the American people.

Moving forward, we must ensure these tax relief provisions are made permanent and continue our efforts to simplify and streamline the tax code.

Congressional leaders should be focusing on innovative solutions to make the system work better for American small business owners who are trying to create jobs, middle-class families trying to provide a better future for their children, and underserved communities trying to break out of generational poverty. After all, that’s what our constituents elected us to come here and do.

Unfortunately, however, under Democratic leadership, this Congress has only turned about 70 bills and resolutions into law, according to In comparison, the last divided Congress, when Harry Reid controlled the Senate, was able to pass nearly 300 bills and resolutions into law between 2013 and 2014.

This is the opportunity cost of Democrats’ endless investigations and impeachment trials. It is not just about the cost of valuable time and taxpayer dollars being expended, but also about the loss of what we could otherwise be accomplishing to address real problems facing our country.

The two-year anniversary of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act doesn’t just commemorate an important piece of legislation; it is also a call to Congress to get to work.

The American people hired us to be problems solvers, not circus performers. Let’s put an end to endless investigations to justify a predetermined push to impeach and focus on working to improve the lives of the people who put us here in the first place.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 proved that we can tackle an enormous challenge that had been festering for decades—and deliver real results. Now, we need to harness that energy toward the opportunities that remain to continue improving our tax code, modernizing our trade deals with agreements like the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, and addressing the challenges that impact underserved communities, families, and individuals across our country on a daily basis.

Let’s not let those opportunities go to waste.


Brad Wenstrup is the U.S. representative for Ohio’s 2nd congressional district. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: Here’s How Trump’s Tax Cuts Have Benefited All Americans

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

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


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

No Gov. Northam, Your Gun Ban is NOT Constitutional

As Virginia gun owners have shown their displeasure with Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s proposed attack on their rights in city and county meetings across the Old Dominion, Northam has been forced to answer questions about he and gun control financier Michael Bloomberg’s gun ban agenda. In doing so, the governor has proclaimed that he supports the Second Amendment and that his gun ban does not violate the U.S. Constitution. In truth, Northam’s proposed gun ban would violate the Second Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.

On Monday, Northam told reporters, “I’m a supporter of the Second Amendment,” adding, “I hear people out there saying that they don’t want law enforcement to enforce unconstitutional laws. Well we’re not going to propose or pass any unconstitutional laws.”

In a Wednesday meeting with reporters, Northam offered a veiled threat to sanctuary jurisdictions that have promised to not enforce unconstitutional gun laws stating, “If we have constitutional laws on the books and law enforcement officers are not enforcing those laws on the books then there are going to be some consequences…” The governor went on to say “Any law that we pass in Richmond and the 8 pieces of legislation that I put on the table back in July – they’re constitutional, so that’s not going to be an issue.”

Northam’s allies in Richmond have proposed firearm confiscation legislation that would prohibit the sale and possession of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms like the AR-15. The governor has stated that he intends to push legislation that would ban such firearms but grandfather possession by gun owners who register their firearms with the government.

Banning commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms under either proposal is unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that governments cannot ban these firearms as they are “in common use” for lawful purposes.

Taken alone, Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in Heller is enough to dispose of Northam’s comments. In the decision, Justice Scalia made clear that the types of firearms protected by the Second Amendment include those “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.”

The firearms industry has estimated that Americans own more than 17.5 million semi-automatic rifles. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the U.S. and therefore indisputably “in common use” and protected by the Second Amendment.

Further, in the 1994 case Staples v. United States, the Supreme Court determined that semi-automatic rifles were common. The case concerned the criminal intent requirement for a conviction for possession of an unregistered machine gun. The subject of the case had argued that he was unaware that the AR-15 in his possession had been modified for automatic fire and was not simply a legal semi-automatic AR-15. In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas made clear that the mere possession of a converted AR-15 is not enough to infer intent sufficient for conviction, as some firearms are “so commonplace and generally available that we would not consider them to alert individuals to the likelihood of strict regulation.” Justice Thomas went on to write that most categories of guns, including semi-automatic rifles, “traditionally have been widely accepted as lawful possessions.”

All doubt as to whether the Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller and McDonald preclude bans on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms was settled in 2015. That year, Justice Scalia joined Justice Thomas in a dissent from the denial of certiorari in Friedman v. Highland Park, a case concerning a local ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

Justice Thomas explained,

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.

Northam’s attempt to portray his Bloomberg-sponsored gun ban as constitutional is an absurd and transparent attempt to forestall the surging Virginia grassroots gun rights movement. Virginia’s gun owners have every reason to take defensive action against Northam and Bloomberg’s unconstitutional gun control agenda.

All Virginia gun owners must organize to fight against unconstitutional Bloomberg-backed gun control in the Old Dominion. Please contact Gov. Northam and let him know you oppose his unconstitutional gun control measures. You can contact Northam using the Governor’s Office contact form below or call his office at 804-786-2211​.


Virginia Gov. Northam Seeks Gun Registration as Down Payment on Gun Confiscation

Bloomberg Bought Virginia Legislators Introduce Confiscatory Gun Ban

First Amendment Defends the Second

Pro-Gun Bill Introduced to Protect Lawful Gun Carriers from Federal-State Legal Trap

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Trump Is Delivering Economic Wins for Rural America

Following the Great Recession in 2008, many economists and liberal thinkers argued that rural America would never again be an engine for economic growth.

While more folks today reside in metropolitan areas, I can tell you from firsthand experience that rural communities continue to play an integral role in job creation and our national economy. Thankfully, President Donald Trump has been steadfast in advancing pro-growth policies that help residents living in these areas of our country.

According to the Brookings Institution, “redder, smaller, more rural communities really are ‘winning’ a little more.” Brookings found that rural areas outperformed their share of the economy to generate around 16.6% of the nation’s job growth during Trump’s first year in office.

The jobs numbers are pretty clear cut. Coming out of the recession, the economic picture for rural communities was bleak at best. Residents were growing older, population was in decline, and more people were moving to metropolitan areas.

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

And while the Obama administration did little to help the people in these communities, Trump has pursued a bold agenda that empowers these communities to grow and prosper. The keys to growth have been lower taxes, less burdensome regulations, and market certainty.

The results back this up, especially in manufacturing. In Trump’s first 30 months in office, manufacturing produced 314,000 more jobs than during the same period in Barack Obama’s presidency.

Manufacturing is especially important in rural communities because roughly 2.5 million manufacturing jobs exist in these areas. Many manufacturing firms are attracted to areas due to lower property taxes, operating expenses, and land prices.

At the end of the day, I realize that elites in Washington, New York, and Los Angeles aren’t going to highlight the successful policies that Trump has championed. But I can tell you that North Carolinians and folks from rural communities are thankful to have a president that listens to and fights for the American worker.

Many lawmakers in Washington come from very urban districts where the population is concentrated. I represent a district that is predominantly rural. I’ve had nearly three years to see how rural workers in manufacturing, health care, retail, textiles, and construction have benefited from Trump’s economic freedom agenda.

I will keep fighting for these policies because they represent economic hope for communities like mine.


Ted Budd is the U.S. representative for North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District. He is a member of the House Financial Services Committee. Twitter: .


Podcast: Alaska Attorney General Talks Workers’ Rights

Challenging Beijing’s Distortions About Human Rights in China

Greta Thunberg Is the Perfect Hero for an Unserious Time

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

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


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

Quote of the day: The hoax that started it all

Moment by moment, the truth about corruption in Washington is coming out.

In a Senate hearing today, Michael Horowitz—Inspector General of the Justice Department—delivered a scathing blow to the narrative pushed by Democrats and their media allies about the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

The Beltway media’s initial reaction to the report was predictable. Pundits cherry picked the parts they liked, while ignoring 17 separate falsehoods and omissions found across three surveillance applications used to justify the FBI monitoring a former Trump campaign adviser.

Fortunately, the truth often finds a way of coming to light. In today’s hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked the tough, obvious questions that most reporters didn’t.

“Former FBI Director James Comey said this week that your report vindicates him. Is that a fair assessment?” Sen. Graham asked Horowitz.

His reply: “I think the activities we found here don’t vindicate anybody who touched this.”

Rolling Stone: Horowitz report shows “years of breathless headlines were wrong.”

More: CNN grilled for refusing to cover opening statements in Horowitz testimony

A huge win for peace through strength!

Americans finally got some good news from Congress this week. In addition to an upcoming vote on USMCA, legislators have agreed to terms for the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which will fund our great American military.

All of President Trump’s top priorities were agreed to in the final deal, including:

  • The biggest pay raise for our troops in a decade
  • More funding to restore our military preparedness
  • More resources to secure our border
  • Paid parental leave to take care of our military families
  • Establishing the cutting-edge United States Space Force

After far too much obstruction from Congress this year, President Trump wants to close out 2019 with huge wins for working Americans. That includes this historic deal to fully fund our troops. Congress shouldn’t wait any longer to send it to his desk.

Something to share: President Trump is ready to sign the NDAA!

WATCH: The Swamp can’t take credit for President Trump’s work

Decades ago, as a private citizen, President Trump saw that Americans were being treated unfairly by NAFTA. So he ran for office—and won—on a promise to replace it.

Now, right on cue, Democrat career politicians are trying to claim credit for President Trump’s work. The reality is that he negotiated a new deal, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), and then House Democrats let it languish in Congress for more than a year. Finally, under pressure, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has at last agreed to bring the new deal to a vote.

That’s great news for American workers, and it should’ve happened long ago. After years of broken promises by Washington to fix NAFTA, it took President Trump to get it done.

Watch: Promises Made, Promises Kept!

Students’ Test Scores Unchanged After Decades of Federal Intervention in Education


Federal “Highly Qualified Teacher” mandates. Adequate Yearly Progress requirements. Smaller learning communities. Improving Teacher Quality State Grants. Reading First. Early Reading First. The dozens of other federal programs authorized via No Child Left Behind. School Improvement Grants. Race to the Top. Common Core.

All of that has been just since 2000. Over those past two decades, while federal policymakers were busy enacting new federal laws, creating mandates for local school leaders, and increasing the Department of Education’s budget from $38 billion in 2000 (unadjusted for inflation) to roughly $70 billion today, the math and reading performance of American high school students remained completely flat. That is to say, stagnant.

The U.S. is now above the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development average in reading, but alas, not because U.S. reading performance has improved. Rather, other countries have seen declines in reading achievement, despite increases in education spending.

In mathematics, however, U.S. performance has steadily declined over the past two decades.

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

Those are the findings from the Programme for International Student Assessment, or PISA exams, released last week.

As The New York Times’ Dana Goldstein reported:

About a fifth of American 15-year-olds scored so low on the PISA test that it appeared they had not mastered reading skills expected of a 10-year-old, according to Andreas Schleicher, director of education and skills at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which administers the exam.

What’s more, the achievement gap between high- and low-performing American students has widened.

The international findings mirror last month’s National Assessment of Educational Progress report, which revealed that math and reading scores across the country have continued a yearslong stagnation, with students largely showing no progress in academic achievement.

Just one-third of students in the fourth and eighth grades reached proficiency in math and reading nationally on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is administered every two years.

As with the Programme for International Student Assessment’s findings that the achievement gap stubbornly persists for American students, the National Assessment of Educational Progress highlighted similar findings within the U.S.

The scores of students who are among the lowest 10% of performers on the National Assessment of Educational Progress have dropped significantly since 2009.

The stubborn achievement gap is not new, but the National Assessment of Educational Progress and the Programme for International Student Assessment provide additional data points on its persistence.

As Harvard professor Paul Peterson writes in The Heritage Foundation’s new book “The Not-So-Great Society”:

The achievement gap in the United States is as wide today as it was in 1971.

The performances on math, reading, and science tests between the most advantaged and the most disadvantaged students differ by approximately four years’ worth of learning, a disparity that has remained essentially unchanged for nearly half a century.

One of the more recent, major pieces of federal intervention sold as a way to improve American standing in education was the Common Core State Standards Initiative promoted during the Obama administration.

Common Core national standards and test, proponents argued, would catapult American students to the top of the math and reading pack. It was time, they argued, for the U.S. to have the same “epiphany” Germany did in the late 1990s, and adopt centrally planned national standards and tests.

Germany now lags the U.S. in reading, according to the new Programme for International Student Assessment data, and is far below Canada, a country that does not have national standards.

Indeed, our neighbor to the north has performed consistently well on the Programme for International Student Assessment since 2000, significantly outpacing the United States, and has neither national standards, nor a federal education department.

Canada’s is a decentralized education system, in which Canada’s 10 provinces set education policy.

The fact that Common Core didn’t catalyze improvements in the U.S. isn’t surprising. Large-scale government programs rarely, if ever, do.

But neither have the myriad federal programs created since No Child Left Behind in 2001, nor have the more than 100 federal K-12 education programs created since President Lyndon Johnson launched his Great Society initiative in 1965 designed, ostensibly, to narrow opportunity gaps between the poor and the affluent.

Heritage’s Jonathan Butcher and I detail Yuval Levin’s theory of government failure in “The Not-So-Great Society.” Levin explains that large-scale government programs fail for three reasons:

  1. “Institutionally, the administrative state is ‘dismally inefficient and unresponsive, and therefore ill-suited to our age of endless choice and variety.’”
  2. “Culturally and morally, government efforts to ‘rescue the citizen from the burdens of responsibility [have] undermined the family, self-reliance, and self-government.’”
  3. “Fiscally, large-scale federal programs supporting the welfare state are simply unaffordable, ‘dependent as it is upon dubious economics and the demographic model of a bygone era.’”

Federal government efforts to improve education have been dismal. Even if there were a constitutional basis for its involvement—which there isn’t—the federal government is simply ill-positioned to determine what education policies will best serve the diverse local communities across our vast nation.

The sooner we can acknowledge that improvements will not come from Washington, the sooner we’re likely to see students flourishing in learning environments that reflect their unique needs and desires.


Lindsey M. Burke researches and writes on federal and state education issues as the Will Skillman fellow in education policy at The Heritage Foundation. Read her research. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: FL Gov. DeSantis sets plan for high school seniors to take civics exam


Not All Findings of Religious Freedom Index Are Encouraging

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a leading nonprofit law firm defending religious freedom, is taking an innovative approach to evaluate the current state of religious freedom in America.

Most assessments in this area focus on government actions such as laws, regulations, or court decisions that affect religious freedom. Becket’s first-ever Religious Freedom Index instead focuses on public opinion, using a national poll to examine six dimensions of religious freedom. The results are generally positive, with a few caveats.

At least formally, religious freedom in America long has been defined broadly. The First Amendment, for example, refers to the “free exercise of religion,” which obviously extends beyond speech or religious worship. In fact, colonial laws protected the exercise of religion for more than a century before the United States was born.

In the mid-20th century, following World War II, the U.S. was an original supporter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 18 of that document says that religious freedom includes both belief and behavior, in private and in public, individually and collectively.

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

But rights, even such fundamental and comprehensive ones, are more than statements or ideas. To be real, they must be experienced and that, in turn, depends a great deal on people’s understanding, perception, support, or opposition to religious freedom. This is why, for example, the Pew Research Center’s evaluation of religious freedom around the world looks at social, as well as government, hostilities involving religion.

Becket’s Religious Freedom Index asked about the degree of acceptance/support or challenge/opposition to six dimensions of religious freedom.

The index, for example, asked five questions about religious pluralism, such as practicing religion in daily life without fear of discrimination or harm. Overall, it shows an average of 80% support for religious pluralism.

Although there was little difference between Democrats and Republicans regarding religious pluralism, the largest gap was about the freedom to practice one’s religious beliefs “even if they are contrary to accepted majority practices.”

Significantly, however, Democrats led Republicans by 10 points (85% to 75%). Future indexes will show whether this continues as the category of “accepted majority practices” changes over time.

The Religious Freedom Index also explored “how Americans value religion and its role in society.” The results were not as encouraging.

“When it comes to issues and what happens today in our country,” for example, 56% said that religion is “part of the solution” while 44% said it is “part of the problem.” The division about “people of faith” was 59% to 41%.

Problems, of course, need solutions. This perception by many (thankfully, not a majority) that not only religion in general, but people of faith in particular, are part of the problem may weaken support for the freedom to practice one’s religious beliefs even when those beliefs are contrary to majority practices.

The index also examined the familiar area of church and state. Here, even though the U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits any “religious test for public office,” one-quarter of Americans say that candidates “should be disqualified or blocked from holding public offices” based on their religious beliefs.

They also say that “[s]ociety should not tolerate public officials who might allow their religious beliefs to influence their decisions.” It will surprise many that the percent of religious people who say they believe this is exactly the same as the percent of agnostics and atheists.

The Religious Freedom Index is based on an online poll surveying a representative sample of 1,000 Americans age 18 and older. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.1%, and Heart and Mind Strategies constructed  the index.

Becket’s conclusion from this first Religious Freedom Index is that “there is evidence for broad support of robust religious freedom protections, discomfort with government interfering in religious practice, and positive attitudes toward a culture of accommodation of religious practice.”

The caveat, however, is this: “Within each dimension the composition of support and opposition varies depending on political parties, age, ethnicity and many other factors.”

This means that the consensus supporting religious freedom in America might be broad, but it also may not be very deep.


Thomas Jipping is deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Twitter: .


Warren Buffet Foundation Spent $77 Million on Abortion, Enough to Kill 220,000 Babies in Abortions

In a Blow to Political Correctness, Trump Praises Salvation Army

From a Hallmark Movie, a Powerful Pro-Life Message

RELATED VIDEO: Wisdom Begins With The Fear of God.

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

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


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

The Democrats Hate ICE Because They Hate Americans

On February 15, 2019, President Donald J. Trump declared a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States (Proclamation 9844), citing the National Emergencies Act, and ordered the diversion of billions of dollars of funds that had been appropriated to the U.S. Department of Defense for military construction. This construction is ongoing. Watch this video titled DOD lists where it will build new border wall:

According to Wikipedia:

national emergency is a situation in which a government is empowered to perform actions not normally permitted. The 1976 National Emergencies Act implemented various legal requirements regarding emergencies declared by the President of the United States.

Proclamation 9844 states in part:

The current situation at the southern border presents a border security and humanitarian crisis that threatens core national security interests and constitutes a national emergency. The southern border is a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics. The problem of large-scale unlawful migration through the southern border is long-standing, and despite the executive branch’s exercise of existing statutory authorities, the situation has worsened in certain respects in recent years.

President Trump took this action because Democrats in Congress have:

  1. Failed to recognize that there is a crisis on the Southern border and
  2. Failed to fund the border wall during the normal budgetary process.

The building of a border wall was a campaign promise made by candidate Trump and remains a major goal of the Trump administration.

On December 9th, 2019 the Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus sent out an email titled “Sign on to cut funding for border detentions.” The email states:

Earleir [sic] this year, The White House declared a phony “national emergency” at the border in an attempt to get funding for his wall.

Then months later, they requested $4.5 BILLION from Congress to fund ICE, expand family detention, and lock up more vulnerable migrants.

Now, they’re trying to get an ADDITIONAL $1.4 billion to double down on their cruel immigration policies!

This is a DISASTER. But thankfully, Progressives around the country are already proposing needed cuts to The White House’s ICE budget.

Are you with us? Please, sign on today to tell Congress to CUT funding for ICE:

The Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus

What is the Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus and who are its members?

According to their website:

The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) consists of one United States Senator and seventy eight members of the United States House of Representatives, and is the largest caucus within the House Democratic Caucus.  Established in 1991, the CPC reflects the diversity and strength of the American people and seeks to give voice to the needs and aspirations of all Americans and to build a more just and humane society.

[ … ]

Our Caucus members promote a strong, progressive agenda, what we call “The Progressive Promise–Fairness for All”.  The Progressive Promise is rooted in four core principles that embody national priorities and are consistent with the values, needs and aspirations of all the American people, not just the powerful and the privileged.  They reflect a fundamental belief in government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The four, core principles of the Progressive Promise:

1. Fighting for economic justice and security for all;
2. Protecting and preserving our civil rights and civil liberties;
3. Promoting global peace and security; and
4. Advancing environmental protection and energy independence

Members of the Democrat Congressional Caucus include Senator Bernie Sanders and all four members of The Squad, made up of Reps. Ilhan Omar (whip), Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

It is the Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus that is driving the policies and politics of the Democrat Party.

Is there a National Emergency on our Southern Border?

The Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus, according to their email, truly believes that there is no “national emergency” on our Southern border. They call President Trump’s February 15, 2019 declaration “phony.” Yet the last two Presidents have used this Executive privilage under law to declare a national emergency.

Multiple presidents have declared national emergencies during their terms in office.

Former President Clinton issued 17 national emergency proclamations of which 6 are still current.

Former President George W. Bush declared 13 national emergencies including one after the September 11th, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Former President Barack Obama declare 12 national emergencies during his presidency including one to respond to the “swine flu epidemic in 2009.” President Trump to date has issued 3 national emergency proclamation.

If swine flu is permissible why aren’t the illegal flow of aliens, including the diseases they bring with them, across our borders a crisis?

If 9/11 is permissible why are the terrorist activities of the drug cartels crossing our borders not a crisis?

If even a single American is killed by someone here illegally then why isn’t that a border crisis?

In a column titled Part III: Like in Europe, America’s Broken Asylum System Enables Terrorist Infiltration Over the U.S.-Mexico Border Todd Bensman writes:

New research establishes the extent to which violent Islamic jihadists infiltrated over land borders as a new method to clandestinely reach targets in Europe, a first in contemporary terrorism history. This series explores the implications of Europe’s experience for U.S. border security.

On September 30, 2017, a Somali immigrant who initially had himself smuggled over the Mexico-California border conducted a double vehicle ramming and stabbing attack, carrying an ISIS flag, that left a police officer and four others gravely injured in Edmonton, Alberta.

But Abdulahi Hasan Sharif arguably would never have been present in Canada for his melee had he not been able to claim one of America’s most indulgent and abused immigration benefits: political asylum. Simply asking a U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer at the border for asylum sets in motion a process that guarantees most foreign strangers legal entry into the United States for as long as processing takes, which can amount to years.

Read more.


It is clear that the Democrats care more about illegal aliens than they do about protecting the American people.

© All rights reserved.


An All-Out Immigration Moratorium, The Left’s Worst Nightmare

House To Vote On Amnesty Bill This Week

Part III: Like in Europe, America’s Broken Asylum System Enables Terrorist Infiltration Over the U.S.-Mexico Border

A New Terror Travel Tactic is Born

New Study Explains Why Islamic Terrorists Have Not Attacked Through America’s Southern Border

Six Saudi Muslims arrested near Naval Air Station after jihad attack, three of them filmed the massacre


There needs to be a thorough and realistic reevaluation of this training program of foreign nationals. But that probably will not happen; it would be “Islamophobic.”

“Six Saudis are arrested over Pensacola naval base shooting including three who FILMED the attack by countryman who killed three and wounded eight before being shot dead – as FBI probes terror link,” by Andrew Court and Snejana Farberov,, December 6, 2019:

The Air Force trainee who killed three and injured eight when he opened fire at a naval base in Florida assailed the United States as ‘a nation of evil’ before he went on his shooting rampage, AFP reports.

The man, first identified by NBC News as Saudi national Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, opened fire inside a classroom at Naval Air Station in Pensacola early Friday morning. Police quickly responded to the scene and he was shot dead.

US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said the suspect was a second lieutenant attending the aviation school at the base.

Meanwhile six other Saudi nationals were arrested near the base shortly after the attack, as investigators began to probe a terror link.

Three of the six were seen filming the entire incident as it unfolded, a source told The New York Times on Friday evening….


Military bases across the U.S are put on high alert as FBI hunts missing Saudi servicemen linked to Pensacola shooting and probes shooter’s trip to New York two days before as terror investigators are called in

Pensacola jihad murderer tweeted that US was committing “crimes against Muslims,” including support of Israel

Florida: Naval Air Station jihad murderer was 2nd Lieutenant in Saudi Air Force

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

Nunes: Schiff Violated My ‘Civil Liberties’ With Phone Snooping

Rep. Devin Nunes said Wednesday that House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff violated his civil liberties by snooping in his phone records and publishing them in his impeachment report.

Schiff released a report Tuesday summarizing the impeachment testimony. None of the information in the report was new — except for the inclusion of phone records suggesting coordination between Nunes and President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Schiff declined to say when or how he had obtained the records, but Nunes noted Schiff had issued a subpoena to AT&T for several phone numbers.

I’m going to be looking for all my legal options on this, too,” Nunes added. “I mean, my civil liberties were violated here. … Adam Schiff, just because he’s chairman, doesn’t have the right to go subpoena — put a big fishing net out there — go grab a bunch of phone numbers, and have AT&T give you all the people they’ve talked to, and then him smear me and say, “Oh, he had all these conversations with Rudy Giuliani.”

Adam Schiff

18 Known Connections

In May 2017, Schiff was one of a number of prominent and influential Democrats who spoke at a Washington, D.C. “ideas conference” organized by the Center for American Progress. This event emphasized the need for Democrats to unite in uncompromising “resistance” against Trump while also developing “new, fresh, bold, provocative ideas that can move us forward.”

On November 16, 2018, Schiff – who was slated to become Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on January 3, 2019 – gave an exclusive, closed-door briefing to members of the Democracy Alliance, a major group of wealthy Democrat funders who were, among other things, passionately dedicated to goal of crippling the Trump presidency.

To learn more about Adam Schiff, click on the profile link here.

Search our constantly growing database of the left and its Agendas

Discover the Networks is the only resource of its kind. We need your support.

Donate Now

RELATED ARTICLE: Rep. Devin Nunes Sues CNN, Denies Meeting Ex-Ukrainian Prosecutor

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Over a Century of Corrupting American Education

“The plain, unvarnished truth is that public education is a shoddy, fraudulent piece of goods sold to the public at an astronomical price. It’s time the American consumer knew the extent of the fraud which is victimizing millions of children each year.” –  Samuel Blumenfeld

“Orwell was dealing with communism and his disillusionment with communism in Russia and what he saw the communists do in Spain.  His novel, 1984, was a response to those political situations.  Whereas I was interested in more things than the political atmosphere.  I was considering the whole social atmosphere: the impact of TV and radio and the lack of education.  I could see the coming event of schoolteachers not teaching reading anymore.  The less they taught, the more you wouldn’t need books.” –  Ray Bradbury

“Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel.” – Socrates

“Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.” – Vladimir Lenin

My maternal grandparents graduated from 8th grade in 1911.  Their framed diplomas hang on our library wall. Each diploma states, “Having passed a credible examination in Orthography (the spelling system of a language), Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Geography, English Grammar, Physiology, United States History, and Music, and having sustained a correct deportment is granted this certificate of proficiency.”  Oh, to have these subjects in today’s grammar schools.

I highly doubt any of today’s college graduates could pass the tests my grandparents passed to graduate from 8th grade.  Most cannot read at a proficient level.  Why?  Because phonics has been eliminated, and yet it’s so easy to teach. If America’s children can’t read, they cannot gain knowledge, they cannot read their Bibles, and they cannot read America’s Declaration of Independence or Constitution.

The best approach for the majority of children is systematic phonics, the simple concept of teaching the 26 letters of the alphabet, the 44 sounds they make, and the 70 most common ways to spell those sounds. For most children, learning this basic code unlocks 85 percent of the words in the English language by the end of the first grade. Children of all levels of intelligence can learn to read most words simply by learning the correspondence between sounds and letters.

Parents say their toddlers are so bright, but once they are put into the government education system, which totally lacks phonics and academic training, they become bored little socialists who have been thoroughly brainwashed with leftist ideology.  They are victims as education expert Samuel Blumenfeld has so rightly stated, and it was the Unitarians at Harvard University who promoted public education, removing it from the family, churches/synagogues and private institutions so long ago.

Countless books have been written regarding the damaging effects of what American education has become along with the Outcome Based Education Skinnerian International Curriculum and how it destroys our children.  For a full overview of the continued damage to America’s children, I would suggest purchasing Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children, by Samuel Blumenfeld and Alex Newman.  Pdf Link

Blumenfeld puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of the educational leaders who decided early in the last century to change the purpose of education from its traditional academic function to a radical social one. High literacy was an obstacle to their progressive agenda, so the teaching of reading had to be changed to produce a more socially desirable result. The results for the nation have been disastrous.

Making Americans Illiterate

In 2012, I was privileged to meet Samuel Blumenfeld at a conference in Maine. Sam’s topic was, “Making Americans Illiterate.”

He told of the destruction of our great country and our education system and commented that in the 1920s, he received an excellent education in reading, writing and arithmetic in New York City.  The progressive education push had started, but because of the depression, it had not yet been implemented for lack of funds.  Now it flourishes and our children are the subjects of this deliberate corruption of academic education.

Twenty-seven years ago, in 1993, Americans were stunned to learn that nearly 90 million Americans have such poor literacy skills that they can scarcely cope with the demands of our high-tech economy. Imagine the lack of literacy today after nearly 11 years of Common Core State Standards implemented in 48 states in 2009.

Sixty-four percent of all eighth-grade students are unable to read proficiently, according to the National Assessment of Education Progress’ (NAEP) latest report. Eighty-two percent of black students and 77 percent of Hispanic students are not reading proficiently.  More than 44 million Americans cannot read or write above a third-grade level.  Fifty percent of adults cannot read a book at an 8th grade level, and I believe these statistics are low.  Link  And fifty percent of college grads have low literacy according to Blumenfeld.

Please understand that NAEP is funded by the Educational Testing Service (ETS) of Princeton, New Jersey which was funded with an initial endowment of $750,000 from the Carnegie Corporation in 1946.  There are far reaching negative implications of the relationship between ETS and the Carnegie Corporation.

Since 1999, NAEP has been funded by the federal government and is widely used across the country.  Individual states pass legislation to use NAEP as a state test.  Parents and legislators mistakenly believe these tests or assessments will give them information about the performance of their children in academic subjects, but this is false.  NAEP tracks conformity to government generated goals…i.e., government propaganda and brainwashing of our children.


In 1958, a gentleman from the Reading Reform Foundation contacted Samuel Blumenfeld and asked him to help them get phonics back in the schools.  Sam was shocked.  When he read Rudolf Flesch’s 1955 book, Why Johnny Can’t Read, he understood the dilemma because Flesch explained what was happening in the schools, and that only with phonics can children learn how to read.

Once phonics was eliminated, other methods took its place.  Sam found the origin of the “look-say” reading method and it was taken from Rev. Thomas H. Gallaudet who in the 1830s had a school for the deaf and dumb.  He devised this technique to teach his students to read because they could not hear sounds.  Gallaudet persuaded the Boston schools to use his primer and it ended up a disaster for Boston education, so they returned to phonics until America’s Lenin, John Dewey, showed up around the turn of the last century and started using it again to dumb down America’s children.

John Dewey (1859-1952) began a movement that transformed the American educational landscape. Dewey shared the theory behind this movement in an essay he wrote in 1898 entitled, “The Primary Education Fetish.” He stated, “The plea for the predominance of learning to read in early school life because of the great importance attaching to literature seems to me a perversion.” The foundation of his thinking was the theory of evolution, and he exalted this argument to a new loftier level by applying evolution to education.

John Dewey

Dewey’s movement had a new vision for schools. He wanted to use schools as instruments for the reconstruction of society. Dewey didn’t want to educate children to think for themselves:

“Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming where everyone is interdependent.”

His vision veered dramatically from the traditional Christ-centered approach to education. Link

Samuel Blumenfeld and Alex Newman discuss this quote in their book Crimes of the Educators: “In other words, deception would have to be used in order for this long-range, complex plan to be successfully implemented.”  Yes, they lie and lie, and lie.

Blumenfeld and Newman also share, “Dewey stated that the only way to undermine the capitalist system was to get rid of the emphasis primary schools placed on the development of high literacy and independent intelligence.” According to Dewey, “It is one of the great mistakes of education to make reading and writing constitute the bulk of the school work the first two years.”

Dewey’s direction was based on using government schools; minimizing the role of parents (because they might teach things like religion); changing the role of teachers to facilitators; de-emphasizing Latin, the classics, the three Rs (reading, writing, and arithmetic), western history, and history in general (including the study of the Constitution and capitalism); and providing a secular environment. The end product was designed to prepare students to be good citizens in a socialist society (students who don’t read very well or think very well for themselves).

Dumbing Down Americans, Rockefeller’s Included

Yes, making Americans illiterate is a key factor in the dumbing down of the American population.  Dewey’s attack on the primary school’s emphasis on teaching children to read had the desired result.  Sam Blumenfeld said that back in those days they readily admitted they were socialists, and people ignored them; today many in Congress openly admit their socialism.

The destruction of education began in earnest around 1880.  Dewey and his socialist friends found out pretty early, at the expense of four of the richest boys in America, that their new teaching methods would create reading disabilities and dyslexia.

John D. Rockefeller, Sr. had a bunch of girls and one son, John Jr., who was raised by mom and grandma.  That one son was dressed in female clothing until age of 8, which wasn’t all that uncommon back then.  When Jr. grew up, he had six children; Abby in 1903, John III in 1906, Nelson in 1908, Laurence in 1910, Winthrop in 1912, and David in 1915.  Jr. fell in love with the Dewey progressive education system.

One of the great ironies of the Progressive Education Movement is that its leaders were able to convince John D. Rockefeller, Jr. that he ought to give his sons a good progressive education.  They convinced him to donate $3 million to the Lincoln School, the new experiment in social education in accordance with Dewey’s radical socialist ideas.

So, Jr. put Nelson, Laurence, Winthrop, and David in the school, which turned them all into dyslexics, proving that progressive reading programs can cause dyslexia.  They were all functional illiterates.  There wasn’t a one of them who could properly read.

Under Gerald Ford, Nelson Rockefeller became the Vice President, a functional illiterate only a heartbeat away from the presidency.  Every time Nelson was to give a speech, he’d take papers to the podium and then set them aside and make some excuse about speaking from his heart.  He couldn’t read the speech anyway.  Guess who read to him throughout his Vice Presidency?  None other than Henry Kissinger!

David Rockefeller, head of the Bilderbergers, wrote in his memoirs that his father was an ardent and generous supporter of Dewey’s educational methods and school reform efforts.  Teachers College of Columbia University operated Dewey’s Lincoln school with considerable financial assistance in the early years from the General Education Board as an experimental school designed by the board to put Dewey’s philosophy into practice.  Despite the freedom for children to learn and play an active role in their own education, there were drawbacks.  He went on to say he had trouble with reading and spelling and found he was dyslexic.  His reading ability and proficiency in spelling only improved slightly as he aged.  He told that all his siblings except Babs and John had dyslexia to a degree.

It was the progressive look-say reading program that caused the dyslexia.  Sam tells in the video that this is the same story with the Bush family.  Barbara Bush and several of her sons became dyslexic. She always claimed they were born with this disability; it never occurred to her that the boys were made dyslexic by the progressive socialist Dewey teaching method.


Today’s college snowflakes cannot bear to be offended; they are totally unlike the young men who rushed the beaches of Normandy where many fell to their deaths.  Learning disabilities have grown exponentially because of Dewey’s progressive education.  Socialism and communitarianism have grown to be acceptable to a majority of young people, especially those who attend colleges or universities.

Dewey surely wouldn’t want students reading the Declaration of Independence as it mentions the Almighty four times, nor would he want the Constitution taught which guarantees our God given freedoms.  Both are anathema to Dewey’s socialist society.

In 1979, the high school my daughter attended wanted to remove Latin from the curriculum.  We succeeded in keeping two years of Latin, but it wasn’t many years later that it was dropped.  Latin is the root of all romantic languages, which makes learning those languages so much easier.

Entrusting your children to government schools guarantees they will not be able to read, do math, write properly, spell, or get an academic education.  Sacrificing them sacrifices our future.

Post Script:  Samuel Blumenfeld passed on to Glory in 2015.  His brilliance is still missed by millions.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: More Evidence Emerges That Federal Government Is Funding Worthless College Degrees

These 2 Cases Show Why Trans ‘Rights’ Could Upend the Rights of All

The battle over the rights of “transgender” and “cisgender” people continues to escalate in one of the most influential arenas: our nation’s schools.

The Chicago Tribune reported this month that after a four-year battle, a school board in Palatine, Illinois, has granted transgender students “unrestricted access to locker rooms based on gender identity.”

Just a few days later, CBS News Minnesota reported a mother had sued her local school district, claiming that it discriminated against her child for being transgender.

These are just two of the most recent stories showing just how prevalent the transgender debate in schools has become.

Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>

What Happened in Illinois

The school board of Township High School District 211 passed its new policy by a 5-2 vote. The policy requires students, teachers, and administrators to treat students “consistent with their gender identity,” meaning students will have full access to restrooms and locker rooms of the gender they identify with.

This goes further than the old policy, which also granted transgender students access to the locker rooms but required that the student retreat to a private area within the room to change.

The school board made the announcement in front of about 250 parents and students. News reports say half the crowd cheered at the decision while the other half booed.

In a speech at the meeting, Superintendent Dan Cates explained the board’s logic by appealing to “other school districts” that have implemented the same policies “without disruption and in a manner that protects the interests of all students.”

Some in the crowd reportedly yelled “false” while the superintendent was speaking. Another student voiced her concern with the new policy, saying, through tears:

I feel uncomfortable that my privacy is being invaded. As I am a swimmer, I do change multiple times naked in front of the other students in the locker room. I understand that the board has an obligation to all students, but I was hoping they would go about this in a way that would also accommodate students such as myself.

The debate in Palatine began four years ago when a transgender student filed an initial lawsuit against the school district. It was the first time a school district was accused of violating Title IX based on gender identity—a category that does not exist in federal law.

At the time, the district acquiesced and allowed the student to use the girls’ locker room as long as he stayed in a private area of the room. But when parents countered with their own lawsuit, the policy was dropped.

Then in 2017, a student named Nova Maday, born a male who identifies as a female, filed a lawsuit claiming the district had violated his rights by restricting him to an “unspecified private changing area within the locker room.” From there, the district began to shift in the student’s direction.

The Minnesota Case

In the other recent case, a transgender student in Minnesota alleged even greater wrongdoing than the Illinois student.

Helen Woods, the mother of a middle school student in Wright County, filed a lawsuit alleging that Buffalo Community Middle School “repeatedly isolated her son from his classmates, limited his access to a suitable restroom, and removed him from physical education classes.”

Her child, Matt Woods, was born a female but began identifying as male in 2015 at the age of 11.

Like Nova Maday, Woods wanted to use the boys’ bathrooms and locker rooms, but the school required Woods to use a single-occupancy restroom. The student claims that bathroom was hard to get to in between classes.

School officials deny any wrongdoing, and the case is ongoing.

Key Factors Driving Both Cases

Though the lawsuits differ slightly in specifics, they share several common denominators that are key to understanding the transgender debate, particularly when it comes to students and schools.

First, these lawsuits are based on President Barack Obama’s 2016 “Dear Colleague” letter that mandated schools must include and accommodate transgender students and recognize gender identity, or else the school could face discrimination charges.

This was an order by executive fiat, not a law passed by Congress, and not a ruling from the Supreme Court.

In 2017, the Trump administration rolled back those provisions, while the Education Department acknowledged that “each school has a responsibility to protect every student in America and ensure that they have the freedom to learn and thrive in a safe environment.”

Second, both lawsuits share an important, particular curiosity: Both schools addressed the transgender student’s wishes to be included and to have “equal access” to facilities, yet in both cases, the students complained that equal access wasn’t equal enough. They claimed the accommodations were somehow still discriminatory, even though it appears the schools took extra efforts to ensure the transgender students were treated equally while also preserving the rights of other students.

In other words, both school districts went out of their way to protect all students’ rights, but transgender students made that an impossible task. They pushed for entitlement rather than equality.

These students keep shifting the goalposts with their self-focused demands. Their demands ultimately pose a greater risk to other students’ privacy rights, which raises questions about discrimination in the opposite direction.

Ignoring Reality and the Law Itself

The most egregious fact is that these lawsuits are even happening at all.

By caving to a few students’ demands for policies based on transgender ideology, school administrators are championing the feelings of a few over the privacy and safety of the many, even though gender identity does not have protected status in federal civil rights laws like sex, religion, and ethnicity.

This was the crux of the issue in the Harris Funeral Homes case recently heard by the Supreme Court: What is gender identity, who defines it, and what protections does it have, if any?

When school officials bow to the wishes of transgender students and their families, they submit themselves to the LGBT-backed groupthink that defies both biological reality and the law as it exists.

The asinine logic of this movement will act as a wrecking ball on public schools with no stopping point. It will eventually destroy social norms within school systems and pave the way for a system in which the interests of a select few are championed at the expense of the many, lest a lawsuit and bad publicity engulf the school board.


Nicole Russell is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Her work has appeared in The Atlantic, The New York Times, National Review, Politico, The Washington Times, The American Spectator, and Parents Magazine. Twitter: .


When She Came Out as a ‘Boy,’ Therapists Silenced Her Mother

At world’s first gender ‘detransition’ conference, women express regret over drugs, mutilation


A Note for our Readers:

VIDEO: Death of Globalism

The news that really never makes the news, certainly not the trending news of the day, is how President Trump is leading the world away from globalism and a tyrannical global police state. All indications are that Boris Johnson will lead the way against globalist policies in the UK and of course we, and the world, have President Donald J Trump. As I stated, way back when, Global Support Coming Soon for Trump.

In previous related articles that I have written which are archived here on my website under the financial category, I have been talking about Trump restoring sound money and resetting the global economic, trade and monetary system, the GFR or “Global Financial Reset”. You cannot make America Great Again unless you control the economy and control your own currency. To remain fully informed, for what will prove down the road to be one of the biggest news stories of the century, I encourage you to subscribe for free to my YouTube channel and visit with me and Economist Dr. Kirk Elliott, (nominated for two Trump committee positions), as we take on step by step, the behind the news news of the Global Financial Reset. Here is a link to that YouTube playlist. We began broadcasting each Wednesday at 6:00 PM on July 17, 2019. Subscribe to my channel today.

Global Financial Reset

Death of Globalism

In this video clip of a speech I gave at the Sarasota Truth Conference in September 2019, you will come to understand what Globalism is and the origins of Globalism. I connect the dots on just how it is that President Trump is also draining the economic swamp and that we are well on our way now only after three short years, to delivering a death to globalism. By the mid to late term of President Trumps second term we may see full victory. This video clip and the GFR (Global Financial Reset) playlist is a good way to be informed and to stay informed and connected.



In short, Trump is quietly setting the stage. Manufacturers are returning home. Apple is launching its new massive facility in Texas. Jobs follow manufacturing so this is a good thing. For all of the President’s progress in this area click on this link. NAFTA’s rude awakening under President Trump along with tariffs and trade deal negotiations around the world are yet additional steps towards the ultimate reset.

What is the ultimate reset? Seizing control from a debt based Central Bank, Petrodollar, IMF, Federal Reserve banking and monetary system by restoring sound money and creating a booming economy here at home while providing opportunity to other nations who don’t fall off the cliff with the old guard and come aboard in this new world that is being created before our very eyes, (well if you know where to look  for information). This is why Pelosi will not sign the USMCA document that the President so wisely and brilliantly put forth. Why? Because it will deliver yet another blow to the ruling elites march towards globalism. It’s okay we will get it done and Pelosi’s days are numbered anyway while Trump has another five years to set the world right. In short this is what is happening but again please subscribe to the YouTube Channel and become familiar with the playlist titled GFR for weekly discussions with me and the  Economist.

  • Strong arming and exposing the Federal Reserve
  • De-funding the UN and setting NAFTA straight
  • Manufacturing returning home
  • Best Economy by most measures in the history of our country and best economy by far in the world today
  • HR 24 & HR 25

China. Yes China. Trump has this covered. Don’t buy the fake news headlines. Finally China has met it’s match. The plan to empower China as part of the globalists plan has been thwarted by Trump. China is hemorrhaging and in a rapid decline having the plug pulled out by Trump. President Trump is repositioning step by step the global playing field while working their own rigged system against them by keeping the markets propped and expanding. Big historical change begins sometime after the 2020 election. The global shift of power is now well underway.

Video Commentary

Clarion Call

This battle will rage on for the rest of our lives. Pray for our President and his family. No Trump-no hope. What we do right here, right now is for posterity. So when your children and grandchildren ask you “What were you doing when the global governance was being thrust down the throat of America and the world, what will your answer be? Freedom, it’s up to U.S.

VIDEO: China Shuts Down American Teen on Tik Tok

Sandwiched between a makeup tutorial, 17-year-old Feroza Aziz used her Tik Tok account to turn her beauty vlog into an awareness campaign about China’s severe abuse of the Uighur (Muslim) population. She quickly felt the brunt of the long arm of China’s ever-increasing censorship.

To learn more about the horrific abuse of the Uighers by China, see below

Aziz made a series of viral videos on her Tik Tok account @getmefamouspartthree exposing the abuse, Aziz found that her account had been suspended. The videos begin as makeup tutorials but quickly switch to exposing how the Chinese are putting the Uighurs into “concentration” camps, separating family members from each other, raping and murdering them.

Business Insider explains:

“[Aziz’s videos] are designed in such a way in an attempt to fool TikTok’s moderators from cracking down and removing her content. TikTok — an app not available in China but owned by the Chinese company ByteDance — has faced increasing scrutiny over fears it censors content considered “culturally problematic” and offensive to the Chinese government.”

Here is one of Aziz’s videos that Tik Tok shut down:

For its part, TikTok said her account was suspended because it was connected to another accounts of hers (@getmefamousplzsir), which the platform said it banned for “violating rules.”

But after the teen took to Twitter to publicize her suspension, Tik Tok reinstated her account and issued a public “apology.”

While it was not much of an apology (the company stood behind its initial decision to suspend Aziz’s account), they did admit that their review process “will not be perfect.”

Americans felt the brunt of Chinese censorship last month when the general manager of the Houston Rockets, Daryl Morey, tweeted an image with the caption, “Fight for Freedom. Stand for Hong Kong.”

Chinese companies immediately suspended their ties with the Rockets, and the Chinese Basketball Association ended their cooperation with the team.

In response, Morey and NBA Commissioner Adam Silver groveled, issuing apologetic statements distancing themselves from the protesters in Hong Kong who are demanding democracy and freedom from China.

Again, Business Insider explains:

“With a population of roughly 1.4 billion people, China is the NBA’s most important international market.”

Although TikTok insists it is independent from China, many have noted that there have been no videos documenting the unrest in Hong Kong, but many have appeared telling a whitewashed story of the region.

Who Are the Uighurs and Why is China Putting Them in “Reeducation” Camps?

Ethnically, the Uighurs are Turkish Muslims. Eleven million Uighurs live in Xinjiang, a territory in northwest China. As Clarion Project has documented since 2013, the Uighurs are under systematic persecution from China in what can authentically be labelled Islamophobia.

Where as a privileged Muslim population in the West will cry Islamophobia if they didn’t get their Diet Pepsi on a airline flight, one million Uighurs are experience actual psychological and physical torture.

The world has been watching stunned as horror story after horror story comes out about exactly what goes on in the Chinese government-run detention centers about one million Uighurs are forced into.

The abuse of the Uighurs is also happening to their children:

Leaked videos have shown children as young as four- or five-years old that are separated from their parents and placed 20-30 at a time in a single room with a fraction of that number of beds and nothing else — languishing, their childhoods wasted, their potential crushed.


China Suspends US Navy Visits to Hong Kong Following Signing of Pro-Democracy Legislation

Border Patrol Confiscates Thousands of Fake IDs Produced in China 

Google is Teaming up With Chinese Authorities

Two-Million Chinese Muslims Incarcerated in Secret Camps

Ahmatjan Osman: Why You Can’t Be Muslim in China

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

Does Crime Go up or down When Guns are More Controlled?

Following the shooting on December 14, 2012, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut, the pandemonium regarding gun control seems to be on the increase. Also, the increasing uproar is being directed to the Second Amendment. From every part of the country, citizens are exercising strong opinions on gun rights, the possibility of a gun control policy and what its impact would be.

Many Citizens Still Advocate for Gun Ownership Rights

The argument for and against gun control is quite heated. While a lot of people are clamoring for gun control in the United States, many citizens still maintain their stand and support on the need for a well-armed citizen. According to these people who advocate gun ownership rights, “well-armed citizenry is valuable in keeping all individuals and the entire country better protected and safer at all times.”

The media has also witnessed an increase in gun violence topics, especially after the mass shooting and other serious gun-related crimes that followed. Obviously, the topics on gun violence are discussed side by side gun control policy in America. Particularly, the gun control topic has provoked an outcry from many US citizens and even concerned individuals from other parts of the world who are bent on their rights to defend and protect themselves as well as the people around them.

In the heat of these arguments, some of which are live discussions with the United States’ president himself, one argument stands out: It is the argument about preventing gun control in the Second Amendment particularly and the United States Constitution as a whole. The argument in favor of not restricting gun ownership rights seems to be gaining the upper hand as the citizens involved are presenting strong reasons to have their own weapons as directed by the 2nd  Amendment.

According to the Second Amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being essential to the security of a free State, the right of the citizens to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

So, those who are opposing the proposal to deny citizens the right to keep and bear arms are strongly pointing to this portion of the second amendment. They strongly advocate for the right to purchase a handgun of their choice – one you can conceal easily in your pocket and use for self-defense when the need arises.

The Argument in Favor of Gun Control

Those clamoring for gun control are also presenting their strong points. Some of those strong points are based on the record of violent crimes accomplished with various gun types and weapons.

One such records are the one curled from the FBI program data; according to the data, throughout the country, the use of firearms for violent crimes was more than any other weapon. The data revealed that approximately 72% of all murder cases and manslaughter were committed with firearms.

In addition, those in favor of gun control are of the opinion that;

  • Increased guns in circulation will lead to increased violent crime
  • Making it difficult for criminals to access guns prevent violent crime
  • Gun ownership increases the risk of suicide or being killed by others

Supporters of Gun Ownership Rights Insist Gun Control is not an Answer to Crime Reduction

Despite the strong reasons and statistics presented by those who support gun control, people who are clamoring for the sustenance of gun ownership rights insist that the nation won’t reduce crime by restricting ownership and use of guns by individuals.

According to NRA (National Rifle Association), those who think that gun control is the answer to crime reduction should ponder on the following;

  • People kill, and not guns. Therefore, violent crimes will decrease if more people use guns to defend and protect themselves.
  • The Brady Bill is an example of waiting period laws that should precede a police state
  • Since they are contrary to the 2nd Amendment, gun control laws do not conform to the constitution. According to the Second Amendment, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms should not be infringed.”
  • In fact, crime rate reduction is not contingent on gun control.

Instead, the government and those concerned should focus on more viable alternatives – people who engage firearms to commit crimes should be subjected to mandatory sentences. This is the solution to increased crime reduction rate – it will yield better results than gun control laws.”

Now, back to the Major Question – Does Gun Control Laws Reduce Crime or Not?

The major question here is whether or not crime goes up or down with gun control. So far, bans on handguns have not met desired expectation in terms of significant impact on crime rates, including murder. Besides, prior to the ban, the amount of handguns out there is huge.

All the efforts to beat the importation and manufacture of handguns with laws have not produced the envisaged result. Why? Such laws end up promoting the existence of the black market for guns.

Laws that attempt to prevent juveniles, criminals and mentally ill people from accessing handguns have not succeeded in accomplishing crime reduction. This is because many of these people already possess guns or would find a way to own one illegally.

A More Viable Solution?

Experts suggest proactive arrests by officers of the law. Particularly, police officers should engage field interrogations and traffic enforcement while on patrol to make proactive arrests in gun-crime spots – and should take away guns from criminals right there and then. A typical example is what happened during the mid-90s in Kansas City; Proactive arrests made by police on crime spots for concealed weapons carry was able to cut back crimes substantially in this city.

In conclusion, it would also be helpful to take a cue from John Lott’s book titled “More Guns, Less Crime“. According to the book, “the rates of violent crime reduce when state pass “shall issue” concealed carry laws.”

In this book, More Guns Less Crime, Lott presents the outcome of the analysis he carried out on crime data involving every county. The analysis covered 29 years period – 1997 to 2005. The University of Chicago Press refereed the different editions of the book.

The Effect of New Trade Agreement on Business

The digital age is the perfect time to start a business. Businesses, both big and small, are being connected to their clients directly than ever before and it’s all thanks to the internet. In fact, because of this, the playing field has been leveled somewhat, giving businesses an equal opportunity to flourish.

However, as boundaries blur, the questions of globalization and free trade come to mind. Are they really going to benefit our economy or are they our downfall? Don’t worry, in this article, we are going to flesh out those arguments, focusing on what free trade agreements are, why they’re needed, and of course, their benefits. Let’s get started.

What Are Free Trade Agreements?

Economists have varied opinions as to what the effects of globalization and free trade will bring to our economy, but they do agree on one thing: both of these rely on free trade agreements or FTA. What are they anyway?

In a nutshell, FTAs are contracts made between countries in order to encourage trade between them. FTAs usually have two objectives: to lower tariff rates and protect the investors. If you’re a small business owner and you’re thinking of leveling up and taking your investment overseas, then you can file for a personal loan for the additional capital.

It is one of the fastest and most efficient ways to raise the needed budget and to get ahead of your competitors as soon as possible. We’re guessing that the tides will turn for the better really soon.

Did you know that our country, the United States, is currently maintaining more than a dozen FTAs around the globe? One of the most controversial right now is the USMCA or the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.

Why Do Businesses Need to Be Aware of Trade Agreements?

Before talking about the USMCA, though, let us first discuss why businesses need to concern themselves about trade agreements. Here are a few points to keep in mind:

  • The lower tariff rates will allow small businesses access to more affordable imported resources.
  • This will also allow them to price their products competitively and perform well on a global scale.
  • Finally, FTAs will reduce the challenges that small businesses go through in order to take their brands overseas. One such challenge is expensive import license requirements that larger companies don’t really bother themselves with, especially those that have already established their branches on foreign soil.

Yes, FTAs are really helpful. This is the reason why we’re really keeping an eye out for USMCA.


But what is it anyway? USMCA is the newest trade agreement that is still currently in the works. This means that it hasn’t been signed by the president yet, but if he does, according to Vice Pres. Michael Pence himself, it is expected to be “one of the largest trade deal in American History”.

The Benefits of USMCA

How big? Well, let’s just say that it is projected that it will bring almost $70 billion to our economy, and more than 150,000 jobs. It will also benefit a lot of industries. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the USMCA will benefit food and agriculture trade, automobile and vehicle manufacturing industries, and even digital trade.

There are also new chapters on improved regulatory practices and intellectual property protection. In a nutshell, this agreement seeks to provide us, business owners, as much protection and security as we can possibly hope for, while also helping improve our country’s (and our partner countries) economy.

In Conclusion: How Can We Get the President to Sign?

The USMCA agreement is one of President Trump’s promises to us during his campaign which explains why he is also passionate about passing this agreement as soon as possible. However, due to some important points in the agreement that are yet to be discussed, it hasn’t been signed yet. You might be thinking if there’s any way to help speed up the matter, though. We hear you. There are actually a few steps:

  • Inform yourself and other business owners about it. Like what we’re doing right now, you can help spread awareness on how people from different sectors (from businessmen to farmers) can benefit from the USMCA.
  • Sign the petition. There are online petitions that you can sign in order to push for the faster processing and signing of this trade contract.
  • Finally, you can join a demonstration. There are different sectors that are taking their voices to the streets.

© All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2019 LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: